Aug 13, 2026 Planning Commission

[ROLL CALL ]

[00:00:06]

>> GOOD EVENING. WE WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME YOU TO THE AUGUST 13TH, 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.

ROLL CALL, PLEASE. >> DANA CAMP?

>> HERE. >> EMMA SOLOMON?

VANESSA ECHOLS? >> HERE.

>> JENNIFER LOW EARN? FILL CHANCELLOR?

>> HERE. >> JENNIFER STEPHENS?

OSCAR MOSELEY? >> HERE.

>> WALKER DAVIS? >> HERE.

>> BEFORE WE GET STARTED I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS FOR THE PUBLIC MEETING OF THE AUBURN PLANNING COMMISSION. THE COMMISSION WILL BE PRESENTED WITH AGENDA ITEMS BY THE CITY PLANNING STAFF, THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE AGENDA ITEM WILL THEN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE COMMENTS OR ANSWER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMISSION. 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.

I ASK THAT YOU KEEP YOUR TIME TO TALK TO 5 MINUTES AND PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS RELATIVE TO THE CASE.

AFTER EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THE REPRESENTATIVE AND STAFF WILL THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND RESPOND TO ISSUES BROUGHT UP DURING THE HEARING. THEN I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR TO THE COMMISSIONERS FOR DISCUSSION, MOTIONS AND A VOTE.

THE COMMISSION WILL VOTE BASED ON STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2030 AND THE GENERAL GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY. HAVING SUMMARIZED THE BASICS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING PROCESS, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SUMMARIZE OUR ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY RELATED TO THE APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION PLATS. BY ALABAMA STATUTE, A MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION SUCH AS OURS IS THE FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION PLATS, WITH REGARDS TO SUBDIVISION PLATS, THE COMMISSION ACTS AS ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND IS BOUND BY THE LIMITATION THE CONTAINED IN STATE LAWS, THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED BY THIS COMMISSION. WHILE PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE REQUIRED ON MOST PLATS, WHICH WELCOME ANY AND ALL PUBLIC COMMENTS CONCERNING THESE ITEMS. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO CONFIRMING THAT THE PLAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT CODIFIED IN LAWS AND REGULATIONS PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED.

I ASK THAT IF YOU INTEND TO SPEAK TOURING ANY PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT, PLEASE SIGN IN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO 5 MINUTES.

FINALLY I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A POINT TO THE PUBLIC IN ATTENDANCE: AS YOU KNOW THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS ADVISORY BOARD FOR THE CITY COUNCIL. EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF SUBDIVISION DECISIONS ALL OTHER DECISIONS WILL BE MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S POSITION. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY, SO WE'LL BEGIN NEXT IS CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.

CITIZENS COMMUNICATION IS FOR YOU TO SPEAK ON ANYTHING THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

SO IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK DURING CITIZENS COMMUNICATION, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE CITIZENS COMMUNICATION. FIRST THING ON OUR AGENDA IS OLD BUSINESS. CONDITIONAL USE CELEBRATION

EVENTS CENTER. >> ALL RIGHT.

THE FIRST ITEM IS A CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST FOR A COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT USE, AN EVENT CENTER TO BE LOCATED AT 1,000 MAIN STREET SPEUT B IN THE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.

THIS WAS POSTPONED THE PAST COUPLE OF MEETING.

IT IS UTILIZING AN EXISTING UNIT WITHIN THE MIDTOWN DEVELOPMENT FOR PRIVATE EVENTS SUCH AS SHOWERS AND BIRTHDAYS.

I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

>> DID WE RECEIVE ANY COMMUNICATION?

>> NOT ANY COMMUNICATION. >> ALL RIGHT THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE CELEBRATION EVENT CENTER, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CONTROLS CLE PUBLIC HEARING.

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

COMMISSIONERS? >> IS THE APPLICANT HERE?

>> IS THE APPLICANT HERE? PLEASE COME FORWARD.

STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE.

>> GOOD EVENING, KYLE LANGSTON, 843 WEST RICHMOND CIRCLE,

AUBURN, ALABAMA. >> GUESS THE REASON WE WERE -- WE POSTPONED IS BECAUSE WE JUST DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THIS FACILITY. SO WHY DON'T YOU ELABORATE ON IT A LITTLE BIT SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.

>> SO CURRENTLY, WE OPERATE AT 65 MAIN STREET CELEBRATION COVE.

IT'S AN EVENT SPACE THAT WE HAVE.

IT'S AN OUTDOOR-INDOOR SPACE. WE WANT TO EXPAND TO THE NEW

[00:05:03]

LOCATIONS IN THE CITY OF AUBURN. >> OKAY, WELL ONE OF THE THINGS -- QUESTIONS THAT WE ALSO HAD WAS THE OPERATION HOURS.

>> YES, WE OPERATE FROM 10 TO 9, 10 A.M. TO 10 P.M. OR 9 P.M., IN THAT GENERAL TIME FRAME.

WE'RE NOT GOING TOO LATE AS ANY OF THE BARS AND LATE HOURS LIKE

THAT. >> OKAY.

AND WHEN TYPE OF EVENTS WILL Y'ALL BE AGRICULTURE THERE?

>> WE HAVE BIRTHDAY PARTIES, BRIDAL SHOWERS BEING ENGAGEMENT PARTIES. THIS PAST WEEK WE HAD A 6TH BIRTHDAY PARTY, A 7-YEAR-OLD MOVIE NIGHT AND AN ENGAGEMENT

PARTY. >> SO IS THERE -- IS THERE LIKE A MAXIMUM CAPACITY? THAT MIGHT BE --

>> IS THERE A MAXIMUM CAPACITY FOR THIS BUILDING?

>> THERE WOULD BE. THAT IS -- THAT'S AN INSPECTIONS THING. SO I GUESS THAT PROBABLY WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE ACTUALLY LISTED IN THE FACILITY

ON THE WALL SOMEWHERE. >> AND INSPECTIONS HAVE BEEN OUT. THEY CHECKED THE BATHROOMS AND --

>> ANY OUTSIDE EVENTS, OUTSIDE EVENTS --

>> LIKE OUTSIDE OF -- >> OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING? NO,NOT INSIDE BUT OUTDOORS? OKAY.

>> WE'RE NOT DOING MUSIC FESTIVALS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, CRAZY, LIKE I HEARD SORORITY FRATERNITY PARTIES, WE'RE NOT DOING FRATERNITY PARTIES. IT'S NOT THAT TYPE OF

ENVIRONMENT. >> OKAY, THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS,

COMMISSIONERS? >> SO THEY WOULD NEED A BUSINESS LICENSE WITH -- I GUESS YOU WOULD NEED A BUSINESS LICENSE, ALSO WOULD THEY NEED AN ALCOHOL LICENSE IF THERE'S GOING TO BE

ANY ALCOHOL SERVED? >> SO WE DON'T SELL ALCOHOL THERE. WE HAVE SERVICE ALCOHOL IF WE HAVE VENDORS THAT DO THAT BUT WE DO NOT SELL ALCOHOL ON SITE.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING WITH ABC OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

>> ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> THANK Y'ALL. >> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE CASE CU2026-029, CELEBRATION EVENT CENTER.

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

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED?

[CONSENT AGENDA]

THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF THIS WEEK THE PACKET MEETING FROM JULY 6TH AND THE REGULAR MEETING JULY 9TH.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

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

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED?

[2. Annexation – Youth for Christ ]

>> ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM IS A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY .17 ACRES OF A 1.35-ACRE PARCEL THAT IS ALREADY WITHIN AUBURN CITY LIMITS.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1400 NORTH COLLEGE STREET, ANNEXATION PRIORITY IS HIGH. THIS IS A PART OF A PARCEL THAT WAS PARTIALLY ANNEXED, INCORPORATED IN 1968 AND THERE IS CURRENTLY A BILLBOARD ON THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BECOME LEGALLY NONCONFORMING SHOULD THIS PROPERTY BE ANNEXED.

THERE IS A REZONING REQUEST FOLLOWING THIS.

I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ABOUT THIS ANNEXATION.

>> THANK YOU. THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS?

I NEED A MOTION. >> MOTION TO APPROVE CASE

AX-2026-012. >> SECOND.

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

ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, REZONING YOUTH FOR CHRIST.

[3. Rezoning – Youth for Christ – PUBLIC HEARING]

>> SO THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 1.35 ACRES FROM DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HOUSING AND RURAL TO COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1400 NORTH COLLEGE STREET.

IT'S AT THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH COLLEGE AND EAST UNIVERSITY DRIVE. THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY AS MASTER PLAN MIXED USE, WHICH THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING -- THE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WOULD BE -- FIT THE DESCRIPTION OF MASTER PLAN MIXED USE. THE PROPERTY IS ENCUMBERED BY FLOODPLAIN, SO DEVELOPMENT WOULD STILL HAVE TO MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THERE. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS REZONING REQUEST THAT YOU HAVE.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING, THIS REZONING OF THAT 1400 NORTH COLLEGE STREET. SO I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[00:10:02]

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PP-2026 -- I'M SORRY,

HZ-2026-016. >> SECOND.

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

ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT, NEXT IS BINFORD

[4. Preliminary Plat – Binford Residential – PUBLIC HEARING ]

RESIDENTIAL. >> ALL RIGHT, GOOD EVENING.

THIS IS A REQUEST FROM FORESITE GROUP LLC REQUESTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-LOT CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION, CONSISTING OF 5 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1455 BINFORD DRIVE AND 1519 AND 1521VFW ROAD AND IS ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION 14 OR NC-14. SHOWING THIS MAP IS ALL THE LOTS AFFECTED WITH THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT.

IT'S NOT JUST ONE. AND THE LOTS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED ARE ALSO THE LOTS AFFECTED WITH THIS PLAT.

THE PLAT AS A WHOLE IS UP HERE BUT WE'RE JUST STRICTLY LOOKING AT THESE LOTS. SO THE HISTORY OF THIS PLAT FOR THE LAND HAS SOME IRREGULARITIES TO IT.

WHEN I85 WAS BUILT TOO MUCH RIGHT-OF-WAY WAS TAKEN FROM PROPERTY OWNERS ON THIS LAND AND SINCE THEN THE DEEDS, THE TAX PARCELS AND THE COUNTY DATA DO NOT ACCURATELY REFLECT WHAT IS SHOWN. THE PURPOSE OF THIS PLAT WILL CLEAN THIS UP, DEDICATE RIGHT-OF-WAY, DEDICATE EASEMENTS AND TURN 10 LOTS INTO 5 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.

IT IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT FOR A FINAL PLAT, WHICH I KNOW THIS IS PRELIM BUT BEFORE A FINAL PLAT CAN BE SIGNED, THE AUBURN WATER WORKS BOARD DOES NEED TO ACCEPT NEW EASEMENTS ONTO THEIR LAND. THAT WILL CROSS ON THE THEIR PROPERTY. NOW, WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> SO THIS IS A MATTER JUST CORRECTING THE RECORD AS IT WERE, AND YOU'RE NOT -- AND YOU SAY THERE'S NO SUBDIVISIONS GOING ON HERE, BECAUSE THIS IS -- I MEAN, THE PLAT IS NOT REDIVIDING THIS LAND AT ALL,

IT'S JUST CORRECTING THE RECORD? >> RIGHT, IT'S GETTING -- YEAH.

>> HAVE TO CONSIDER THIS AS A PRELIMINARY PLAT.

6 LOTS OR LESS. SO THIS IS TURNING IT INTO 5

LOTS. >> SO HISTORICALLY, WHEN WAS THIS DISCOVERED, THAT THIS IS NOT ACCURATE? WAS IT JUST BECAUSE OF THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE OR --

>> YEAH, SO HOW THIS -- HOW THIS ALL CAME TO BE, I THINK IT WAS LOT 1 AND LOT 2 THAT'S LISTED ON THIS PLAT WERE ORIGINALLY PURCHASED AND THERE WAS A HOUSE BEING CONSTRUCTED ON IT.

THEY CAME IN AND THEY WERE TRYING TO SUBDIVIDE AND THERE'S THE WHOLE QUESTION ABOUT RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND THAT IS KIND OF WHEN THIS WAS DISCOVERED. WHEN THEY WERE DOING TITLE SEARCHES AND THE SURVEY CAME BACK AND WAS WILDLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE HAD. AND SO THERE WAS ESSENTIALLY A PRETTY BIG COME TO JESUS MEETING BETWEEN ENGINEERING, PLANNING, THE SURVEYOR AND THE SURVEYOR ESSENTIALLY WAS LIKE I DON'T THINK ANY OF THIS STUFF IS CORRECT, LIKE HERE IS WHAT I SEE AS ACCURATE OF WHAT I'VE SURVEYED AND I THINK THIS IS THE MOST ACCURATE. SO THIS ALL CAME TO BE I GUESS -- CAME TO OUR KNOWLEDGE I WOULD SAY PROBABLY ABOUT THE PAST FIVE, SIX MONTHS, AND THIS IS A WAY TO RESET THE RECORD AND ESTABLISH WHAT THOSE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES ARE.

SO I GUESS KIND OF THE ERROR -- THIS IS ABOUT LIKE AN 80, 90-YEAR-OLD ERROR AND THIS WAS LIKE I SAID RECENTLY DISCOVERED WHEN SOMEBODY WAS TRYING TO REDEVELOP AND BUILD A HOUSE OVER

HERE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS,

COMMISSIONERS? >> AND CONSTRUCTION HAD STARTED

ON ONE OF THE LOTS, YOU SAID? >> YES, SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE DISCREPANCIES, THERE WAS SETBACKS, ALL THE STUFF, AND THEN -- SO IT REALLY MATTERS IF A LOT IS AS BIG OR NOT BIG AS YOU SAY IT IS, SO THAT'S WHY THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCREPANCY, THERE WAS A WHOLE STOP WORK ORDER.

IT WAS A LOT. SO WE GOT TO THE BOTTOM OF IT.

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK CONCERNING BINFORD RESIDENTIAL?

PLEASE COME FORWARD. >> HE I'M TOM HAILEY.

I'M AT 691 WOODEN BRIDGE ROAD. THIS IS KIND OF BELOW THAT PROPERTY. ALL FOR THIS CLEANING UP -- BUT

[00:15:02]

HERE, RIGHT? >> WE CAN ANSWER THOSE AFTER TH-

>> WE CAN ANTICIPATE 5 HOUSES BEING BUILT? THERE'S HOUSES ALREADY BUILT, THAT'S WHAT I'M CONFUSED ABOUT.

>> WE'LL ANSWER AFTER -- >> AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING

WE'LL ANSWER THAT, YES. >> MAGNOLIA LAKES IS WHERE I LIVE WHICH IS RIGHT BELOW THIS. WE'RE ALL FOR THIS PROJECT AND CLEANING UP THIS AREA ENGINEERING WISE.

THERE'S A LOT OF WATER THAT COMES THROUGH MAGNOLIA LAKES.

WE HAVE A LAKE THERE. IN 30 YEARS THAT LAKE IS SILTED IN TWO OR THREE TIMES AT THE NORTH END.

VARIOUS CONSTRUCTION HAS GONE ON.

I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT, WE'RE ALL PARTICIPATING AND PROTECTING THAT. YOU NEED SOME EXTRA SILK FENCE, LET US KNOW. WE'RE THE MIDPOINT BETWEEN I CALL IT VOLLEYBALL PARK AND [INDISCERNIBLE] MILL WHERE THIS WATER STARTS AND EAST UNIVERSITY DRIVE TO LAKE WILLMORE.

A LOT OF WATER COMES THERE. WE GET IT FROM THE WEST SIDE OF WRITE'S MILL. THAT DOESN'T COME TO THIS LAKE, IT RETURNS RIGHT BEFORE THAT. BUT IF THERE'S GOING TO BE HOUSES BUILT THERE, THERE'S GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTION THERE, WE JUST WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO THE SILT THAT HAS COME THROUGH THAT AREA IN THE PAST. GOT A GREAT ENGINEER ON THIS BUT I JUST WASN'T THERE IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTION GOING ON OR IT WAS JUST REALIGNING PROPERTY.

BUT THAT'S MY QUESTION AND Y'ALL ARE WELCOME TO DRIVE THROUGH.

THERE'S A CULL DID HE ZACK CUL-T NEXT TO THE LAKE AND TAKE A LOOK. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS LAMAR PERRY AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING 1518VFW ROAD, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT THAT'S -- THAT'S ON THE AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING.

AND CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, THERE'S ONE -- ONE PERMANENT HOME THAT'S LOCATED THERE NOW.

THERE'S ONE UNDER CONSTRUCTION. AND SO YOU'RE PROPOSING FIVE? BECAUSE IT'S FIVE OR FOUR. HOW MANY ARE WE PROPOSING RIGHT

NOW? >> SO AS I INDICATE -- IS IT OKAY TO -- FOR CLARITY PURPOSES PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE NOT A Q&A, YOU CAN ASK YOUR QUESTIONS, WE'LL ANSWER THEM ONCE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS DONE SO I WILL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BUT JUST AFTER EVERYONE IS DONE. JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS FOR PEOPLE WHO SHOW UP -- SHOWED UP TO SPEAK TONIGHT, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOT A Q&A, JUST SAW WHAT YOU NEED TO SAW AND THEN WE WILL ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS KIND OF AT THE END OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO I WILL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.

SO JUST CONTINUE, PLEASE. >> COULD I PROPOSE A QUESTION?

>> VERY GOOD, YOU'RE GOOD. >> OKAY, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE

SURE -- >> WELL, YOU CAN ASK THE

QUESTION. >> WE'LL JUST ANSWER IT

AFTERWARDS. >> RIGHT, FAIR ENOUGH.

SO AGAIN, WE'RE AT THE PRELIM, RIGHT, OF THIS.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING OF THAT A SUBDIVISION IS ALL ABOUT, AND I DON'T WANT TO BORE YOU WITH THE COVENANTS OF SUBDIVISION, RIGHT, SO MY PURPOSE IS, IF THIS IS A PRELIM FOR A SUBDIVISION AND ALL THAT'S -- AND WE HAVE SEVERAL PROPERTIES THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR MULTIPLE YEARS IN THIS AREA, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT LOOKS LIKE GOING FORWARD. AND I KNOW THIS IS A RHETORICAL -- WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE GOING FORWARD FOR THOSE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR AGES, IF YOU WILL, AND JUST TRYING TO GET A BROADER PICTURE OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE FOR EXISTING PROPERTIES AS THIS PRELIM IS FORMING.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN WHEN YOU HAVE SPOKEN.

>> YES, I'M RITA JACKSON. I LIVE DIRECTLY ACROSS --

>> YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE, MA'AM. >> 1514VFW ROAD.

>> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE LIVED THERE 30 YEARS.

AND THEY'RE TAKING OVER. I MEAN, HOUSES GOING UP, OUR PROPERTY TAXES IS GOING TO GO UP FROM SOMETHING MY GRANDFATHER

[00:20:01]

JUST DOING IT. AND IT'S NOT RIGHT.

IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE ONES THAT ARE THERE -- A SUBDIVISION? THAT IS OUR LEGACY, AND ALL THESE 600,000-DOLLAR HOUSES IS JUST TAKING OVER AND IT JUST DON'T MAKE NO SENSE TO JUST LET THIS HAPPEN AND NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

THIS BREAKS MY HEART, THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE TAKING OVER OUR PROPERTY. THEY'RE BUILDING AROUND ME.

I HAVE KIDS. THAT'S THEIR LEGACY.

THAT'S WHAT THEIR GRANDFATHER LEFT THEM, AND THEY'RE JUST NOT LISTENING TO US. AND IT BREAKS MY HEART TO SEE THAT THIS IS JUST HAPPENING, FOR SOMETHING -- I'VE BEEN THERE LIKE I SAID, I'M 60 YEARS OLD AND I'VE BEEN THERE ALL MY LIFE.

MY MOTHER'S ACROSS THE STREET. MY SISTER'S HERE.

MY COUSIN'S HERE. AND THEY'RE JUST BUILDING -- JUST AROUND US AND NOT EVEN JUST TAKING OUR OPINION.

SO I'M GIVING MY OPINION. THAT JUST BREAKS MY HEART THAT PEOPLE COULD DO THAT AND NOT EVEN JUST LET US KNOW, JUST COME IN AND JUST TAKE OVER. IT'S AWFUL.

AND GOD BE WITH Y'ALL. >> THANK YOU.

PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE?

COME ON UP. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> STATE YOUR NAME, GROUP. >> BRETT BASQUIN WITH THE FORESITE GROUP, REPRESENTING THE OWNERS.

>> PLEASE TELL US ABOUT CONSTRUCTION AND WHAT IS GOING ON. PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT.

>> EXPLAIN WHAT'S GOING ON? >> MM-HMM.

>> WELL, THERE WAS A HOUSE BUILT YEAR, A SEWER LINE WAS CONSTRUCTED, THERE'S MULTIPLE LOTS BACK THERE.

I THINK THAT THERE'S -- NOW THERE'S GOING TO BE FIVE LOTS.

>> IT'S ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. >> IT'S ALL SINGLE FAMILY.

IT'S ALL NC ZONING. EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN DONE IS WITHIN THE RIGHTS OF THE ZONING ERNZ 0, YOU KNOW, JUST BUILDING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THERE. AND SO REALLY, THIS PLAT IS CLEANING A LOT OF THE MESS THAT WAS LEFT HERE FROM THE 1950S WHEN THE INTERSTATE CAME THROUGH.

THERE'S A LOT OF PROPERTY TAKEN HERE THAT WAS NEVER REALLY TAKEN, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THERE'S NO LEGAL TRAIL TO IT.

THEY JUST TOOK THE PROPERTY. SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT DEFINED WHERE ROADS ACTUALLY ARE AND BASICALLY CLEAN UP A LOT OF THE MESS THAT HAS BEEN LEFT FOR THE PAST 70 YEARS HERE.

>> WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO WITH THIS IS CLEAN UP THE INACCURATE SURVEYS -- AND RIGHT-OF-WAYS.

THERE'S A LOT OF THESE RIGHT-OF-WAYS THAT'S -- WE'RE DEDICATING -- PART OF THIS IS WE'RE DEDICATING RIGHT-OF-WAY.

WE'RE DEAD IT'S DEDICATING EASET NEED TO BE IN PLACE AND WE'RE JUST CLEANING A LOT OF THOSE THINGS.

BUT I MEAN, EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT. THE ONLY REASON WHY WE'RE HERE BEFORE YOU ALL RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY -- WE'RE ACTUALLY DEDICATING THE ROAD THAT Y'ALL ARE DRIVING THROUGH RIGHT THERE ON BINFORD.

THAT'S NOT TRUE RIGHT-OF-WAY. IT WAS NEVER OFFICIALLY DEDICATED SO THIS IS JUST CLEANING UP -- THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY IT'S BEFORE YOU. IF NOT, YOU CAN BUILD ON THOSE

LOTS BY RIGHT AND -- >> RIGHT, THIS IS JUST, FOR LEGAL PURPOSES IN CASE SOMEONE WANTS TO SELL OR WHATEVER?

>> YEAH AND TO DEFINE THE ACTUAL RIGHT-OF-WAY, RIGHT.

I MEAN, JUST CLEANING UP A LOT OF STUFF THAT'S --

>> AND THERE'S NO CHANGES, IT'S AS IT EXISTS NOW.

>> WELL, ON THE RIGHT THERE, RIGHT, ON THE RIGHT, THAT'S 3 LOTS THAT'S TURNING INTO -- I DON'T KNOW, IS IT 3 OR 2? ON THE RIGHT SIDE THERE, THERE WAS 3 LOTS ON THE RIGHT SIDE AND IT'S TURNING INTO 4, RIGHT. THE BIG LOT ON THE LEFT SIDE OF

[00:25:02]

WE'RE COMBINING INTO ONE LOT. AND THEN UP IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER, THAT'S 2 -- WE'RE COMBINING LIKE, AGAIN, 2 -- A COUPLE PARTIAL LOTS. LOOK AT THE OLD SUBDIVISION PLAT THAT WAS HERE. WHERE WE'RE AT IS PROBABLY 20 LOTS, BUT WITH THE INTERSTATE TAKING AND SOME OF WHAT HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER TIME, YOU'RE JUST LEFT OVER WITH WHAT WE'RE SHOWING AND ASSEMBLING, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN, JUST TRYING TO COMPRIEN COMBINE THESE LOTS.

A LOT OF THOSE OLD LOTS ARE NOT BIG ENOUGH TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE ZONING THAT IT'S IN SO WE'RE BASICALLY JUST COMBINING THEM TO CREATE AN ACTUAL LOT THAT'S --

>> AND THESE ARE -- WHAT'S NC -- WHAT, WHAT'S THE NUMBER?

>> THIS. 14.

>> EACH ONE OF THESE ARE GOING TO HAVE JUST ONE SINGLE FAMILY

HOME? >> IN NC ZONING THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S ALLOWED IS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

>> SO AGAIN, JUST TO CLARIFY, HAD NOTHING BEEN DONE AND THOSE LOTS WERE BIG ENOUGH, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN TEN HOUSES THAT

WOULD HAVE BEEN -- >> THERE COULD BE, YEAH.

>> THAT AMOUNT AND NOW THERE WOULD ONLY BE 5 HOUSES ALLOWED BY 5?

>> THANK YOU. >> SO RIGHT NOW I THINK THERE'S A HOUSE ON LOT 1, THAT'S THE ONE THAT WAS THEN BUILT --

>> , THAT'S 2ANO, THAT'S 2A, LOM RIGHT CORNER.

THAT'S THE ONE THAT WAS BUILT LAST YEAR.

THERE'S CURRENTLY -- NORTH, LOT 1 YES, THAT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION

RIGHT NOW. >> BUT THEN ON THE OTHERS,

THERE'S NOT RIGHT NOW? >> NO.

>> BUT THERE WILL BE CONSTRUCTION THERE?

>> YES. >> BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS. YOU KNOW ON THE RIGHT SIDE -- INTEND ON THE RIGHT SIDE THERE WILL BE FOUR HOMES, RIGHT? YEAH, THERE WILL BE FOUR STRUCTURES THERE.

>> THERE'S TWO ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE DEB WEST OF BINFORD.

YOU SEE WHERE THEY HAVE THE RED CIRCLES.

THE LOTS OUTLINED. SO THERE'S TWO OVER THERE AND THEN THERE'S FOUR ON THE EAST SIDE.

>> DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE SILT IN

THE LAKE. >> YEAH, I MEAN, ALL THESE ARE BEING MONITORED BY CITY OF AUBURN.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S EROSION CONTROL METHODS AN ALL THAT

STUFF DONE FOR THE HOMES. >> HE'S RIGHT.

>> GO AHEAD. >> I BELIEVE THESE WOULD FALL UNDER INSPECTION SERVICES, BECAUSE THEY'RE LOT LEVEL PROJECTS, BUT YOU KNOW, WE CAN -- I'LL HAVE OUR WATER CITY GROUP JUST GO OUT AND TAKE A LOOK, NO PROBLEM.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYTHING ELSE?

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, CAN I ASK -- >> I'M SORRY.

IN OUR PACT IT GETS 5 LOTS PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL, BUT I WAS HEARING MR. BASQUIN SAY 6 LOTS.

THAT THERE WERE 10 LOTS THAT WILL BE CONSOLIDATED INTO THE --

THE PACKET SAYS 5 LOTS. >> YEAH, SO IT'S GOING FROM 10 TO 5 AND THEN THAT'S THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY.

SO THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FORCES [INDISCERNIBLE] BUT IT'S NUMBER YOU START WITH, KIND OF IS WHAT

IT IS. >> THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS 6 PIECE?

>> NO, SO -- YEAH, SO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY HAS BEEN DEDICATED

BUT IT'S 5 LOTS, YEAH. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.

NEED A MOTION, PLEASE. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

PRELIMINARY PLAT 55-2026-012. >> SECOND.

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

ANY OPPOSED? PRELIMINARY PLAT BROWN

[5. Preliminary Plat – Brown Townhomes – PUBLIC HEARING (Part 1 of 2)]

TOWNHOMES. >> ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST FOR A 13-LOT SUBDIVISION OFF OF A PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVE. SO THE PROPERTY IS ZONED UNS, URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD SOUTH. IT'S .69 ACRES.

CURRENTLY HAS TWO DUPLEXES ON IT WITH LIKE AN ADDITIONAL TWO

[00:30:05]

FUTURE LAND USE FOR THIS AREA IS ALSO URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD SOUTH.

SO WITH THE LOT SAYSES -- AND ST WANT TO FRAME THIS. THING REALL- ONLY THING THAT WE'RE PUTTING FORWARD IN THAT IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT SO THAT'S THE LOT LAYOUT, LOT SIZE, INGRESS, EGRESS, THOSE ITEMS. SO THE FORMER SUBDIVISION WAS 13 LOT TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT. THE TOWNHOMES ARE PERMITTED BY LOT. LOT SIZES RANGE FROM 844 SQUARE FEET ALL THE WAY UP TO 2,299 SQUARE FEET.

THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR A TOWNHOME IS 1800 SQUARE FEET.

NO OTHER THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT JUST KIND OF INITIALLY WAS THAT THIS WAS AN OLD PROPOSAL WHERE THERE WAS A PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVE GOING THROUGH IT. FOR EVERYBODY JUST KIND OF IN THE AUDIENCE, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CHANGED IN THE SUBDIVISION REGS ABOUT A YEAR AGO, 18 MONTHS, THAT EVERYTHING, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING COULD SUBDIVIDE OFF A PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVE, NOT A PRIVATE STREET PER SE, SO THAT IS WHY YOU SEE THE LOTS WHERE IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE SUBDIVIDING OFF THEMSELVES AND THEN THE ROAD IS THE EASEMENT WITHIN IT. SO THERE ARE SEVERAL COMMENTS THAT I WANTED TO BRING YOU GUYS ATTENTION TO.

SO THERE IS -- PRIMARILY THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS.

SO THERE WAS THE COMMENT ABOUT MOORE AVENUE.

I THINK WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF COMMUNICATION ABOUT THIS AND ALSO HAVE A PRETTY LENGTHY PUBLIC HEARING BUT ONE OF THE COMMENTS DOES ADDRESS THAT. THERE'S ALSO A COMMENT THAT ADDRESSES THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE SAMFORD SIDE.

>> IS THAT PLANNING OR ENGINEERING?

>> ENGINEERING. >> AND THOSE ARE ENGINEERING COMMENTS. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL BE A THEME JUST KIND OF IN THIS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND THEN I THINK ALSO JUST ACROSS GENERAL DEVELOPMENT, JUST KIND OF MAINTAINING CAPACITY ON OUR ARTERIAL ROADS SO IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE ON ANOTHER ITEM ON THIS, I THINK ON THE LAST SUBDIVISION. WHERE OUR PREFERENCE IS IF A LOT HAS ACCESS TO AN ARTERIAL AND TO A SIDE STREET, THAT THE STAFF WILL RECOMMEND AND FORCE ACCESS OFF OF THE MINOR STREET TO MAINTAIN THE CAPACITY OF THE ARTERIAL.

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES IN THE PAST SUBMISSION.

THEY WORKED TO GET A BID ON THAT AND THEY CONFIGURE AND REDESIGNED THEIR LAYOUT TO TAKE ACCESS -- EXCUSE TO EXCLUSIVELYE ACCESS OFF MOORE AVENUE AND THEN THEY GOT THE NINE TOWNHOME LOTS KIND OF BEHIND IT THAT ARE SUBDIVIDING AFTER THAT PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVE. I THINK THE OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO MENTION IS THAT THIS IS FOR 37 BEDS.

THEIR DENSITY THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE ON A .69-ACRE DOWN THERE IS UP TO 58. SO THEY'RE GIVING BACK ABOUT 40% OF THAT N CITY THAT THEY COULD HAVE BY RIGHT.

AND I THINK THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION WITH THAT -- YEAH, SO THERE'S THIS COMMENT THAT EVERYTHING ALONG SANFORD AVENUE NEEDS TO TAKE ACCESS -- BUT A LOT OF THIS STUFF WOULD BS WOULD BE HANDLED IN DRT. SO WITH THAT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW?

>> SO IT'S TAKEN THE TRAFFIC OFF SAMFORD TO MOORE OR DO I HAVE IT

BACKWARDS? >> YEAH, SO THE EXCLUSIVE ACCESS WILL BE ON MOORE AVENUE, THAT IS CORRECT.

AND THE REASON FOR STAFF'S POSITION ON THAT WAS JUST KIND OF -- AND THE REASON FOR EXISTING THE INITIAL THROUGH ACCESS DRIVE WAS DIDN'T WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO MAKE THIS RIGHT AND TRYING TO MAKE IT RIGHT OR PEOPLE TRYING TO MAKE IT LEFT INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH THE STACKING ON.

ONTO SAMFORD. AND ALSO REDUCING THE NUMBER OF VEHICLE AND PERFORMED CONFLICTS WITH PEOPLE, THAT'S A HIGH TRAFFIC CORRIDOR FOR PEDESTRIANS DOWN THERE.

I THINK THIS IS REALLY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE REALLY STRESS ESPECIALLY KIND OF OUR URBAN AREAS WHERE WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THE CAPACITY OF THAT EXISTING ARTERIAL AND NOT REALLY INTERRUPT IT WITH DIFFERENT MOVEMENTS.

>> SO I HAVE A QUESTION. SO WITH ACCESS OFF OF MOORE AVENUE, MOORE AVENUE STARTS OFF MAYBE A LITTLE BIT OVER A CAR WITH WIDE AND THEN FUNNELS DOWN EVEN NARROWER? BASED ON WHAT I SAW. SO WHAT'S THE PROPOSAL TO

ADDRESS THAT, RIGHT? >> YEAH, SO LIKE I SAID, ONE OF THE COMMENTS ON THERE IS THAT THERE IS MORE RIGHT-OF-WAY

[00:35:02]

EXCLUSIVE. >> ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? ALL RIGHT, THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE BROWN TOWNHOMES, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN.

>> MY NAME IS RICHARD SHELBY. I LIVE AT 333 MOORE CIRCLE.

AND MOORE AVENUE IS A SINGLE LANE ROAD, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY IT'S A PUBLIC WALKWAY. EVERY MORNING WHEN I HAVE MY COFFEE, I SAY HELLO TO MY NEIGHBORS WALKING THEIR DOGS, JOGGING DOWN MOORE AVENUE. PEOPLE GOING TO CLASS, STUDENTS.

THERE'S MORE FOOT TRAFFIC THAN THERE IS VEHICLE TRAFFIC ON MOORE AVENUE. AND TO MAKE A ROAD ACCESS ON -- TO MOORE AVENUE IS GOING TO CAUSE SERIOUS TRAFFIC PROBLEMS, IN ADDITION TO TO THE FACT THAT OUR ISLAMIC FRIENDS ON FRIDAY FRIDAYS -- IT'S PRAYER DAY AND THERE'S NOT A PARKING SPACE TO BE HAD ANYWHERE IN THAT AREA ON FRIDAY.

SO -- AND ONE OTHER ADDITIONAL THING: THERE'S A LOVELY STAND OF OLD GROWTH HARDWOODS ON THAT LOT.

IF THERE'S GOES TO THERE'S GOING AREAS PAVED OVER, THOSE HARD WOODS ARE GOING TO COME DOWN SO YOU CAN TAKE YOUR AUBURN FREE CITY LOGO AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.

>> THANK YOU. DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN.

>> HELLO, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. I'M JOHN STANLEY.

I LIVE AT 1,000 GRAY STONE DRIVE IN MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA.

I OWN THE TOWNHOUSE IN MOORE CIRCLE, THE ADDRESS IS 325 MOORE CIRCLE. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS THAT LIVE IN MOORE CIRCLE.

MR. AND MRS. THOMAS AT 319 MOORE CIRCLE.

MRS. EVE STALKER, OWNER OF 327 AND 329, MOORE CIRCLE.

BOTH OF THOSE ARE MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTIES.

MRS. [INDISCERNIBLE] STALKER OWNER OF 317 MOORE CIRCLE.

AND MRS. RODRIGUEZ, OWNER OF 333 MOORE CIRCLE.

OUR CONCERNS -- AND I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO BE REPETITIOUS OF WHAT MR. SHELBY JUST SAID BUT OUR CONCERNS ARE, NUMBER 1, PUBLIC SAFETY. NUMBER 2 IS ACCESS.

NOT ONLY AT MOORE CIRCLE BUT -- AND MOORE AVENUE.

AND THE OTHER IS THE DENSITY THAT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL CREATE. THINK ABOUT IT.

13 LOTS, AT LEAST TWO RESIDENTS PER UNIT.

THAT'S GOING TO CREATE ANOTHER SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 26 AND 36 ADDITIONAL CARS COMING IN AND OUT OF THIS PROPERTY THAT'S ONLY ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT. I'M IN THE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE BUSINESS IN MONTGOMERY, HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 54 YEARS.

I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS.

IN MY CAREER. ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT.

I WONDER WHY THE DEVELOPER HADN'T THOUGHT -- AT LEAST THOUGHT ABOUT PROVIDING RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT ACCESS ON SAMFORD.

I ASKED THE DEVELOPER, DID HE CONSIDER THAT? HIS RESPONSE TO ME WAS, NO, AIN'T THOUGHT ABOUT THAT, OKAY.

I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD NOT HAVE LEFT OUT AND LEFT

[00:40:06]

ON-STREET PARKING ON MOORE AVENUE IS NOT RESTRICTED.

VEHICLES PARKING ON MOORE AVENUE SEVERELY LIMITS VEHICULAR ACCESS TO MOORE CIRCLE. MOORE AVENUE IS CURRENTLY NOT WIDE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. WITHOUT ADEQUATE ACCESS, EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND PERSONNEL ARE NOT TODAY AND WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RESPOND QUICKLY TO MOORE AVENUE, MOORE CIRCLE AS WELL AS TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS AN IMMEDIATE CONCERN TODAY, FOR OUR TENANTS AT MOORE CIRCLED AND MOORE AVENUE PROPERTY OWNERS. THE CITY OF AUBURN IS REQUESTED TO ENSURE THAT ALL RESIDENTS ON MOORE CIRCLE ARE PROVIDED WITH UNRESTRICTED EMERGENCY ACCESS TO THEIR PROPERTIES AND FOR THE SAFETY OF EACH TENANT AND AUBURN CITIZEN LIVING ON MOORE CIRCLE AND MOORE AVENUE. COLLECTIVELY, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU.

IN. ANYONE ELSE?

>> MY NAME IS BOOBY BOBBIE POOL. I LIVE AT 343 SAMFORD.

I DON'T BACK ALL THE WAY UP TO MOORE AVENUE BUT MOORE AVENUE, JUST IN CASE Y'ALL HAVEN'T BEEN BY THERE, IS NOT A STREET, IT'S NOT AN EARVEG AVENUE, IT'S AN A, ESSENTIALLY.

LIKE -- I BELIEVE YOU SAID IT'S JUST A ONE LANE ROAD, AT BEST.

BASED ON WHAT ALL THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PUT IN THERE AND I THINK ONE OF Y'ALL SAID THERE ARE SEVERELY GUESS MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS BACK THERE, I THINK THERE'S THE TWO BIG HOUSES BY THE CEMETERY AND THEN THE OLD APARTMENT COMPLEX IS ESSENTIALLY ON ARMSTRONG. BUT I AGREE WITH THE TWO PREVIOUS COMMENTATOR -- SORRY, THE TWO PREVIOUS ONES WHO WERE UP HERE MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT THIS.

THIS IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER, AS FAR AS MOORE AVENUE, AS FAR AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I MEAN, I'M RIGHT ON THE LINE.

THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO ME IS ESSENTIALLY A RENTAL.

AS LONG AS IT'S NO MORE THAN TWO UNRELATED -- I THINK Y'ALL SHOULD VOTE AGAINST THIS. I DON'T KNOW WHO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS. I THINK IT'S TUCKER, I'M NOT SURE -- BUT THIS -- THAT PLAN RIGHT THERE IS A TRAIN WRECK.

ALL Y'ALL ARE ASKING FOR IS PROBLEMS. AND THAT'S IT. AND MY NEIGHBORS ON PAIN STREET, IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE COLLEGE STUDENTS LIVING THERE, WHICH I ASSUME THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THERE, YOU HAVE PAYNE STREET FROM THE TOP TO THE BOTTOM IS GOING TO BE OVERRUN.

I MEAN, WE ALREADY HAVE A BUNCH OF COLLEGE KIDS BACK THERE ANYWAY BUT ADDING -- WHAT DID YOU SAY, 37 BEDS THERE? SO 37 VEHICLES COMING DOWN PAYNE STREET, TO GET ONTO MOORE, TO THEN -- I ASSUME MAYBE THEY'RE PUTTING GARAGES UNDERNEATH THEM.

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE 37 KIDS PARK THEIR CARS IN THOSE GARAGES THAT TIGHT? THAT ACTUALLY MIGHT BE FUN TO SEE. BUT -- DISASTER. Y'ALL ARE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Y'ALL ARE KIND OF CHARGED WITH PLANNING OUT THIS CITY AND QUITE FRANKLY, YOU AREN'T -- Y'ALL'S PREDECESSORS MAYBE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING TOO GOOD.

IT'S Y'ALL'S TURN TO STOP TO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

IF IF YOU TUCKER WANTS -- IF TUCKER WANTS TO -- WRAP UP PLEASE.

>> IF TUCKER WANTS TO TEAR DOWN WHAT'S THERE, MAYBE BUILD 4

[00:45:02]

I MEAN, THE FACT THAT THAT -- WHATEVER YOU SAID BY CODE COULD PUT 58 BEDS THERE, THAT'S RIDICULOUS.

BUT I WOULD ASK THAT Y'ALL NOT APPROVE THIS, AND I THINK ALL MY NEIGHBORS ON MY STREET WOULD ASK YOU THE SAME THING.

MY BACK CORNER NEIGHBOR ON MOORE AVENUE WOULD DEFINITELY OBJECT TO IT. I DIDN'T SEE HER HERE BUT -- INAUDIBLE ] ARE YOU RIGHT THERE? THERE'S SANDY. SO -- WE WE WOULD JUST ASK YOU O VOTE IT DOWN, PLEASE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN.

>> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO TRIM MINE DOWN.

I DON'T THINK I CAN GET IT ALL IN IN 5 MINUTES.

SOME OF IT HAS ALREADY BEEN TALKED ABOUT.

MY NAME IS JOHN REAGAN. I LIVE AT 365 PAYNE STREET WITH MY WIFE AND WE BOUGHT THERE FOUR YEARS AGO BECAUSE WE LOVED THE STREET, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ITS HISTORY.

AND WHEN THIS PROJECT FIRST CAME UP, THE ORIGINAL PLAT -- AND YOU CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- WAS TO GO OUT ONTO EAST SAMFORD, RIGHT? AND FROM THAT MEETING TO THIS MEETING HERE, THE PROJECT HAS BASICALLY BEEN TURNED 180°.

I THINK THE IDEA OF TAKING EVERYBODY OUT TO MOORE IS A CRAZY IDEA. AND Y'ALL SHOULD REALLY THINK ABOUT IT, WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.

YOU GOT 4 BUILDINGS ALREADY ON THIS LOCATION RIGHT HERE.

ALL OF THEM ARE ALREADY GOING OUT TO EAST SAMFORD ALREADY.

ALREADY. THEY WERE GOING OUT THAT WAY ANYWAY. NOW YOU WANT TO TURN THEM TO MOORE, WHICH THE -- WOULD THAT BE THE WEST SIDE IS SUPER NARROW, AND THE WEST -- SORRY, THE EAST SIDE OF THAT ROAD IS AN EASEMENT OR A RIGHT-OF-WAY, IT'S NOT EVEN A STREET.

IT'S 11 FEET WIDE AND BETWEEN SANDY'S HOUSE AND THE OTHER TUCKER -- BROWN HOUSE -- EXCUSE ME?

>> ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE.

>> OKAY. IT'S ONLY 21 FEET WIDE FROM DWELLING TO DWELLING. YOU COULDN'T GET A ROAD IN THERE ANYWAY. SO MY -- I GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS. ANSWER THEM LATER.

BUT WHY IS THE CITY CATERING TO RENTERS THAT ARE COMING IN, THEY WILL BE LEAVING AFTER A YEAR, TWO, THREE, FOUR AND THE RESIDENTS HAVE TO SUFFER EVERYTHING THAT'S BEING BUILT? BY CODE -- I THINK THEY CAN ACTUALLY BUILD UP TO 65 BEDS IN THIS LOCATION.

IF THE ALLOTMENT IS 85 BEDS PER ACRE, THEY COULD TECHNICALLY HAVE THAT MUCH. THAT'S WAY TOO MUCH.

OUR CITY IS KILLING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE BY ALLOWING THAT MANY RESIDENTS TO GO IN SUCH A TIGHT AREA.

SO I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE ENTRANCE-EXIT ONTO MOORE.

I GOT TO POINT OUT SOME STUFF. THE PROJECT, IF YOU LOOK AT IT, IT SAYS 311 SAMFORD. IS LET'S MAKE IT 311 SAMFORD.

MOORE IS NOT EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THE TRAFFIC.

I'VE TAUGHT THAT BOTH WAYS, IT'S TOO NARROW.

THERE'S PARKING ALONG THERE ALL THE TIME FOR ALL THE MEETINGS AND SCHOOL TO TAKE PLACE. THERE'S KIDS WALKING ALL THE TIME, GOING FROM SCHOOL DOWN PAYNE AND BY BRINGING ALL THOSE CARS DOWN MOORE, TURNING RIGHT ONTO PAYNE STREET, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A PROBLEM. MY WIFE AND I HAVE SEEN TWO ACCIDENTS THERE ALREADY, BY PEOPLE TRYING TO TURN FROM MOORE ONTO PAYNE. BECAUSE BOTH STREETS ARE TOO NARROW. SENDING MORE TRAFFIC THAT WAY IS A MISTAKE. I SUGGEST YOU ALL TAKE A VOTE, VOTE IT DOWN AND RECONVENE AT SOME OTHER TIME WHERE WE CAN HAVE SOME ALTERNATIVE EXITS. BY JUST MOVING IT FROM THE LAST MEETING TO THIS MEETING TO MOORE IS A MISTAKE.

I WENT OUT THERE THIS MORNING, I THINK SOME THINGS COULD BE DONE TO IMPROVE SAMFORD, TO ALLOW FOR THIS TRAFFIC.

IN MY OPINION THE LIGHTS ARE NOT SYNCHRONIZED GOING FROM EAST COLLEGE TO GAY TO PAYNE, PINEDALE.

[00:50:05]

AFTER 8:30 THIS MORNING, THERE WAS HARDLY NO TRAFFIC.

SO YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT TWO PEAK PERIODS IN MY OPINION, AROUND 7:30 TO 8:30 AND 4 O'CLOCK.

I THINK THERE'S SOME COUNTERMEASURES WE COULD DO TO THE FLOW TO HANDLE GOING FROM FOUR BUILDINGS ON THIS THING TO 13. IF YOU HAVE THEM EXIT OUT ONTO SAMFORD. I USED TO WORK FOR MERCEDES BENZ. I WAS HEAD OF LOGISTICS FOR NORTH AMERICA. I'M WILLING TO HELP.

I'LL BE PART OF A COMMITTEE, A GROUP WORK, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO DO, TO FIND A WAY TO GET THE TRAFFIC TO GO OUT ONTO SAMFORD.

THIS PROPOSAL IS A TERRIBLE IDEA.

SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET HURT. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

YOUR TIME IS UP. >> OKAY.

>> HELLO. MY NAME IS NICOLE LYNCH AND I'M ACTUALLY A RENTER HERE IN AUBURN, ALABAMA.

I'VE LIVED HERE FOR 16 YEARS AND I LIVE AT 330 MOORE AVENUE.

AND I HAVE HAD THE PLEASURE OF LIVING THERE FOR 7 YEARS.

SO THIS IS GOING UP RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE I RENT FROM.

I'M NOT SURE IF THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY IS HERE, SO I WANTED TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK. I THINK THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WAS ALREADY MENTIONED IS A BIG DEAL AT MOORE AVENUE.

BUT I ALSO THINK OF THE RUN-OFF WATER.

RIGHT NOW MY LOT GETS A TON OF RUN-OFF WATER, TO THE POINT OF WHEN I COME HOME OR IT'S RAINING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IT'S JUSE AVENUE TO PAYNE STREET. SO WHEN WE GET HEAVY RAINS AND DOWNPOURS WITH FLOOD WATCHES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND SO I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THAT TAKING AWAY THE SOIL FROM THIS PROPERTY THAT'S GOING TO BE TURNED TO ASPHALT OR CONCRETE IS GOING TO NOT BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE WATER, SO THEN IT'S JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO FLOW DOWN MOORE AVENUE TO PAYNE STREET.

AND THEN I JUST ALSO WANT TO MENTION ABOUT JUST THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BRING INTO OUR AREA THAT I JUST DON'T THINK THE ROAD STRUCTURE IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE IT. WHICH I KNOW WE ONLY HAVE SIX TO SEVEN FOOTBALL HOME GAMES DURING THE YEAR BUT THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT NOW WE CAN'T EVEN HANDLE IT, TO THE POINT OF SOMETIMES WHEN I'M COMING HOME FROM A GAME, I CAN'T EVEN GET TO MY PROPERTY. I'VE HAD TO PARK ON PAYNE STREET AND WALK, WHICH THEN MAKES IT HARDER FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES TO BE ABLE TO GET THERE. AND SO I JUST WOULD REALLY LIKE Y'ALL TO THINK ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

WE'VE ALSO HAD GAS PROBLEMS WITH DIFFERENT LOTS WHEN BUILDING HAS BEEN GOING UP OVER THERE, WHICH I KNOW IS AN ISSUE, RIGHT, AND IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IF THERE'S CONSTRUCTION, WHETHER THERE'S ONE HOUSE BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY OR 13 TOWNHOMES BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY. BUT THE GAS LINE RUNS UNDER SAMFORD TO MOORE AVENUE. SO THAT IS HOW THE CITY BUILT IT WAY BACK WHEN. SO ANYTIME THERE'S CONSTRUCTION ON MOORE CIRCLE OR ON THE CORNER OF WRITESMILL AND SAMFORD OUR HOUSES GET AFFECTED BY THE GAS LEAKS SO I HAVE TO VACATE MY PROPERTY, ME AND MY DOG HAVE TO VACATE THE PROPERTY FOR A DAY, TWO DAYS, THINGS LIKE THAT. AND I AM KNOW THERE'S SOME THINGS OUT OF THAT CONTROL, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.

IF THERE'S 13 TOWNHOMES GOING IN HERE AND I KNOW THAT GAS AND EVERYTHING GOING TO COME OUT AND MEASURING AND WHATEVER BUT THEY MARK IT AND IT STILL GETS HIT AND SO THEN I HAVE TO VACATE MY PROPERTY, AND I'M -- THAT'S ON ME THEN TO FIND A PLACE TO STAY, FOR ME AND MY DOG. SO I JUST WOULD LIKE Y'ALL TO THINK ABOUT JUST THE VOLUME AND THE DENSITY.

AND I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THE POLICIES THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW FOR SUBDIVISION PLATS, RIGHT, BUT YOU MENTIONED IT AT THE BEGINNING OF YOUR MEETING, IT'S THE GENERAL GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY. AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS GOOD FOR OUR COMMUNITY. SO THANK YOU.

>> NEXT, WHO WOULD BE NEXT? >> BILL KASKEY I LIVE AT 521 EAST SAMFORD. I'M OBVIOUSLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT. I DON'T WANT TO REPEAT WHAT OTHER FOLKS HAVE SAID, BUT IF YOU'RE TALKING 37 CARS, IT'S LIKE A SHELL GAME; YOU WANT TO KEEP THEM OFF SAMFORD TRYING TO MAKE LEFTS INTO THE PROPERTY AND BLOCKING TRAFFIC.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET THERE SOMEHOW SO THEY'VE EITHER GOT TO GO OUT PAYNE OR ARMSTRONG SO THE TRAFFIC JUST A MOMENT IS GOING TO BE THERE BECAUSE OF 13 TOWNHOMES.

SECONDLY YOU'VE GOT SAMFORD SCHOOL THAT'S KIND OF KITTY-CORNER FROM THAT. IT'S A PROBLEM FOR ALL THOSE KIDS, THEY DON'T PAY ATTENTION, THEY'RE TON SCOOTERS, THEY'RE ON BICYCLES OR THEY'RE WALKING. SO ADDING THIS KIND OF DENSITY

[00:55:01]

A THIRD POINT IS I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RULES ARE FOR IMPERVIOUS SPHAIFS BUT THERE'S S NO WAY THAT THEY COULD PUT UP THIS MANY TOWNHOMES ON THAT SMALL A LOT AND MEET THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.

AND MY LAST POINT IS ABOUT TRASH AND RECYCLING.

MAYBE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE BIG BIN, BUT I DID A LITTLE FUN WITH MATH. IF YOU'VE GOT 26 BINS, SO 13 TRASH BINS, 13 RECYCLING BINS, THEY'RE 30 INCHES WIDE EACH, THAT'S 780 INCHES OR 65 FEET OF TRASH BINS.

IF YOU NEED A FOOT BETWEEN EACH ONE, THAT'S 2 MORE FOOT, YOU'VE GOT 117 FEET OF TRASH BINS. YOU CAN PUT THEM ON SAMFORD ON MONDAY MORNINGS OR MOORE STREET ON MONDAY MORNINGS.

THAT'S ANOTHER RECIPE FOR DISASTER.

ALL THAT TRASH, RECYCLING, IT'S GOT TO GO SOMEWHERE.

SO THERE'S JUST NOT ROOM ON THIS PROPERTY FOR ALL THIS STUFF THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PUT IN. IT'S TEN POUNDS IN A FIVE POUND SACK, AND I WOULD HOPE YOU WOULD VOTE AGAINST IT.

THANK YOU.

>> WHO WOULD BE NEXT? >> I'M AL JENKINS.

I LIVE AT 442HARE AVENUE. IT'S PARALLEL TO MOORE AVENUEMENT I'M BASICALLY HERE TO SPEAK FOR THE KIDS.

WE'VE HEARD IT ALREADY, BUT I HAVE AN 11-YEAR-OLD AND HE HAS BUDDIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEY RIDE THEIR BIKES, THEY WALK, AND SO I JUST -- I'M WITH EVERYONE ELSE.

I DON'T THINK THIS IS SAVOR PRACTICAL.

ALSO, YOU KNOW I'M ALL FOR PROGRESS AND WE HAVE A LOT OF NICE NEW HOMES IN THAT AREA, WHICH I APPRECIATE AND I LIKE ALL THE NEW PEOPLE COMING AND ALL THAT, BUT ALSO THE HISTORY OF AUBURN IS IMPORTANT, AND I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD -- I KNOW IT HAS A FEW APARTMENTS AND CONDOS AND TOWNHOUSES, BUT YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD TURN INTO AN APARTMENT COMPLEX TYPE OF STREET.

IT'S GOT A LOT OF HISTORY. SO ANYWAY, I'M BASICALLY HERE TO SPEAK FOR THE KIDS AND HOPE Y'ALL WILL VOTE NO.

THANK YOU.

>> NEXT? >> HI, MY NAME IS SCOTT HILL.

I LIVE AT 369 PAYNE STREET. NEIGHBORS WITH JOHN AND LESLIE REAGAN. WE ENJOY HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF MOORE AND WATCHING PEOPLE COME DOWN THAT ALLEYWAY -- AND IT IS AN ALLEYWAY, LET'S BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. WHERE MORE COMES MOORE COMES INI CAN WALK DOWN THAT SPACE AND STICK MY ARMS ABOUT AND THAT'S ABOUT AS WIDE AS THAT IS. IT'S REALLY FUN TO WATCH UPS AND FED EX COME DOWN MOORE AND EMPTY OUT ONTO PAYNE.

TYPICALLY THEY END UP IN OUR FRONT YARD.

SO THERE IS A REAL TRAFFIC CONSIDERATION HERE THAT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED, AND I THINK AUBURN IS JUST IN A REAL WEIRD SPOT RIGHT NOW. I WENT TO AUBURN -- I WENT OFF AND YOU KNOW HAD A CAREER, GOT RECRUITED BACK TO COLUMBUS, GEORGIA AND LIVED OVER THERE FOR 8 YEARS AND JUST COULDN'T WAIT TO GET BACK TO AUBURN. AND WE BOUGHT A HOUSE ON PAYNE STREET AND SAID, WELL, LET'S MOVE OVER THERE FULL TIME.

I WAS STILL WORKING IN COLUMBUS, GEORGIA BUT I LIVE IN AUBURN BY CHOICE. AND AUBURN'S IN A REALLY WEIRD SPOT. I DON'T ENVY YOU ALL IN YOUR JOB, I REALLY, REALLY DON'T. IT'S TOUGH.

AND I'M THANKFUL THAT YOU SERVE AND DO THIS.

BUT AS DOWNTOWN HAS GROWN AND THESE LARGE, VERY LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES HAVE BEEN PUT IN, EVERYTHING'S PUSHING OUT. WE GOT TO HAVE BOUNDARIES.

PAYNE STREET IS ONE OF THOSE BOUNDARIES.

IT'S A ONE-WAY STREET. IT'S THE WORST ONE WAY STREET EVER.

IF ANY OF Y'ALL WANT TO COME OVER ON A FRIDAY MORNING AND SIT ON OUR FRONT PORCH, JUST PLEASE, GIVE US A CALL, YOU DON'T NEED TO SIT THERE FOR AN HOUR, SOMEONE WILL TURN ONTO PAYNE AND GO THE WRONG WAY AND NOT JUST SLOWLY.

[01:00:03]

THERE ARE KIDS ON THE STREET. IT'S A BORDER STREET.

IT IS RESIDENTIAL, OKAY. I UNDERSTAND BY RIGHT, I UNDERSTAND THE ABILITY TO PULL THIS OFF -- SOMEONE TOLD ME A LONG TIME AGO JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DO SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD DO SOMETHING, OKAY? AND I JUST -- WHERE WE REALLY HAVE TO START THINKING ABOUT WHAT'S ALREADY HAPPENED DOWNTOWN AND HOW THINGS ARE PUSHING OUT.

PEOPLE AVOID THE TRAFFIC DOWNTOWN AND PAYNE STREET BEARS THE BRUNT OF THAT. ARMSTRONG BEARS THE BRUNT OF THAT. BECAUSE YOU CANNOT MOVE ON GAY AND COLLEGE AT ALL OR MAGNOLIA OR THAT MUCH AND IT'S BRUTAL.

I KNOW Y'ALL KNOW THAT BUT WHAT IS PAYING THE PRICE IS THESE OUTLYING AREAS THAT ARE REALLY KIND OF THE BORDER AREAS THAT ARE RESIDENTIAL AND I JUST REALLY WANT TO ASK YOU TO GIVE REALLY STRONG CONSIDERATION TO CONSIDER.

IT'S GETTING TO A POINT WHERE THINGS LIKE THIS HAVE TO BE GIVEN SOME REAL CONSIDERATION AROUND IS THAT JUST -- IS THAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO? THERE'S FOUR STRUCTURES ON IT NOW, HE COULD BUILD FOUR STRUCTURES AND MOVE ON.

BUT TO PACK IT FULL -- AND YOU'VE GOT IT GOING ON ON THE CORNER OF THAT MUCH. RIGHT NOW IT'S ALREADY THACH.

IT LOOKS AWFUL, 40 FEET HIGH, THEY'RE PACKED ON THERE DERBY STILL HAVE A GRAVEL DRIVEWAY. WE CHOSE NOT TO TEAR OUR HOUSE DOWN, OKAY. WE CHOSE TO RENOVATE OUR HOUSE, BECAUSE IT HAS HISTORY. IT WAS BUILT IN 1936, OKAY.

AND WE LOVE WHAT DERBY STILL HAVE A GRAVEL DRIVEWAY BECAUSE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF MAKING SURE THERE'S ENOUGH, YOU KNOW, GRASS AND GRAVEL FOR THE RAIN WATER TO SOAK IN.

YET YOU CAN DO THAT? I -- WE JUST GOT TO START ASKING SOME REAL QUESTIONS HERE ABOUT HOW AND WHAT WE'RE DOING WITHIN OUR CITY. SO I ASK YOU TO REALLY, PLEASE, TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS THING ON MOORE AVENUE DOESN'T HAPPEN.

I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT ALL THE OTHER TALKING POINTS AND I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME -- I'VE TALKED LONGER THAN I THOUGHT I WOULD TO BE VERY HONEST WITH YOU.

BUT IT'S TROUBLE WAITING TO HAPPEN.

IT REALLY TRULY IS. AND IT'S NOT SAFE.

SO THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME.

>> ANYONE ELSE? >> LESLIE REAGAN, 365 PAYNE STREET. I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT -- I PRINTED THIS OFF OF THE AUBURN WEBSITE.

THIS IS FROM THE 2025 AUBURN CITIZEN SURVEY.

QUESTION 2:00 MAJOR CATEGORIES OF CITY SERVICES THAT SHOULD RECEIVE THE MOST EMPHASIS OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS.

NUMBER 1 ON HERE IS FLOW AND MANAGEMENT OF TRAFFIC.

AND I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE THAT ANSWERED THIS PROBABLY SAID, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BEST TO SEND THEM DOWN AN ALLEY AND THROUGH NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO THAT'S NUMBER 1. NUMBER 2 IS MAINTENANCE OF CITY INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS IS WHAT THE CITIZENS SAID.

AND IT'S ON THE AUBURN WEBSITE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I'M WILLIAM SHAW. I OWN A PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF ARMSTRONG AND MOORE, 337 ARMSTRONG STREET.

EVERYTHING YOU GUYS SAID IS GREAT.

I AM AGREE, I AGREE THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE DONE.

THE THING THAT I WANT TO -- THE THING THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT -- I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS COMMITTEE IS CONCERNED WITH THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THIS SUBDIVISION, AND AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS, THEN THE COMMITTEE HAS TO SAY YES.

I'M HOPING THAT THE COMMITTEE CAN THROW QUESTIONS FURTHER ON, BECAUSE IF THE COMMITTEE SAYS YES AND THAT PUTS PRESSURE ON THE NEXT PROBLEM, THE TRAFFIC AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF, THAT MEANS NOW WE'VE PUSHED IT TO A CRISIS.

WELL, THIS HAS BEEN APPROVED, SO NOW WE'VE GOT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. WE CAN'T SAY NOW, OH, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE APPROVED IT. NOW WE'RE SAYING, OH, MY GOODNESS, WE'VE GOT A HUGE PROBLEM -- TRAFFIC PROBLEM ON

[01:05:02]

SO I'M HOPING THAT THE COMMITTEE CAN DISALLOW THIS FOR REASONS OTHER THAN JUST -- WELL, IT MEETS THE CRITERIA.

THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON BROWN TOWNHOMES?

>> I'LL TRY TO SHORTEN WHAT I INTENDED TO SAY.

CAROLYN ANN CAR, I LIVE AT 342 PAYNE STREET.

I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP THAT COVERS PAYNE STREET, HARE AVENUE AND PAINDALE DRIVE.

WE'RE THE OLDEST INTACT NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE CITY.

I SUPPOSE OTHER THAN PERHAPS THE HISTORIC DISTRICT ON NORTH GAY -- I MEAN ON NORTH COLLEGE. AND WE ORGANIZED OUR GROUP.

AT THE TIME OF THE AUBURN 2000 PLAN PROCESS, WHEN THAT BEGAN.

WE WERE THE ONLY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ACTUALLY ATTENDED ALL OF THE AUBURN 2,000 PLAN MEETING. AND THAT WAS AN INTERESTING PROCESS. BUT WE DID IT AND WE WERE -- BECAUSE WE WERE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE APPROACHING HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT COMING TOWARD US ON PAYNE STREET, PINEDALE AND HARE. QUITE FRANKLY, WE WERE PLEASED TO BE ASSURED, IF YOU READ THE AUBURN 2,000 PLAN, THAT NO HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE ALLOWED NEXT TO NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION ZONING. OF COURSE, TO OUR SHOCK, WOODLAND TERRACE APARTMENTS WERE TORN DOWN AND 221 ARMSTRONG WAS BUILT. AND THAT LED TO NOT ONLY THE CONSTANT WRONG PAY DRIVING ON PAYNE STREET BY THE STUDENTS WHO ARE CUTTING THROUGH TO 221 ARMSTRONG BUT TO THE OVERLOAD OF THE SEWER SYSTEM IN THE AREA, THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM WHICH OF COURSE CALLS DR. COURSE CAUSED DR. BILL WALL'S PROPERTY TO COLLAPSE. WE WERE VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE CITY HAVING SAID THERE WOULD BE NO HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT NEXT TO CONSERVATION THAT ALLOWED THAT.

WE'VE ALSO OF COURSE FOUGHT THROUGH THE WHOLE BUSINESS OF AIRBNB, WHICH I WON'T GO INTO, OTHER THAN TO SAY WE ACTUALLY LOST A VERY LOVELY FAMILY FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHO MOVED BECAUSE THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT TOLERATE STUDENTS YELLING OBSENITIES AT THEIR CHILDREN ON PARTY WEEKENDS, WHEN THEY WERE RENTING AIRBNB. SO WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH VARIOUS ISSUES THAT HAVE BOTHERED US WITH ALL THE DEVELOPMENT QUESTIONS. BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL, BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION, YES, WE UNDERSTAND THE TRAFFIC PROBLEM ON SAMFORD AVENUE, BUT MANY OF US USE MOORE ALLEY IN ORDER TO AVOID BEING CAUGHT IN THE TRAFFIC PROBLEM ON SAMFORD AVENUE, AND NOW THE THOUGHT OF COURSE OF THIS HAVING ALL THESE CARS BUILT ONTO MOORE ALLEY, WE DO NOT BELIEVE THIS IS WORKABLE.

QUITE FRANKLY -- AND THIS IS NOT A JOKE -- AS I DROVE THROUGH MOORE THIS MORNING ON MY WAY TO MY WORK WITH THE -- EXCUSE ME -- AT THE CHURCH WITH OUR CHURCH FOOD PANTRY, A CAR HAD TO BACK OUT OF ARMSTRONG TO LET ME GET OUT OF MOORE STREET ONTO ARMSTRONG AND THAT'S NOW WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. I THINK MOST OF THE THINGS THAT I INTENDED TO SAY HAVE BEEN SAID. QUITE FRANKLY, AS I SAY, WE HAVE BEEN VERY, VERY DISAPPOINTED THAT THE CITY HAS NOT FOLLOWED THROUGH ON WHAT IT HAD SAID IN THE ORIGINAL AUBURN 2,000 PLAN AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND YOU WHAT IT SAYS IN OUR CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE ON URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD SOUTH.

AS IT GOES THROUGH THIS, AT THE END IT SAYS "OF THE THREE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS, THE PERMITTED USES IN THIS DISTRICT ARE GEARED TO THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE BUT FOCUSED ON PRESERVING AND COMPLEMENTING THE CHARACTER OF THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

[01:10:01]

IT GOES ON TO SAY "THIS WILL REQUIRE MORE STRINGENT REVIEW OF PROPOSALS". SO THEREFORE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASKS YOU TO DENY THIS PROPOSAL UNTIL IT CAN BE BETTER FORMULATED NOT TO IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> ANN SHAW, 337 ARMSTRONG STREET, CORNER OF MOORE AND ARMSTRONG. I AM THE GREAT GRANDDAUGHTER ALONG WITH MY FAMILY OF WILLIAM MCDOWELL MOORE OF MOORE STREET. THAT'S WHERE THE NAME COMES FROM. THAT STREET WAS ORIGINALLY OUR DRIVEWAY. IT WAS A COMMON DRIVEWAY SHARED BETWEEN OUR HOME ON 337 ARMSTRONG STREET AND THE SAMFORD HOUSE WHICH WAS RIGHT ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY FROM US.

THAT BECAME A FLAG POLE LOT WHEN THE COW PASTURE BEHIND OUR HOUSE WAS SOLD EVENTUALLY TO PAY FOR LIFE, WHEN LIFE GOT HARD THROUGHOUT THE DEPRESSION AND THE WORLD WARS.

SO THAT WAS A FLAG POLE LOT. IT WAS A DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO MOORE CIRCLE THAT WAS SOLD, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY MY GRANDFATHER'S COW PASTURE. THAT WAS NEVER INTENDED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. THE ALLEY THAT CONNECTS TO PAYNE WAS ALSO A FLAG POLE LOT. AND THAT'S WHY WE DON'T EXACTLY LINE UP. THESE ARE TWO DRIVEWAYS THAT OF COURSE CITY SERVICES CAME IN AND IT BECAME A CITY STREET VERSUS SIMPLY A FLAG POLE LOT. BUT IT REALLY STILL TODAY IS WHERE A NEIGHBORHOOD IS MEETING STUDENT UNIVERSITY SERVICES.

WHERE WE'RE BUILDING LOTS OF STUDENT AND TAILGATE HOUSES WHILE THE REST OF US THAT HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN ARE TRYING DESPERATELY TO PRESERVE A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S BEEN THERE SINCE MY GREAT GRANDPARENTS' TIME, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1918. MY HUSBAND IS HENRY CLAY ARMSTRONG, WHO JUST SPOKE A MINUTE AGO.

AND SO WE HAVE A REALLY VESTED INTEREST IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE ARE TRYING DESPERATELY TO KEEP OUR HOUSE FOR YET ONE MORE GENERATION. IT'S BEEN IN OUR FAMILY FOR SIX GENERATIONS, AND WE HOPE TO KEEP IT FOR ONE MORE.

SORRY, THAT WAS BAD. ANYWAY, I REALLY WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD THINK ABOUT HOW TO SEPARATE THE CITY PROVIDING -- OR ENCOURAGING STUDENT HOUSING IN A PLACE THAT WE REALLY WANT TO BE A FAMILY HOUSING AREA. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

>> [INDISCERNIBLE] 2324 PAYNE CIRCLE.

MY FAMILY HAVE BEEN IN LEE COUNTY, IN AUBURN FOR EIGHT GENERATIONS. I HAVE SERVED ON THE CITY COUNCIL FOR SIX YEARS. I KNOW WHAT Y'ALL ARE FACED WITH. I KNOW A FEW YEARS AGO, THE UNIVERSITY MET WITH THE ADMINISTRATION, CITY ADMINISTRATION AND WERE TOLD THAT WE NEED TO HAVE MORE STUDENT HOUSING CLOSER TO CAMPUS IF WE EXPECT TO GROW THE UNIVERSITY. SO THAT HAS OBVIOUSLY COME ABOUT. WE HAVE THAT GROWTH.

IT HAS GONE TOO FAR. THIS MAY BE LEGITIMATE.

YOU HAVE AMPLE REASON NOT TO APPROVE THIS.

AND THE CITY COUNCIL -- OF COURSE THE WAY IT USED TO BE, Y'ALL TURN IT DOWN AND CITY COUNCIL CAN APPROVE IT.

IS THAT THE WAY IT STILL IS? >> NO, SIR, THIS IS THE FINAL

AUTHORITY FOR THE SUBDIVISION -- >> THE PLANS, YES.

>> ALL RIGHT, WELL GOOD. WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS, IT WAS SIMILAR TO THE PROPERTY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.

IF IT DOES -- I MEAN, I KNOW THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THAT AND I ASKED THEM AT ONE TIME, I SAID HOW DID Y'ALL GET THIS THING APPROVED? HE SAID OH, IT WAS APPROVED.

THE POINT IS I KNOW THAT Y'ALL CAN'T CHANGE THE LAW RIGHT NOW, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. THIS FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO

[01:15:04]

I'VE LIVED ON A LOT OF STREETS IN AUBURN.

YEARS AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT -- I DON'T LIKE THE WAY WE'RE PROCEEDING WITH THESE DEVELOPMENTS AND THE LOOK THAT THEY GIVE AM IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT THE LOVELIEST VILLAGE.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? OKAY, SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL RIGHT, SO WOULD THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE COME

FORWARD? >> GOOD EVENING, LEE [INDISCERNIBLE] KHADR ENGINEERING, REPRESENTING THE

APPLICANT. >> ALL RIGHT, THE BIGGEST THING IS TRAFFIC. WE KNOW THAT.

SO WILL YOU SPEAK TO THAT. AND THEN WE'LL GET MR.

GRIFFITHS TO SPEAK. >> YES, MA'AM.

WAS THERE ANYTHING SPECIFIC RELATED TO TRAFFIC OR YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT MORE -- I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A BUNCH OF STUFF THAT'S COME UP IN THE QUESTIONS AND -- JUST MORE OF

IT? >> MORE OF IT.

>> AS FAR AS ADDITIONS TO TRAFFIC ON MOORE AVENUE, WITH THE WAY THIS IS CONFIGURED, BASED ON WHAT WE WERE ASKED TO EVER DO THE LAST TIME THIS CAME IN BEFORE Y'ALL, BEFORE WE PULLED IT, YEAH, WE'RE TAKING ALL THE TRAFFIC OFF OF SAMFORD, LIMITING THAT ACCESS TO GET RID OF IT ALTOGETHER, OTHER THAN PEDESTRIAN. AND TAKING IT TO MOORE AVE.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE ENTIRETY OF THE TRAFFIC OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS PLANNED TO GO TO MOORE AVENUE AT THIS TIME.

YEAH. >> PLEASE SPEAK TO THE TRASH AND

RECYCLING. >> CAN I BACK UP A SECOND REAL QUICK? SO SPECIFICALLY, YOU'RE SAYING THAT AS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED, THE ACCESS TO THE DEVELOPMENT WAS FROM SAMFORD BUT YOU CHANGED IT TO MOORE?

>> FIRST TIME WE BROUGHT THIS IT GOT PULLED BEFORE IT WAS BROUGHT

IN HERE, CORRECT? >> YEAH, IT DID.

>> I CAN'T REMEMBER THE TIMING ON IT.

>> IT WAS. >> SO ORIGINALLY, WE HAD THE -- IT WAS A PASSTHROUGH STREET, SO THERE WERE CONCERNS AT THAT POINT FROM A STAFF LEVEL AND OBVIOUSLY FROM YOU GUYS ABOUT TRAFFIC CONCERNS ON SAMFORD AVENUE ITSELF.

THERE WAS I THINK CUTTHROUGH WAS USED DURING THAT DISCUSSION, THE CONCERN OVER CUTTHROUGH TRAFFIC AROUND ARMSTRONG, SO FROM A STAFF LEVEL, THAT WAS PART OF THE REASON, IS TO TRY TO

ALLEVIATE SAMFORD -- >> THE REASON FOR THAT HAD TO DO THE NEW SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT THAT SAYS NO ACCESS ONTO

ARTERIAL -- >> NO, SO YES, IF THEY WERE TO CONNECT TWO PUBLIC STREETS, THAT WOULDN'T BE A PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVE. PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVES ARE PARKING LOTS. IF IT FUNCTIONS AS A STREET IT'S A STREET. LIKE I SAID THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES WITH IT TAKING ACCESS OFF OF SAMFORD SO --

>> SOMEONE ASKED -- WE'LL GO BACK TO TRAFFIC.

SOMEONE ASKED ABOUT RIGHT-IN AND RIGHT-OUT ONTO SAMFORD.

WAS THAT CONSIDERED? >> NOT AT THIS TIME, NO, MA'AM.

AFTER OUR INITIAL DISCUSSIONS, FROM WHEN WE PULLED IT ORIGINALLY -- AND I DON'T KNOW MICHAEL MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO SOME OF THIS AS IT RELATES TO IMPACTS TO SAMFORD AVENUE, BUT AGAIN, I WANT TO SAY -- MISSION IS PROBABLY NOT THE RIGHT WORD BUT SOME OF THE DECISIONS ON TRAFFIC CONTROL IN THE CITY PUT PRIORITY ON THE MAJOR ARTERIALS VERSUS THE SIDE STREET.

AND THAT'S -- THAT IS A TYPICAL CONDITION FOR ANY MUNICIPALITY, ESPECIALLY ONE OF A SIZE AS LARGE AS THIS ONE AND OBVIOUSLY MUCH LARGER. SO NO RIGHT-IN RIGHT-OUT ON SAMFORD WAS NOT CONSIDERED AS A PART OF THIS.

AGAIN, THAT IS PARTIALLY DUE TO SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE HAD ON THE ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION OF THIS, WHEN WE HAD A DRIVE CONNECTED ON THE WAY UP. AGAIN THIS IS -- THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE WERE PRIMARILY TO CONFORM THE DEVELOPMENT INTO

[01:20:05]

THE REVIEW. >> AND CAN WE GET SOMEBODY TO TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY? BECAUSE SEVERAL PEOPLE --

>> DO Y'ALL WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT OR -- PUBLIC SAFETY IN

GENERAL OR -- >> GETTING FIRE TRUCKS IN

THERE -- >> LIKE A FIRETRUCK, AN

AMBULANCE. >> YEAH, I GUESS WHEN YOU GUYS ARE DONE ASKING -- WE CAN TALK ABOUT FIRE ACCESS AND ALL THAT.

>> IT'S PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THEM TO ANSWER

THAT THAN THE -- >> SO WE CAN ASK, BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE MORE QUESTIONS CONSIDERING TRAFFIC TO BE CONSIDERED.

BUT THE OTHER THING THAT WAS MENTIONED WAS THE TRASH AND RECYCLING. SO WHERE IS THAT GOING TO TAKE

PLACE? >> I BELIEVE THIS WOULD TAKE TRASH ACCESS FROM A PRIVATE HAULER BEING NOT PUBLIC, NOT PUE ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE ONE BIG TRASH DUMP THEY ARE?

>> THEY HAVE INDIVIDUAL CANS INTERNAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT

WOULD BE -- >> AND THEREFORE, THE -- BACK TO TRAFFIC. THE TRASH PICKUP WILL HAVE TO COME IN, SANITATION WILL VERY HO COME IN THROUGH MOORE AVENUE

ONTO THIS PRIVATE DRIVE? >> CORRECT, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE

ACCESS OFF OF SAMFORD. >> DESIGNING THE PROPERTY HERE -- AND I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S THE --

>> YEAH, I WOULD -- YEAH, I WOULD SAY THAT'S TOTALLY UNDER THE PURVIEW OF DRT. I KNOW IT WAS MENTIONED AS A PUBLIC COMMENT BUT I MEAN, WE CAN -- I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT

THAT SO -- >> THAT'S FINE.

>> I'LL DEFER. >> RIGHT NOW WE WANT TO FIGURE OUT IS IT -- DOES IT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, AT LEAST AT A

MINIMUM LEVEL, OR MORE? >> THAT IS MY QUESTION.

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, RIGHT?

DOES IT? >> I GUESS -- I GUESS YOU'RE ALL

DONE WITH QUESTIONS FOR LATER -- >> UNLESS ANYBODY ELSE HAD A

QUESTION -- >> THE COMMENTS FROM ENGINEERING ADDRESS THE POTENTIAL NEED TO DO SOMETHING WITH MOORE AVENUE, ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAYS. I'VE WALKED THIS STREET MANY TIMES AND PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT.

I'VE WALKED IT AS PART OF MY WALKING ROUTE FOR YEARS.

SO I KNOW THAT MOORE AVENUE AND THAT ALLEYWAY.

I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT IT IS THAT PEOPLE PARK ALONG MOORE AVENUE BESIDE THESE FOLKS' HOUSE IS A PROBLEM.

THIS WILL BE A QUESTION TOO FOR ENGINEERING AS WELL BUT HAVE YOU, LOOKING AT DESIGN, HAVE YOU SEEN THAT YOU CAN POTENTIALLY MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO MOORE AVENUE TO PROVIDE BETTER TRAFFIC

FLOW, SAFETY, FIRE TRUCKS? >> I'LL SAY THIS: FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT, OUTSIDE OF JUST GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH GETTING INTO THE PROPERTY AND ACCESSING A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, DETAILED DESIGN ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS NOT --

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT HAVE YOU EVEN LOOKED AT IT TO SAY, YEAH, IT CAN HAPPEN, NO, IT CAN'T?

>> TO THE POINT WHERE WE'VE GOT INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO US -- FOR EXAMPLE, WE DON'T HAVE DETAILED SURVEY INFORMATION OF THE ENTIRETY OF MOORE AVENUE AT THIS TIME.

LEVEL OF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, FOR GETTING THROUGH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT STAGE AND DESIGN DEVELOPMENT.

I WOULD SAY THAT'S EXTREMELY COMMON.

I THINK Y'ALL WOULD PROBABLY AGREE WITH THAT, BECAUSE WE HAVE SIMILAR CONVERSATIONS ABOUT OTHER PROJECTS.

>> YOU LAY IT OUT, YOU GO THROUGH THE DRT PROCESS, IF THERE'S -- REALLY, THAT'S WHERE THE CHANGES HAPPEN.

THAT'S WHERE ALL THESE THINGS -- >> CORRECT, THAT'S WHERE WE GET INTO THE DETAILS OF LIKE, OKAY, IF THERE IS -- YOU KNOW FOR EXAMPLE THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS THAT YOU REFERENCED, WHEN WE GET INTO THE ACCESS COMING OFF OF MOORE -- YOU KNOW, THIS IS A PRIVATE DRIVE, IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO CONFORM WITH CITY

STANDARDS -- >> IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT THERE COULD BE A REDESIGN OF THIS AT SOME LEVEL, RIGHT,

THROUGH DRT? >> THAT'S VERY CORRECT.

>> YEAH, AND I GUESS KIND OF THE LOTS ARE JUST --.IT

>> IT JUST LOOKS BAD RIGHT NOW BUT THERE'S A PROCESS THAT'S GOING TO LOOK AT IT AND SAY OKAY, HOW DO WE FIX THIS SO THAT

IT WORKS RIGHT. >> YEAH, SO -- SO THESE ARE JUST LOTS. LIKE THE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED AND I GUESS THAT'S -- THAT PART WOULDN'T BE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW, BUT I GUESS THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DESIGNED -- THERE ARE A LOT OF STANDARDS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE COMPLIED TO SO THAT WOULD

[01:25:01]

>> RIGHT. WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON AND CONSIDERING IS JUST THE PLAT. DOES IT MEET SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OR NOT. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CHARGED

WITH DOING. >> THE AS BUILT GETS DEALT IN A PROCESS LATER.

>> YEAH, I GUESS IT'S KIND OF -- I GUESS JUST FOR GENERAL PRACTICE, THERE NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC HEARING TO SPEAK, IF YOU'RE NOT AT THE MIC PLEASE DON'T SPEAK AND PLEASE DON'T TALK OUT OF TURN AGAIN, PLEASE.

NICE, NICE. OKAY.

>> I DON'T THINK WE HAVE DERBY ACTUALLY DO HAVE A QUESTION.

>> YES, MA'AM, SORRY. >> JUST LOOKING AT THIS DESIGN WITH FOUR UNITS THAT ARE FACING EAST SAMFORD AVENUE, SO THAT'S I THINK EAST SAMFORD IS AN ARTERIAL ROAD --

>> YES, MA'AM. >> AND ONE OF THE MAJOR STREETS LEADING INTO DOWNTOWN. WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF HAVING THIS GO BEFORE THE DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE? SO I THINK THERE COULD BE A PROCESS FOR IT TO GO TO THE

DERC. >> YEAH, SO NORMALLY I GUESS WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ON MONDAY, THE DERC'S INFLUENCE ON PROJECTS OUTSIDE OF THE URBAN CORE IS REALLY KIND OF TIGHTLY BOUND TO THE TABLES. SO THEY'VE GOT TO CONFORM TO THE TABLES. THERE'S NO REAL REVIEW, I GUESS, WHERE YOU GUYS GOT TO GO TO THE D TRC AND MEET THEM.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN'T CONDITION UPON THEM. AS LONG AS THEY'RE TABLE THAT IS ESSENTIALLY AS IF THEY HAVE MET WITH THE DDRC AND THE DDRC REALLY JUST CONTROLS BUILDINGS. THEY DON'T CONTROL SITE PLANS.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS EXCLUSIVE TO STAFF REVIEW.

>> I WOULD SAY THAT I THINK THAT IF THERE'S ANY WAIVERS, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN ASK FOR OR IS IT THE DDRC?

>> IF THERE ARE WAIVERS I GUESS SPECIFICALLY TO THE TABLES BUT THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE WAIVERS TO THE TABLES AND NOT WAIVERS TO THE -- LIKE THE SUBDIVISION REGS AND I WANT TO STRESS AGAIN THAT THE TABLES ARE NOT BEING CONSIDERED TONIGHT.

THE SUBDIVISION REGS ARE. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. THARP? THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE

COMMISSION TO THE STAFF? >> I'M GOING TO ASK THIS BECAUSE GOING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR HERE.

DOES THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT MEET OUR SUBDIVISION REGS?

>> YEAH, SO I GUESS KIND OF -- I GUESS -- I'VE TAKEN NOTES ON KIND OF ALL OF THE QUESTIONS HERE SO I WANTED TO GO THROUGH THOSE. MICHAEL, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD BEFORE I GET ROLLING ON THESE?

>> I CAN GET ROLLING ON A LOT OF THEM.

>> ALL RIGHT SO -- SO I'LL JUST GO FIRST AND I'LL KICK TO MIKE ON SOME OF THE SPECIFIC STUFF, ON THE ENGINEERING SPECIFIC STUFF. SO DENSITY, I KNOW DENSITY HAS COME UP A GOOD BIT. FOLKS FEEL THIS IS TOO MUCH.

THE FUTURE LAND USE OF THIS IS URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD SOUTH.

THE ZONING FOR THIS IS URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD SOUTH.

THAT IS 85 BEDS AN ACRE. AND SO LIKE I SAID, WHEN I WENT OVER THE REVIEW, THEY'RE BUILDING 37 BEDS, THEY HAVE -- THEY BY RIGHT CAN DO 58. I GUESS KIND OF THE CONFIGURATION OF IT WITH 2S AND 3S, NORMALLY THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS CONDUCIVE TO STUDENT HOUSING, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE LIKE A FOR SALE PRODUCT.

I GUESS THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT CAN SPECIFICALLY SPEAK TO. BUT EVEN WHEN WE LOOKED AT A FUTURE LAND USE PLAN RECENTLY, IT WASN'T TO TAKE AWAY ANY URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD SOUTH. I THINK IT WAS IN FACT TO ADD URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD SOUTH AND THERE WAS A LOT OF CONSTERNATIO] THAT IT SHOULD REALIZE REDEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS A DENSITY OF 85 BEDS AN ACRE AND I THAT WORKS OUT ABOUT 17 UNITS. SO THEY'RE GIVING BACK YOU KNOW ABOUT 40% OF THEIR DENSITY THAT THEY COULD DO BY RIGHT.

I GUESS THAT KIND OF BRINGS ME TO MY NEXT POINT.

WITH IT BEING UNDER 70 BEDS DOES NOT WARRANT A TRAFFIC STUDY SO I GUESS THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I GUESS ENGINEERING OR I GUESS -- SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL COULD ASK FOR.

JUST KIND OF WITH THE PLAT. BUT I GUESS ON THAT JUST KIND OF BACK TO THE BY RIGHT SITUATION, SO THIS IS A PLAT WHERE WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT SUBDIVISION REGS, INGRESS, EGRESSES, LOT SIZES, STUFF LIKE THAT, WITH OTHER I GUESS USES AND MUD WOULD BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT DOES NOT COMING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT I REALLY WANT TO STRESS.

REALLY WANT TO STRESS. AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD OTHER

[01:30:03]

SOMETHING ONLY STAFF HANDLES. THEY DICTATE WHERE THE ACCESS

GOES. >> GIVE US A LITTLE MORE MUD

JUST TO EXPLAIN. >> AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE OFTEN SEE IS THE MULTIUNIT DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN STYLE BUT IT'S IN MUD AND THERE'S NO SUBDIVISION SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS THERE WILL BE MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON ONE LOT.

LIKE I SAID, THEY IS UP TO A DENSITY OF 85 PETS PER ACRE AND ON THIS ONE THEY CAN DO UP TO 58 BEDS ON THIS LOT BY RIGHT AND IT DOES NOT COME TO PUBLIC REVIEW. DOES NOT COME TO PLANNING COMMISSION. NOTHING.

AND THAT IS HOW THE ONE DOWN THE STREET, I GUESS SANFORD HILL GOT

CONSTRUCTED, IT WAS IN MUD. >> LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION THOUGH BECAUSE THEY WOULD THEN HAVE TO PROVIDE THE PARKING

NECESSARY. >> RIGHT.

>> THIS LOT, I DON'T SEE ANYBODY BEING ABLE TO PUT THAT MUCH PARKING ON THAT SPACE UNLESS THEY BUILD SOMETHING REALLY HIGH SO IT'S NOT EVEN ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR THE MUD.

>> SO I WILL SAY SO WITH THE TOWNHOME, A I THINK THAT'S KIND OF MY OTHER POINT, A LOT OF PEOPLE MENTIONED PARKING, THINGS ABOUT TOWNHOMES. TOWNHOMES REQUIRE ON SITE PARKING AND SO YOU MUST HAVE ALL THE PARKING ON YOUR LOT SO THOSE ARE THE INDIVIDUAL 13 LOTS THAT THE PARKING WOULD HAVE TO BE ON SO THAT WOULD BE FOR THE TWO AND THREE BEDROOM UNITS THEY WOULD

HAVE TO HAVE. >> THAT'S WHAT'S REASONABLE AND ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE HAVE IT

SITTING HERE TODAY. >> SURE--

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW GENEROUS WE NEED TO BE ABOUT WHAT THEY CAN

DO VERSUS WHAT THEY HAVE HERE. >> I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS WHO WOULD LOVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE THAT. I JUST SAY THAT FROM A PROFESSIONAL STANDPOINT OF DEALING WITH THEM, THEY COME IN WITH DIFFERENT PROPOSALS. SO THEN I GUESS WITH-- THERE'S ON STREET PARKING SO EMERGENCY ACCESS, AERIAL ACCESS.

SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS WORKED OUT IN THE PROCESS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PLAT, ONE OF THE THINGS IS THE SPACE IN BETWEEN THE UNITS AND THAT IS FOR-- IF IT'S OVER A CERTAIN HEIGHT THERE NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO A FIRE TRUCK.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS A HARD-FOUGHT BATTLE.

THAT IS SOMETHING THE ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS GO BACK AND FORTH ABOUT BECAUSE THE ARCHITECTS ARE SAYING THE BUILDING IS SHORT ENOUGH AND IT'S UNDER 30 FEET, EAVES, ET CETERA, VERSUS THE CIVIL ENGINEER SAYING THERE SHOULD BE ENOUGH SPACE, WHETHER THAT'S 26 FEET, 401 FEET. SO THEN ON A LOT OF OUR INFILL URBAN LOTS, IT GETS VERY TIGHT AND IT'S A VERY HOTLY CONTESTED TOPIC THAT REALLY DOES HOLD UP A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS TO BE DECIDED KIND OF AT A LATER DATE BUT THEY CAN GET UNDER 30 FEET BY DESIGN AND THEN NOT HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT BUT THAT WOULD MEET CODE.

THAT WOULD BE COMPLIANT. SO EXISTING USES.

LIKE I SAID THERE ARE ALREADY A NUMBER OF MUDS DOWN THERE LIKE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, THIS STRUCTURE IS ALREADY AN MUD.

THE ORIGINAL LAYOUT, I THINK WE'VE KIND OF BANTERED BACK AND FORTH ABOUT THAT. THERE WAS A THROUGH STREET, PRIVATE ACCESS THAT STAFF DENIED.

REALLY WEREN'T IN FAVOR OF IT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PUBLIC STREET AND SO THEN THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO GIVE RIGHT AWAY.

THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS AND SO EARLIER IT WAS SAID THAT THIS CONFIGURATION WAS INITIALLY FLUID. THERE WAS NEVER A FLIPPED VERSION OF THIS. IT WAS A THROUGH STREET ENTIRELY. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT IT WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE BEEN A PUBLIC STREET WHICH WOULD HAVE THEN TO HAVE TO DEDICATE RIGHT AWAY AND ASK FOR A WAIVER, PRIVATE ALLEY, 20 FEET, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SO DRIVEWAY SPACE AND CONSOLIDATION, THIS AN ENGINEERING TOPIC. CITY CATERING TO RENTERS.

THAT WAS A STATEMENT-- I WOULD NOT SAY THAT'S TRUE.

I THINK ON THIS PROJECT, I THINK A LOT OF THE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'VE SEEN DOWNTOWN, A LOT OF THESE LUXURY TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENTS WHERE THESE ARE FOR SALE AND THE REASON THAT PEOPLE ARE APT TO GO FOR SIMPLE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT IS BECAUSE IT IS A LOWER BARRIER OF ENTRY FOR SALE PRODUCT AND IT IS A BROADER AUDIENCE THEY CAN SELL TO.

IF THEY HAVE TO CONDO IT IN A MUD IT'S A MUCH DEEPER HURDLE FOR THE BUYERS TO REACH AND I GUESS THIS ISN'T LIKE AN AFFORDABILITY THING AT ALL FOR THE PRICES THAT THEY ARE MOVING

[01:35:02]

SO HOW MUCH CAN THEY BUILD, I THINK I'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT, 85 BEDS PER ACRE, 58 BEDS BY RIGHT. ALL OF THOSE USES ARE PERMITTED PRETTY MUCH IN URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS SOUTH.

LIGHT SYNCHRONIZATION. PAIN STREET SIGHT DISTANCE, GAS LINE CAN'T SPEAK TO, SURFACE RATIO FOR TOWNHOMES...

>> AT 75. >> APPRECIATE IT.

SO .75. SO I GUESS ONCE AGAIN THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE WORKED OUT IN DRT AND I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT MUDS, PURVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AND EXPLORED OTHER PROJECTS, THERE'S THE GENERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY WELFARE, TRAFFIC CONFIGURATION, CIRCULATION AND ALL THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS. THAT IS ALL ON THE TABLE FOR CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT.

LIKE I SAID I THINK THERE ARE TWO COMMENTS THAT ADDRESS IT AS FAR AS THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY, THEY RIGHT AWAY ON SANFORD.

JUST MY INITIAL COMMENT, WHAT I WOULD REALLY STRESS, LIKE I SAID WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE, THAT FOLKS GET REALLY INVESTED IN THE PRELIMINARY PLATS AND THE BUY RIGHT AND THE PUBLIC REVIEWS AND NOT UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS A BUY RIGHT OPTION THAT DOES NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH PUBLIC REVIEW, WHERE THEY CAN STILL REALIZE GREATER DENSITY THAN THEY HAVE PROPOSED.

SO THAT IS THE EXTENT OF MY PLANNING SO I WILL KICK IT TO

ENGINEERING. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS?

>> I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS COMMENT AND A LOT OF THE COMMENTS REPRESENTED TONIGHT WE HAVE REPRESENTED TONIGHT. THIS IS AN IDEA WE ARE DISCUSSING. ONE OF THE MAJOR ONE WAS TRAFFIC THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN PART OF THAT MEETING.

I HAD CONCERNS. BUT ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS OF THE TRAFFIC WAS HOW CAN WE SERVICE IT AND GET PEOPLE IN AND OUT OF IT? SINCE THEY REQUESTED TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY THE, THE SUBDIVISION, THE DRIVEWAY TO MEET THE STANDARDS. SO ONCE WE CLOSE A DRIVEWAY, YOU HAVE TO MITIGATE, NO MATTER WHAT FORM OF DENSITY THAT YOU HAVE, YOU STILL HAVE TO PASS THE THRESHOLD OF HOW DO YOU OFFSET OR MITIGATE YOUR IMPACT TO THE LOCAL SYSTEM.

THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL INCREASE. SINCE YOU HAVE A HIGHER USE OF THE SITE HOW ARE YOU OFFSETTING YOUR IMPACT TO THE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. SO THEY REQUEST US TO PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THAT AND ONE OF OUR COMMENTS IS HOW DO YOU PLAN TO MITIGATE THOSE ISSUES. FOR THAT REASON THERE IS A LIMITED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS OF GENERAL TRAFFIC THAT WILL BE REQUIRED VEHICLE NUMBERS COME A SAFETY CONCERNS, ACCESS CONCERNS, HOW DO THEY PLAN TO GET OUT OF THE SITE BASED ON INFORMATION THEY ARE PRESENTING HERE.

>> CLOSING OFF THE ACCESS. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> CREATES A HIGH DEVELOPMENT BAR.

SOLVED THE PROBLEM THAT YOU ARE BREAKING, RIGHT, IN TERMS OF THE REGULATIONS. YOU HAVE TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM.

THE ENGINEER OF RECORD HASN'T THOUGHT OF THAT BECAUSE THE CITY HASN'T PRESENTED THAT. THAT WAS OUR PRESENTATION, HOW DO YOU SOLVE THAT? YOU HAVE TO CONVINCE ME THAT IS

GOING TO WORK. >> AND THE MITIGATION HAS TO BE

SAFE. >> CORRECT.

AGAIN, MAY BE AN ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC CREATED BY THE DEVELOPMENT SO THIS IS AN OFF SITE IMPROVEMENT BECAUSE WE KNOW IT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT TO A DIRECT STREET THAT IS RELEVANT TO THE AREA BECAUSE WE ARE ASKING YOU TO ACCESS OFF OF THAT. DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR LOCAL STREET STANDARDS.

THE CITY IS GOING TO REQUEST AN ADDITIONAL 5 FEET OFF OF THAT PROPERTY IF YOU ARE SUBDIVIDING. SANFORD SHOWS THAT IS AN ARTERIAL CALCIFICATION OF ROADWAY.

IF YOU ARE SUBDIVIDING OFF MATERIAL IT WOULD REQUIRE 80 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY. RIGHT THERE I BELIEVE IT SHOWS

[01:40:02]

THAT WAS THE NEXT ITEM I WAS GETTING INTO COME ALSO THE CONCERNS OF ACCESSING MORE. THERE IS LIMITED RADIUS COME I THINK A 1-2-FOOT RADIUS TO TURN IN.

I'VE DRIVEN IT AND THAT IS A VERY TIGHT ALLEY BACK THERE.

HOW DO WE GET PEOPLE IN AND OUT? HOW DOES FIRE, HOW DOES POLICE, HOW DOES SANITATION? THOSE ARE QUESTIONS THEY HAVEN'T PROVIDED AN ANSWER FOR, NO MATTER WHAT FORM OF DEVELOPMENT THEY DO ON THE SITE IF THEY INCREASE THE DEVELOPMENT, THAT IS THE REQUIREMENT BASED ON THE DENSITY REQUIREMENT.

WE ALSO HAD AN 8-FOOT SIDEWALK PEDESTRIAN AND LIGHTING PLAN ALONG WITH EAST SANFORD. THAT IS PART OF A DEVELOPMENT, DOWNTOWN SIDEWALKS. SO THAT IS REQUIRED.

AND AS PART OF THE D. RT REVIEW THERE WAS SOME STORMWATER APPEARED IF YOU DEVELOP A SITE BY RIGHT IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN NECESSARILY CONCRETE IT AND NECESSARILY WALK AWAY.

YOU HAVE TO PROVE YOU HAVE ANY EFFECTS TO ANYBODY DOWN STREET OR ANYTHING THAT SURCHARGES HYDRAULICALLY IN A HYDRAULIC.

AND/OR ADJACENT TO THAT PROPERTY.

THOSE ITEMS ARE VERY TECHNICALLY DRIVEN AND WE DON'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM FOR THEM HERE. THEY HAVE TO SOLVE IT BEFORE

THEY GET TO THE NEXT STEP. >> ON THE DRAINAGE ISSUE.

SAYING THIS IS SOMETHING WE GET A LOT OF WATER THROUGH HERE.

SO THE HURDLE, THE MITIGATION ON THIS SITE WOULD BE NOT TO MAKE

THAT ANY WORSE OR IMPROVE IT. >> FROM TODAY.

>> FROM TODAY. SO WHATEVER GOES IN HERE CAN'T MAKE THAT DRAINAGE PROBLEM WORSE.

>> WORSE. BUT IF IT ALREADY ISN'T FUNCTIONING TODAY WE CAN STILL LOOK AT IT TO SAY NO, THAT WAS WRONG THEN THEREFORE WE WOULDN'T PROPAGATE SOMETHING THAT IS WRONG NOW SO YOU HAVE TO FIX IT NOW IF YOU WANT TO FURTHER DEVELOP THE SITE. DEVELOPING SITES REQUIRES DEVELOPMENT COSTS SOMETIMES. THOSE ARE A LOT OF COMMENTS FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BUT FROM A CIRCULATION STANDPOINT I CAN TELL YOU I HAVE MAJOR CONCERNS AND THEY ARE NOT PRESENTED IN THIS MEETING DRT BUT THOSE ARE NOT SOLVED

CURRENTLY AT THIS TIME. >> SO MITIGATING ALL OF THOSE SOUNDS LIKE A DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT TO ME.

JUST MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION. >> IN MY OPINION IT IS A VERY HIGH BAR TO GET THE APPROVAL FROM MY OFFICE IN ORDER FOR IT TO DEVELOP IN THE CONDITION IT IS PRESENTED.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE MITIGATING EVERYTHING THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT TONIGHT, WE MIGHT SEE THIS BACK AGAIN IN A DIFFERENT PLATFORM.

>> AND THERE WAS ANOTHER QUESTION --

>> FINAL. >> I'M TRYING TO GET TO EVERYBODY'S QUESTION IN MY MEMORY.

WE HAD SOME OF THEM. THERE WAS ANOTHER ISSUE FOR RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT. EVEN IF YOU DID DO THAT WE OFTEN FIND PEOPLE THAT STILL DO NOT FOLLOW RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT RIGHT.

THEY TEND TO BREAK THAT RULE. AND IF SOMEBODY WERE TO DECELERATE ON STANFORD IT STILL ADDS TO THE DELAY ALONG SANFORD.

HOWEVER I WILL ACKNOWLEDGE THIS. IF WE ASK THEM TO TAKE A LEFT AT ARMSTRONG, I HAVE A SIGNAL RIGHT AT THE GATE STREET THAT IS ALREADY GOING THROUGH SOME SERVICE ISSUES BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE AND THE WARNING. I'M GOING TO CAUSE EVEN FURTHER DELAY AT ARMSTRONG. I JUST PULLED UP THE SIGNAL AND GOING THROUGH, WE HAVE THAT CAPABILITY.

YOU HAVE TO OFFSET OR MITIGATE THE IMPACT TO THE SYSTEM.

I DON'T SOLVE THAT FOR YOU, THAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD TO SOLVE AND YOU DO NOT PROCEED TO THE STEP

IF YOU DON'T. >> TRAFFIC LIGHTS NOT BEING SYNCHRONIZED ON THE WAY, YOU GUYS PAY ATTENTION TO THAT

THROUGHOUT THE CITY. >> THAT IS ACTIVELY MANAGED EVERY DAY AND WE CAN TELL YOU THE TEMPERATURE INSIDE THE CABINET RIGHT NOW. I HAD IT PULLED UP.

AND I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE TIMING.

>> IT MAY NOT SEEM LIKE IT IS SYNCHRONIZED BUT YOU ARE LOOKING AT A BIGGER PICTURE THAT REQUIRES CERTAIN SIGNALS AT

CERTAIN TIMES. >> AND IT IS NOT PERFECT BECAUSE ACCIDENTS DO OCCUR SO TIMING PLANS GET CHANGED.

IF THERE IS A FIRE COME OR THERE IS AN ACCIDENT, WE ALLOW OUR POLICE SERVICES AND FIRE SERVICES, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY, SO THAT WILL CHANGE A SIGNAL TIMING PLAN LIKE THAT.

SO IT IS SERVICE TO THE AREA. TIMING PLANS ARE ALWAYS FLUID.

TAKING THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WE DO HAVE TRAFFIC COUNTS AT THESE LOCATIONS. WE DO HAVE TURNING MOVEMENTS AND THAT DATA WE CAN SHARE WITH THE DEVELOPER.

THIS WILL HAVE AN IMPACT TO TRAFFIC.

IT MAY BE UNDER A THRESHOLD, BUT IT HAS SOME HIGHER CONCERNS FOR ME TO SOLVE TO GET TO THE NEXT STEP.

[01:45:06]

>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTION,

COMMISSIONERS? >> YES, I DO.

BACK TO MR. COTTON. IF THIS IS NOT APPROVED AS A SUBDIVISION, THEY HAVE THE POSSIBILITY.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT AGAIN? WOULD IT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SAME CRITERIA WITH THE ENGINEERING?

>> EVERYTHING CACTUS WILL GO THROUGH D.O.T. PROCESSES.

IT GOES THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? >> CAN YOU PUT THE MAP UP THAT HAS THE ZONING ON IT? SO THE CITY, AUBURN 2000 STRATEGIC PLAN WAS MENTIONED. WE HAVE A 2020 PLAN.

WE HAVE A 2040 PLAN. THINGS CHANGE OVER TIME.

WE GET PUBLIC INPUT EACH TIME WE TRY TO UPDATE THOSE THINGS.

ONE OF THE SITUATIONS THAT'S RESULTED HERE, YOU KNOW, IN THE PLANNING SENSE, I WANT TO SAY I FEEL YOUR PAIN.

THE HIGH DENSITY ZONING RIGHT NEXT TO ZONING AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IN THE CITY. WE MADE A PLAN, A LAND USE PLAN SOME TIME AGO. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO USE THE LAND FOR? HOW IS IT GOING TO GROW OVER TIME? WELL, THE WAY THE PLAN LAYS OUT IS YOU'VE GOT SOME HIGH DENSITY GOING ON RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE THIS N , THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME SORT OF THING.

THE ONLY WAY THAT THING IS GOING TO GET FIXED IS IF WE CHANGE THE PLANS, RIGHT? WE COME UP WITH AUBURN 2060 PLAN OR WHATEVER IN THE FUTURE, WE COULD THEORETICALLY BACK ALL THIS STUFF BACK AND COMPLETELY CHANGE IT.

I MEAN, THAT'S POSSIBLE. IT'S A PRETTY STEEP CLIMB UPHILL BUT IT'S POSSIBLE. AND SO WE ARE KIND OF IN THE SITUATION WE ARE IN DUE TO PLANNING OVER THE YEARS.

AND WE ARE JUST TRYING TO GET THE BEST WITH IT.

WE ARE HERE TO APPROVE A PLAT, A PRELIMINARY PLAT, WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION. NOW THEY ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH AND SAY OKAY, HERE IS WHAT WE HAVE LAID OUT, HOW IS IT GOING TO WORK, EVERYBODY? THE ANSWER TO ME ON THIS ONE, WHAT I SEE, NOT SURE IT'S GOING TO WORK AT ALL.

WE HAVE A PROCESS, LET'S SIT THERE AND WALK THROUGH THAT AND FIGURE OKAY, WHAT WOULD WORK? THERE IS A CERTAIN DENSITY ALLOWABLE BY RIGHT. THEY COULD JUST PUT SOMETHING THERE. THE DEVELOPERS ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND TRY TO FIGURE IT OUT.

WE ARE KIND OF STUCK AS A PLANNING CONDITION WITH CERTAIN RULES AND REGULATIONS AND STATE LAWS AND STUFF THAT BASICALLY SAYS IF THEY MEET THIS REQUIREMENT YOU HAVE TO VOTE FOR IT. YOU HAVE TO APPROVE IT.

SO THEN WE TAKE THE NEXT STEP. CAN WE REALLY DO THIS? DOES THIS REALLY MAKE SENSE? WHAT DOES ENGINEERING THINK ABOUT IT? I GUARANTEE THINGS WILL CHANGE.

ANYWAY, I'D LIKE TO GET OFF MY SOAPBOX.

>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD ON TO THAT.

WHEN THE CITY SAYS THEY ARE GOING TO LOOK AT ZONING MAP AND MAKE SOME CHANGES, IT GOES BEFORE THE PUBLIC, AND FOR YOU TO GO AND LOOK AT THEM WITH ALL THE MAPS AND TALK WITH THEM ABOUT IT AND MAKE COMMENTS, AND ESPECIALLY ONCE IT GETS WRITTEN UP AND PUT DOWN ON A MAP LIKE THIS ONE, THEN YOU CAN COME TO THE MEETINGS LIKE THIS AND THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE LAST SAY ON THE ZONING. YOU CAN COME AND MAKE YOUR COMMENTS THERE. AND THE PROBLEM NOW IS YOU HAVE A ZONE THAT IS GOING IN THAT ALLOWS MUCH MORE DENSITY THAN NC11, AND THIS WAS DONE, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE ZONE, THIS PARTICULAR AREA WAS CHANGED TO UNS BUT IT WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND IT'S IN OUR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, WE LOOK AT NOW, OUR 2030 PLAN WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT NOW.

[01:50:04]

BUT THERE WILL BE A 2040 PLAN. >> THERE IS.

>> THERE IS ONE. >> WE ARE MOVING FORWARD.

PLANS ARE GOING TO CHANGE. >> I WOULD JUST SAY THIS.

SOMETHING JUST, WHAT WE HAVE HERE, THOUGH, IS A SITUATION WHEREBY THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE HEMMED IN BY THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS THERE. NO ONE IS GOING TO BE EXPANDING MORE STREET. NOBODY.

THERE IS NOTHING TO DO THERE UNLESS YOU ARE TEARING DOWN HOUSES. WHETHER IT IS MUD OR TOWNHOUSE, IT'S GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND WILL BE NATURALLY LIMITED IN SIZE BECAUSE JUST BECAUSE WHAT CAN BE SUPPORTED, I WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEND A MESSAGE TO CITY COMMISSION, WHAT WE HAVE IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR THIS AREA. AND I THINK -- [APPLAUSE] IF WE AS A COUNCIL DO THAT IS TO SAY VOTE SOMETHING LIKE THIS DOWN.

MAYBE WE SHOULD BE RECONSIDERING THIS KIND OF THING.

BY THE WAY, WE ARE HERE TO REPRESENT THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY, NOT JUST TO LOOK AT ZONING MAPS, NOT JUST WHAT THE COMMISSION SAYS. WE ARE HERE TO REPRESENT THE BEST INTERESTS, OTHERWISE IT WOULDN'T BE BROUGHT TO US.

WE CAN VOTE ANYTHING DOWN THAT WE WANT TO.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD. [APPLAUSE]

>> OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE?

>> YES, I HAVE QUESTIONS. SO I FEEL LIKE I'M HEARING ABOUT THE SUBDIVISION, THAT IS OF TOWNHOMES, BUT I'M ALSO HEARING THE CONCERNS ABOUT SAFETY, TRAFFIC, THE FIRE TRUCKS GETTING IN AND OUT, MOORE AVENUE THAT IS VERY SMALL, BEING ABLE TO HANDLE EVERYTHING. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS AN INCOMPLETE PRODUCT THAT HAS BEEN TURNED IN.

WE ARE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE A 13 LOT TOWNHOME, BUT IT MAY NOT

BE ABLE TO SUPPORT 13 TOWNHOMES. >> SO I GUESS IT'S KIND OF IN THE NAME. IT'S A PRELIMINARY PLAT.

WHEN WE UPDATED OUR SUBDIVISION REGS A WHILE AGO, ONE OF THE THINGS A LOT OF ENGINEERS TOLD US, THEY DON'T GET SURVEYS DONE UNTIL THEY GET QUASI APPROVAL AND MOVE FORWARD AND DO THAT.

SO I WOULD SAY KIND OF BY DESIGN, NOT AN INADEQUACY ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT. I THINK THIS IS PRETTY STANDARD.

AND SO THIS IS JUST A PRELIMINARY PLAT LOOKING AT LOTS, I THINK SUFFICIENT FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL.

I GUESS WHAT THE STRUCTURE IS ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE, THAT IS A PROCESS TO BE HANDLED WITH. STORM WATER SEWER, INGRESS AND EGRESS, ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS, WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE, DOES IT ALL COMPLY TO A TABLE 57 WHICH IS PRETTY RIGOROUS, BUT I JUST WANT TO SPEAK TO THE FACT THERE ARE A LOT OF UNANSWERED QUESTIONS, THAT'S HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE

FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT. >> WHEN THINGS COME IN A FINAL PLAT COME ALL THOSE THINGS WILL BE CLEARED UP, WOULD IT POTENTIALLY CHANGE FROM 13 LOTS TO...

>> SO IT COULD. THEY ARE ALSO NOT BOUND TO A PLAT, APPROVING THIS PLAT OR DENYING THIS PLAT DOES NOT LOCK THEM INTO TOWNHOMES. THEY COULD DECIDE TO DO ANOTHER

USE. >> BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BUILD

UNTIL THEY GET THAT FINAL PLAT. >> COME BACK TO US TO APPROVE.

>> RIGHT. BUT LIKE I SAID, I THINK THE D ARE, THE ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, ALL THAT STUFF IS

REVIEWED ADMINISTRATIVELY. >> OKAY, ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.

WE ARE VOTING ON WHETHER THIS MEETS SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OR NOT FOR THIS PLAT. SO I NEED A MOTION FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BROWN TOWNHOMES.

>> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT

P2026-01-8. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

>> WALKER DAVIS. >> NO.

>> DANA KEMP. >> YES.

[01:55:01]

>> BILL CHANCELLOR. >> YES.

>> JENNIFER LEVERING. >> NO.

>> VANESSA ECHOLS. >> NO.

>> JOSEPH. >> NO.

>> JENNIFER STEVENS. >> YES.

>> OSCAR MOSLEY. >> YES.

>> ANNA SOLOMON. >> NO.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IF YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS, YOU DO NEED TO DEFINE THE REASON FOR THAT, AND IT HAS TO BE TIED TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. IF YOU WANT TO PRESS ON THAT, I THINK IT'S ARTICLE ONE D6, WHICH ADDRESSES THE TRAFFIC FLOW CONDITION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THAT, IF YOUR CONCERN IS FOR HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE REASONS, PLEASE MAKE THAT AND READ THAT INTO THE RECORD, THANK YOU.

>> INGRESS AND EGRESS, AND HEALTH SAFETY.

HEALTH SAFETY CONCERNS. >> HEALTH SAFETY CONCERNS.

>> HEALTH SAFETY EGRESS. >> PUBLIC SAFETY.

>> I HAVE PUBLIC SAFETY, EGRESS. IS INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDED, OR NOT? IS THAT SUFFICIENT? DO WE NEED TO GO? OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. 4-5 DENIED.

>> 4-5 DENIED. [APPLAUSE]

>> OKAY. NEXT IS CONDITIONAL USE -- WE WILL WAIT UNTIL EVERYBODY GETS OUT THAT WANTS TO LEAVE AT THIS

TIME. >> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> YOU CANNOT LEAVE. >> THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> CAN I -- I'D LIKE TO MAKE A

MOTION TO RECESS FOR 5 MINUTES. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND

[6. Conditional Use – Shoppes at Woodward Oaks – PUBLIC HEARING]

>> I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.

OKAY, OUR NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS CONDITIONAL USE --

SHOPPES OF WOODWARD OAKS. >> ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST FOR THE SHOPPES AT WOODWARD OAKS REQUESTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL FOR A COMMERCIAL AND ENTERTAINMENT USE OR A PACKAGE STORE.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1785 JAMES BURT PARKWAY, DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HOUSING, PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OVERLAY.

TAKES ACCESS OFF OF WEST FARMVILLE, PARKWAY, AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED PACKAGE STORE USE. THIS IS A RECENTLY BUILT SHOPPING BUILDING WITH THE MIDDLE USE, THIS STORE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED BEING THE PACKAGE STORE.

SO WITH THAT I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU. AND THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR SHOPPES AT WOODWARD OAKS, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS?

>> YEAH, SO THERE WERE A HOST OF USES THAT WERE APPROVED WHEN THE PDD FOR THIS WENT THROUGH. WAS A PACKAGE STORE REQUESTED OR

INTENTIONALLY LEFT OFF? >> PACKAGE STORES ARE NORMALLY LEFT OFF, JUST TO GIVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL AN ADDITIONAL REVIEW WHEN IT COMES IN.

SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ANYTHING AGAINST THEM, IT'S JUST TO THE COUNCIL. EACH INDIVIDUAL PACKAGE STORE.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> IT'S 450 FEET FROM A CHURCH. WHAT IS THE REGULATIONS IN TERMS

OF PACKAGE STORES? >> THERE ARE NONE.

THERE ARE NONE FOR THE CITY. >> THE HEMP STORES HAVE --

>> WHAT ABOUT FOR THE SCHOOLS? >> SAME THING.

[02:00:03]

>> OKAY. >> AND THIS PROPOSED PACKAGE STORE ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL AREA, AS WELL.

SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHAT HAVE BEEN THE GENERAL GUIDELINES THAT WE'VE USED TO PLACE PACKAGING STORES IN AREAS?

WE DO HAVE PRECEDENT. >> SO PRETTY MUCH AREAS LIKE THIS ARE KIND OF IN LINE WITH WHERE, I GUESS NOT THE DISTANCE TO THE CHURCH OR DISTANCE TO THE SCHOOL OR ANYTHING BUT AS FAR AS BEING IN A COMMERCIAL CENTER, THIS IS A COMMERCIAL NODE, THE WOODWARD OAKS SUBDIVISION AND TERRY CREEK WHERE IT IS DOWN, THERE IS PUBLIX AND THEN THE PACKAGE STORE FOR THE DOWN, GAS STATIONS, BUT ALSO OTHER COMMERCIAL NODES COME HIGHER INTENSITY USES, BUT PUTTING PACKAGE STORES I GUESS IN THIS AREA IN THIS PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL, SOME MIGHT ARGUE IS AN AMENITY, BUT I THINK FOR THE CITY THERE IS NO BUFFER YARD, NO BUFFER ZONES LIKE AKIN TO THE HEMP STORES, IN PROXIMITY TO DIFFERENT USES LIKE CHURCHES OR SCHOOLS OR ANYTHING.

SO THIS IS PRETTY STANDARD. >> OKAY.

HERE FOR THIS? >> YEAH.

>> YOU SEE THE TOWNHOUSE. >> MM-HMM.

>> ON HD, WHICH ZONE -- >> HOLDEN DISTRICT.

THIS BORDERS THE UNIVERSITY. THIS PDD BORDERS THE UNIVERSITY LAND. THEY HAVE FISHERY PONDS WHERE THEY BAIT FISH, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.

>> OKAY. THANKS.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS?

STATEMENTS? >> MOVE TO APPROVE SHOPS AT

WOODWORK OAKS CONDITIONAL USE. >> WELL I'VE GOT A COMMENT.

I'M GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS AS IT WAS NOT ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WAS GRANTED WHEN THIS CAME BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT. THERE IS NO PACKAGE STORE THERE.

SO I WILL VOTE NO. >> SO I GUESS KIND OF, DID YOU OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NO ONE CAME UP?

>> I'M SORRY. >> I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.

>> WHAT SHOULD WE DO WITH THE MOTION?

>> YEAH, YEAH, THE OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SORRY. I WASN'T LOOKING AT MY NOTES.

THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING. >> SO THERE WAS --

>> THERE WAS. >> THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE --

>> APPLICANT. >> APPLICANT.

>> THAT STEP MAY HAVE BEEN FORGOTTEN.

NICK HAYES, 333 BROOKSIDE REPRESENTING, I AM ONE OF THE OWNERS OF THE SHOPPING CENTER, ALSO ONE OF THE OWNERS IS OCCUPYING THE TWO SUITES TO THE LEFT, WHO WAS A MEDICAL DOCTOR HERE IN TOWN WITH TWO CLINICS. SCOTT GREER, OFFERING ADULT AND PEDIATRIC MEDICINE. HIS PRACTICE IS GOING IN THERE.

THERE'S A PHARMACY GOING IN ON THE END OPPOSITE FARMVILLE.

OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THIS USE.

THIS OPERATOR HAS MANY STORES THROUGHOUT ALABAMA AND GEORGIA.

IMPECCABLE TRACK RECORD. IN GOOD STANDING WITH THE ABC.

WE HAVE A PACKAGE STORE ADJACENT TO GRACE CHURCH ON GLENN.

YOU KNOW, THEY ARE ALL OVER, ANYWHERE IN TOWN, YOU ARE GOING TO BE CLOSE TO OTHER, YOU KNOW, RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS, RESIDENCES, WE'VE SOLD A GOOD MANY OF THESE TOWNHOMES.

ALL OF THE PEOPLE AND MANY OF THE RESIDENTS HAVE CALLED ME ASKING WHAT'S GOING IN THERE. I HAVEN'T HEARD, EVERYBODY SEEMS SUPPORTIVE. AND SINCE MISS CAMPER MENTIONED HER CONCERN, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT HAS EVER BEEN INCLUDED AS A PERMITTED USE IN ONE OF THESE, SO TO HOLD IT AGAINST THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE SINGLING IT OUT.

WHILE I UNDERSTAND KIND OF HER LINE OF THINKING IT JUST NEVER HAPPENS THAT WAY. SO LOOKING TO APPROVE THIS USE IN A STRIP WHERE IT IS SORT OF ON THE PREEMPTIVELY IDENTIFIED

[02:05:03]

ON THE THREE SUITES TOWARD FARMVILLE, THERE IS A RESTAURANT, A RESTAURANT USE GOING IN THERE.

THOSE PLACES WILL SERVE ALCOHOL. SO IT'S GOING TO BE THERE.

AND THIS WILL SERVE THE FOLKS WHO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR TRAVERSE DOWN FARMVILLE. THERE'S ALREADY ANOTHER PACKAGE SCORE AT FARMVILLE AND DONAHUE, SO THIS ISN'T GOING TO DIRTY UP THE AREA, SO TO SPEAK. ANY WAY, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT ANYONE MAY HAVE.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. PART OF THE GENERAL OPERATION,

HOURS OF THE PACKAGE STORE? >> TRUTHFULLY, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY, BUT I WANT TO SAY, AND THE OPERATOR ISN'T HERE TONIGHT, BUT I WANT TO SAY HE'LL CLOSE AROUND 7:00, 8:00, BUT I'M NOT

THE OPERATOR. >> OKAY.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? JUST BECAUSE I HEARD SOMETHING ABOUT TOWNHOMES, SO WHERE ARE THE TOWNHOMES?

>> WHERE YOU SEE DDH, OR WHERE YOU SEE THAT CUL DE SAC, JUST BASICALLY RIGHT DOWN THERE, THAT WHOLE AREA, AND THEN IT TRANSITIONS TO SINGLE FAMILY, AND THEN AS YOU GET BACK OUT TO DONAHUE, THERE'S ANOTHER KIND OF SECTION OF TOWNHOMES IN THE FRONT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO YOU HAVE TOWNHOMES ON ONE END AND THE OTHER END AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SORT OF

>> ALL RIGHT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A

SECOND, RIGHT? >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE SAYING NO?

[5. Preliminary Plat – Brown Townhomes – PUBLIC HEARING (Part 2 of 2)]

>> SO CAN SOMEONE FROM LEGAL JUST ON THE LATEST NOW, IF YOU ALL COULD GO BACK AND DO IT AS A MOTION TO DENY AND THEN STATE THE REASONS? JUST WITH A MOTION TO APPROVE AND IT FAILING TO APPROVE, WE NEED TO GO BACK AND CLEAN IT UP AND ACTUALLY MAKE A MOTION TO DENY, WHICH I KNOW IS SOMETHING

THAT WE DON'T DO. >> YES, MOTION TO DENY IF YOU COULD BASE IT ON -- WAS IT ARTICLE ONE, PARAGRAPH D?

OR SUBSECTION D, PARAGRAPH SIX. >> D SIX.

>> CAN YOU TELL ME WHICH DOCUMENT?

>> CAN YOU TELL ME WHY WE ARE DOING A MOTION TO DENY WHEN WE

HAVE DENIED THINGS BEFORE? >> THIS IS ADVICE FROM OUR LEGAL COUNSEL TO FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES AND FORMALLY MAKE A MOTION TO DENY. AND STATING THE REASON FOR DENIAL. AND THEN YOU JUST HAVE TO SAY IT ONCE, EVERYBODY HAS TO SAY IT ONCE.

>> THE MOTION? >> BRING IT BACK.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO VOTE ON -- IS THAT APPROPRIATE? CASE 2026-013. TO DENY.

A MOTION TO DENY THE CASE. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO BRING IT BACK UP. AND THEN MAKE A MOTION TO DENY.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO REVISIT AND BRING BACK UP CASE

2026-0013. >> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

>> NOW I MAKE A CASE TO DENY THE CASE.

-- I. MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE CASE.

BASED ON ARTICLE ONE, SECTION D. IS THAT IT?

>> IN REFERENCE TO CERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC LEVEL.

>> IN REFERENCE TO HEALTH, SAFETY, EGRESS AND TRAFFIC FLOW.

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

TO DENY. >> WALKER DAVIS?

>> YES? >> CHANCELLOR? JENNIFER? VANESSA? JULES? JENNIFER STEVENS? OSCAR? ANNA SOLOMON?

[02:10:08]

5-4. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> THAT CLEARED IT UP. >> IT WAS A MOTION TO DENY.

SO IT CAN GO TO ITEM SEVEN. >> IT WAS DENIED 5-4.

[7. Conditional Use – Project V – PUBLIC HEARING ]

[LAUGHS] >> OUR NEXT IS CONDITIONAL USE

FOR PROJECT FIVE. >> SO THIS PROJECT -- THE REQUEST IS RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR INDUSTRIAL USE MANUFACTURING.

CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE? SO YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, IT'S JUST BEEN A LONG PROCESS, IT'S BEEN A SLOW MARCH OF THE DEVELOPMENT DOWN HERE.

THIS IS ANOTHER INDUSTRIAL PROJECT DOWN ON HAYGOOD COURT, YOU REMEMBER THIS IS ON BEEHIVE, JUST KIND OF ANNEXED TO EVERYTHING THAT WAS DONE, THIS IS ANOTHER MANUFACTURING USE THAT ADDS TO THE ONES THAT WERE JUST APPROVED TO THE EAST OF IT.

JUST KIND OF IN TOTAL, THERE HAS BEEN OVER A MILLION AND A HALF OF SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL UP FOR CONSIDERATION TO BE PERMITTED OUT HERE JUST IN THIS NEW INDUSTRIAL AREA.

SO THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF THAT FROM THE DEVELOPER.

>> THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.

FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR THIS PROJECT.

WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK? PLEASE COME FORWARD.

SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THE PROJECT.

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

[8. Conditional Use – Chateau Apartments – PUBLIC HEARING ]

>> ALL RIGHT. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY AT THE TOP OF THIS, WE WILL BE MODIFYING THE CONDITION, ESPECIALLY WITH THIS ONE AND BRINGING IT BACK TO THE STREET FRONTAGE THAT IS ON THE PROPERTY. WE WILL GET TO THAT AND I WILL EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT AT THE TOP. SO THE REQUEST HERE IS FOR RECOMMENDATION OF CITY COUNCIL FOR CONDITIONAL USE OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL USE WHICH IS A 65 UNIT MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT.

A RIGHT. THE PROPERTY ZONE IS AN EXISTING MUD WHICH IS A MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT, I THINK IT CURRENTLY HAS 72 UNITS IN IT. AND THEY ARE GOING TO 65.

AS YOU ALL KNOW, D DENSITY IS 16 DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE.

UNITS, NOT BEDS. IS NOT BOUND BY THE DEFINITIONS SO THEY CAN HAVE UP TO FIVE. AND SO THE DWELLING UNITS, YOU CAN HAVE UP TO 80 BEDS AN ANCHOR IN D.

SO THEY ARE GOING BACK AND THEY ARE ADDING TO 260 BEDS TOTAL.

THE THING TO FOCUS ON, I JUST WANT TO SAY THIS.

JUST IN THIS PRESENTATION, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL COME UP IN THE DRT PROCESS. RD, RDD AND CDD ARE UNLIKE OUR URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS AND OUR REDEVELOPMENT AREAS.

DD IS HEAVILY SCRUTINIZED WITH BUFFER YARDS AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MAY COME UP JUST DEPENDENT ON THE SURROUNDING USES. WE CAN GO FORWARD TO THE NEXT ONE. SO YOU WILL SEE, THIS IS THE ONE ON THE TOP, THIS IS THE ONE THAT IS LOCATED ON GAY STREET.

THIS IS THE SECOND IMPLEMENTATION FROM THE APPLICANT, STAFF REQUESTED THEY HAVE MORE OF AN URBAN FEEL ALONG THESE AREAS ON THE GAY STREET SIDE, THAT IS ON THE TOP OF THE PAGE WHERE YOU SEE IT SAYS TOWNHOMES JUST FURTHER UP.

AND THEN AS YOU GET TO THE CORNER, THEY WILL HAVE A BUILDING THAT IS MORE ADDRESSED IN THE CORNER WHERE THEY HAVE AMENITIES AND THINGS IN THE POOL AND WHATNOT.

THERE'S ALSO STREET PARKING BUT I GUESS IN THE BOTTOM CORNER OF CHATEAU, INTO THE CORNER, THERE WILL BE A THREE LEVEL PARKING DECK. THAT'S A BIT OF A MISNOMER, IT IS TWO LEVELS AND THEN THEY PARK ON THE ROOF OF IT AS WELL, THAT IS THE THIRD LEVEL. SO THE CONDITION THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH IT WAS JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT THIS CORRIDOR AND SIDEWALK, WE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT ON MONDAY.

THERE'S TWO THINGS I WANT TO BRING UP.

CURRENTLY THERE ISN'T A SIDEWALK THERE, THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO PUT THAT ON THEIR, THAT'S PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS WITH THE ROAD CLASSIFICATION. AND THEN I THINK THERE'S ALSO SOMETHING IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT MENTIONS THIS EXCEEDS THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, I GUESS THE DENSITY ASSOCIATED WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. THE STAFF POSITION ON THAT, THAT IS FACTUALLY TRUE BUT ALSO WITH THIS BEING AN EXISTING MUD, REALLY KIND OF FUNCTIONS THE SAME.

[02:15:02]

JUST WITH LESSER INTENSE USES THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO IT. SO THAT WILL BE THE TOWNHOME STYLE, THERE WILL ALSO BE SOME GARDEN STYLE APARTMENTS.

I THINK THAT IS PRETTY MUCH IT, ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ONE.

BUT THESE TWO PROJECTS WILL BE OWNED BY THE SAME PERSON.

BUT THEY HAVE TO BE APPROVED SEPARATELY.

THIS IS THE CHATEAU ONE ON NORTH GAY AND MARTIN AVENUE CORNER.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS... >> IS A WAIVER REQUIRED FOR THE

DENSITY? >> NO, A WAIVER IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THE DENSITY. SO HOW WE HAVE TREATED ZONING AND DENSITY AND WHETHER IT WAS A CONFLICT WITH THE DENSITY IN THE ZONING AND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, WE KIND OF DEFERRED TO IT.

AS I'VE SAID IN THIS AREA WE DEFERRED TO THE ZONING DISTRICT.

I THINK IN SOME AREAS IT MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO PUSH BACK, BUT IN THIS SCENARIO WHERE IT IS WITHIN 1 MILE OF CAMPUS, THERE'S ALREADY HAVING A WALKING PRESENCE HERE AND DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE PAST THIS WHERE FOLKS WALK, THEY TAKE TRANSIT TO GET TO CAMPUS. THIS REALLY IS APPROPRIATE.

AND LIKE I SAID, I THINK YOU RUN INTO A LOT MORE ISSUES WHEN YOU DON'T REALIZE YOUR DENSITY AND SITUATIONS LIKE THIS, YOU DO WANT TO ENCOURAGE DENSITY RIGHT HERE.

>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IT SAYS THIS IS RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL AND IT TALKS ABOUT THE 5-FOOT SIDEWALK. I THINK WE WENT OVER THIS DURING PACKET FROM NORTH GAY, FROM MARTIN AVENUE TO EAST DRAKE.

DOES IT STILL SAY THAT? >> THAT'S THE THING THAT I MENTIONED THAT I WANTED TO MODIFY.

WE WOULD BE TAILORING IT JUST TO -- THEY WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS ON NORTH GAY STREET FOR THE FRONTAGE OF THIS PROPERTY. SO I GUESS KIND OF THE LANGUAGE SHOULD PROBABLY BE THE AMENDED CONDITION THAT THEY HAVE TO BUILD, THEY WOULD HAVE TO IMPROVE THE SIDEWALK ON THEIR STREET FRONTAGE AND SO THAT WOULD BE ON NORTH GAY STREET AND MARTIN AVENUE. THAT WOULD BE THE AMENDED MO

MOTION. >> IT WOULD BE BEFORE CHATEAU?

>> NO. SO NORTH GAY STREET AND MARTIN AVENUE WOULD BE FOR THE CHATEAU AND THEN WE WILL GET TO WHAT THE AMENDED LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE FOR LAMONT.

>> THANK YOU. THIS DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO I WANT TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USE OF THE CHATEAU APARTMENTS, IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, PLEASE DO SO. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN AFTER YOU HAVE SPOKEN.

>> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS DON, MY PRIMARY RESIDENCE IS 123 SHADY OAK LANE. BUT I OWN PROPERTIES AT 601 NORTH GAY STREET. THESE ARE CONDOMINIUMS. BASICALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM CHATEAU.

AND FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN REAL QUICKLY AND REVIEWED, IT LOOKS LIKE A REALLY NICE IMPROVEMENT. CHATEAU IS AN OLDER COMPLEX AND I DON'T WANT TO MAKE ANY DISPARAGING COMMENTS ABOUT IT, BUT I BELIEVE THIS WILL BE A GREAT IMPROVEMENT.

THAT AREA NORTH GAY HAS SEEN DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS AND IT LOOKS GOOD AND WE ARE TRYING TO MAINTAIN OUR PROPERTY AS WELL.

I JUST WANT TO SUPPORT OUR NEIGHBORS AND IT LOOKS LIKE A REALLY WONDERFUL DEVELOPMENT. THE ONLY CONCERNS I WOULD HAVE AND JUST SORT OF EXPRESS IS PARKING.

WE HAVE COME TO REALIZE THAT THE VALUE OF ABUNDANT PARKING IN OUR COMPLEX, I'M SURE THEY WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS WHEN I NOTICED THAT THERE IS A LEASED AREA BAR OR RESTAURANT ON THE FOURTH FLOOR, HOW THAT IS FACTORED IN WHEN YOU COUNT PARKING SPACES FOR THE UNITS OR BEDROOMS AND THEN YOU ADD IN -- WHAT IF YOU HAVE OPERATING A LOUNGE AND I GUESS A SKY LOUNGE. SO HOW DO YOU AMEND THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT? THAT'S THE ONLY CONCERN I WOULD HAVE. JUST SO IT WOULDN'T SPILL OVER INTO OUR UNIT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COMMISSIONERS? >> QUICK QUESTION ON PARKING.

[02:20:04]

>> THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK TO, BUT I IMAGINE THERE WILL NOT BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, THAT WILL ABSOLUTELY BE AN AMENDMENT TH THING.

>> BRETT BASQUIN WITH THE FORESITE GROUP.

THE SKY LOUNGE IS A FANCY WORD FOR A STUDY ROOM.

[LAUGHS] JUST ON THE TOP FLOOR.

SO THERE IS NO BAR. THAT'S KIND OF LIKE THE WORST THING YOU COULD DO. [LAUGHS]

SO NO, THERE IS NOT THAT. >> WE HAVE A SKY BAR, DON'T WE?

>> IT MAY BE A DISAPPOINTMENT TO SOME.

BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

WE'VE GONE THROUGH IT, WE ARE GOING TO PUT -- ESSENTIALLY THE WAY THIS DEVELOPMENT HAS -- WAS RECONFIGURED AFTER ORIGINALLY MEETING WITH STAFF IS THAT THESE BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO ADDRESS THE STREET AND ARE GOING TO THE FRONT OF THE STREET SO THE SIDEWALK WAS NATURALLY THERE BECAUSE WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THE TWO STORY TOWNHOMES THAT ARE FRONTING THE ROAD THAT WE ARE BUFFERING, A LOT OF THAT WILL HAVE DIRECT ACCESS.

SO THAT WAS ALWAYS INTENDED IN THERE.

AND JUST SO OTHER PEOPLE KNOW, AS PART OF THIS, THE CITY -- AS PART OF THE PREVIOUS BOULEVARD PROJECT THERE, THEY WERE REQUIRED TO UPGRADE SIDEWALKS ALONG THE WAY.

SO THERE IS CITY FUNDING IN PLACE TO BASICALLY EXTEND THE SIDEWALKS AND GET CONNECTIVITY DOWN TO DRAKE AND FURTHER ON DOWN THERE. JUST SO EVERYBODY IS ON THE SAME PAGE. IT IS NOT -- I THINK WHEN IS MENTIONED AT PACKET, IT SHOULD BE MENTIONED HERE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LISTENING THAT MAY NOT UNDERSTAND THE FULL PICTURE OF EVERYTHING. BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS COMMISSIONERS?

>> I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION. JUST LOOKING AT THIS PICTURE,

THERE IS SOME STREET PARKING? >> NO THERE IS NOT.

SO THIS KIND OF LOOK THROUGH HERE, WHEN YOU SEE THE PARKING ON THE RIGHT THROUGH THERE, THERE IS AN EXIT DRIVE BETWEEN THE BUILDING RIGHT THERE ON THE SITE PLAN.

THAT IS ACTUALLY ON SITE, NOT ON THE STREET.

THERE WON'T BE STREET PARKING. SO UP OFF OF NORTH GAY THERE, THE BROWN AREA ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING IS KIND OF LIKE PARALLEL PARKING. THAT'S ALL ON SITE.

>> THAT MAKES SENSE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? OKAY, I NEED TO AMEND THE CONDITIONS. I NEED SOMEONE TO MAKE A MOTION

TO AMEND THE CONDITIONS. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND

THE CONDITIONS. >> FOR A SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF

THE PROPERTY. >> ON THE STREET FRONTAGE ON THE

PROPERTY. >> ON GAY AND --

>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A SECOND AND A MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE OPPOSED? OKAY. NOW WE NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED.

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

[9. Conditional Use – LeMans Apartments – PUBLIC HEARING ]

NEXT IS CONDITIONAL USE. >> ALL RIGHT, KIND OF THE SECOND PART OF THIS APPLICATION, THIS IS A REQUEST ALSO FROM FORESITE GROUP REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS A 126 MULTIPLE UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 560 PAIRING STREET. YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT THE PROPERTY HAS A TURN OFF FROM EAST DRAKE AVENUE, BUT IT HAS ITS OWN STREET WHICH RUNS ALONG THE WHOLE SOUTH AND NORTH OF THE PROPERTY AND ALSO HAS AN ACCESS POINT.

THE SQUARE CURRENTLY HAS 144 UNITS.

THIS WILL BRING IT DOWN TO 126 UNITS SPECIFICALLY.

BUT THAT WILL BE A TOTAL OF 504. THERE IS A CONDITION FOR APPROVAL REGARDING THIS CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST.

AND STAFF WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MODIFICATION TO REMOVE THE 8-FOOT EAST DRAKE AVENUE SIDEWALK, RECOMMENDATION WHILE STILL INCLUDING THE 5-FOOT MARTIN AVENUE SIDEWALK THERE.

SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY -- WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF CORRESPONDENCE ON THIS SPECIFIC APARTMENT COMPLEX.

THERE ARE TALKS ABOUT MAYBE THE DUMPSTER BEING A LOCATION THAT IS NOT IDEAL. SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS?

[02:25:04]

SO A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE APARTMENTS.

>> GOOD EVENING. WE ARE IN THAT LITTLE JUTTED OUT AREA WHERE THE DUPLEX SAYS THE POTENTIAL SITE WOULD BE FOR UNDER 26 RESIDENTS. IT BACKS UP TO FIVE POTENTIAL HOME SITES. WE'VE ALREADY BEEN TOLD THIS WILL BE ADDRESSED WITH A CHANCE TO GET IT AS PART OF PUBLIC RECORDS. THE SPECIFIC IMPACT, THE ADDITIONAL DENSITY OF THE PROPOSED LOCATION, THE OTHER IMPACTS AS CHRIS ADDRESSED IN PARAGRAPH B, REGARDING THE PROPOSED LOCATION WILL NOT RESULT IN ADVERSE EFFECTS TO ADJACENT PROPERTY. AND OTHER MATTERS AFFECTING PUBLIC HEALTH. ADDITIONAL ITEM 26 RESIDENTS ALL PARKING THEIR TRASH IN THE BACK YARD OF SEVEN HOUSES, ONE OF WHICH IS OURS WILL BRING A HOUSE ON A SLAB.

AND AGAIN, THERE ARE FOUR OTHER HOUSES AROUND.

THEY WILL EXPERIENCE A TREMENDOUS IMPACT WHETHER THAT IS THE TRASH, THE DEBRIS, THE AIR AND RUNOFF FROM THAT SITE.

AGAIN, THAT PARAGRAPH OF THE STAFF NOTE REGARDING SUBSTANTIAL LARGE DENSITY AND THEREBY USE AROUND THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, THAT EMPHASIZES OUR CONCERNS, APPRECIATE IT AND ANY QUESTIONS,

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO

SPEAK? >> GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS NICHOLAS, I LIVE ON THE SQUARE.

MY MAIN CONCERN IS WHAT ABOUT ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE? THERE WAS 144 PEOPLE, MAYBE.

A COUPLE OF FOLKS MAY HAVE LEFT. BUT I HAVE LIVED THERE FOR ABOUT THREE YEARS NOW. IT IS PROBABLY THE MOST AFFORDABLE PLACE TO LIVE. THE NEXT -- I. LIVE IN A TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT. I THINK THE MOST AVAILABLE THING I COULD FIND WAS ABOUT $1000. THAT IS NOT TOO GOOD.

BUT IT'S ABOUT A $300 JUMP IN WHAT WE SEE.

I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THIS PLACE WAS ACTUALLY IN THE REDEVELOPMENT ZONE FOR STUDENTS. BUT I HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN A BORN AND BRED PERSON THAT LIVES HERE MY WHOLE LIFE.

GO TIGERS, YOU KNOW? BUT MY MAIN QUESTION AND CONCERN IS ABOUT ALL OF THE FAMILIES THERE.

BECAUSE ACTUALLY MY NEIGHBOR, HE IS SOMEONE WHO LIVES OFF OF SOCIAL SECURITY, HE IS VERY LIMITED WITH WHAT HE CAN DO.

SO I MEAN, WHERE DO WE GO? WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF PLACES -- I GET IT, THE OLDER APARTMENTS ARE IN THIS AREA, BUT I MEAN YOU'VE ALSO GOT TO THINK ABOUT THEM, RIGHT? THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PLACES THAT PEOPLE CAN GO THAT LIVE IN AUBURN THAT WANT TO STAY IN AUBURN.

I LOVE AUBURN. BORN AND BRED HERE MY WHOLE LIFE. WHERE DO WE GO? I MEAN, THAT'S PROBABLY THE CHEAPEST THING I CAN FIND IS A TWO BEDROOM FOR $710. I KNOW IT WILL GO UP, BUT A ONE BEDROOM WAS $936 IN AUBURN. AND THEN THE NEXT THING YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE IS AN APARTMENT COMPLEX FOR 700.

BUT I MEAN, I GET THAT THEY ARE OUR SISTER TOWN BUT I KIND OF WANT TO STAY IN AUBURN, I LOVE AUBURN.

IT IS MY HOME. THAT IS ALL.

>> THANK YOU. SIGN IN PLEASE.

ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS? I HAVE A NOTE FROM PACKET TO MAKE A MENTION OF THE SIDEWALKS.

MOVE FROM 8 FEET TO 5 FEET? >> SIMILAR TO THE CONDITION THAT WE MADE ON CHATEAU, THE MODIFICATION JUST NEEDS TO BE THAT THE APPLICANT IMPROVED THE SIDEWALK ON THEIR STREET FRONTAGE. SO I GUESS THAT WOULD BE MARTIN AVENUE, BUT A LOT OF THAT WOULD BE BUTTONED UP IN DR..

SO LIKE I SAID, AT THE TOP, MODIFYING THE CONDITION TO PREPARE IT BACK TO SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ON THEIR PROPERTY.

>> SO MOVED AS AN AMENDMENT. >> SECOND.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO -- LET ME GO BACK, SORRY.

[02:30:05]

FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, THAT'S THE CONDITION.

>> THEN I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? >> YOU CAN.

GO AHEAD. >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE APARTMENTS AS AMENDED.

>> SECOND. >> QUESTION?

>> MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE CONCERN ON THE TRASH FROM THE

LOCATION. >> YES, SO DUMPSTER LOCATIONS ARE ONCE AGAIN SOMETHING THAT IS HEAVILY SCRUTINIZED.

SO PRETTY MUCH THEY CAN'T BE VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.

WE GOT A DIRECT COMPLAINT ABOUT THIS, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED IN DR., WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE IT IS NOT JUST DUMPSTERS BEING THROWN OFF TO THE SIDE.

>> ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR?

[10. Conditional Use – Bragg Avenue Mixed-Use – PUBLIC HEARING ]

BRAGG AVENUE MIXED USE. >> ALMOST DONE.

[LAUGHS] THIS IS RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 152 AND 160 BRAGG AVENUE.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT AN EIGHT UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, EACH CONSISTING OF FOUR BEDROOMS WITH A COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING, WHICH IS PERMITTED AT THE NEXUS OF BRAGG AVENUE AND SANDERS STREET.

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND SUBSEQUENTLY APPROVED FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC ALLEY AND THE CONSOLIDATION OF LOTS 152 AND 160 BRAGG, BEFORE A FORMAL SITE PLAN WILL BE -- REVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WEST, CRDW.

THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN THE CITY OF AUBURN'S PLAN DESIGNATES THE PROPERTY AS MIXED USE ONE. THIS DESIGNATION CAN INCLUDE RETAIL, COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE USES.

THERE ARE SOME RENDERINGS, AS YOU WILL SEE HERE.

SOME IDEAS. STAFF DOES HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

ONE, A PRELIMINARY PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND SUBSEQUENTLY APPROVED FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC ALLEY AND CONSOLIDATION OF LOTS 152 AND 160 BRAGG.

THE STAFF REPORT SAYS BEFORE WE WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT TO DURING D APPLICATION. NUMBER 2 IS THAT A FINAL REVIEW MUST BE SUBMITTED AND ACCEPTED AS COMPLETE BEFORE FINAL INSPECTION CO WILL BE COMPLETED. AND NUMBER 3 IS THE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE MUST BE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> THIS CONDITIONAL USE DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COMMISSIONERS? >> I LOVE THE RENDERINGS OF.

I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> SO IT JUST SHOULD BE WITH THE AMENDED CONDITIONS, BECAUSE SHE CHANGED THE CONDITION.

[02:35:02]

>> AS AMENDED. >> YES.

>> MAKE THE MOTION AGAIN. >> I MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR 152 BRAGG RESIDENTIAL WITH CONDITIONS.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

[11. Waiver – 337 East Magnolia Avenue ]

>> SO I KNOW THIS IS THE LAST ONE THAT WAS REQUESTED.

SO IT WAS REQUESTED WITH AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD EAST, SO IT'S REQUESTED THE 15-FOOT REQUIREMENT ON THE GROUND, STORY HEIGHT, WAIVER REQUESTED TO THE 10.5 REQUEST FOR THE UPPER STORY HEIGHT, WAIVER REQUESTED THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR SIDEWALK REQUIRED FOR GROUND STORY UNIT, AND THERE IS THE TWO FINAL WAIVERS ON FOUR AND FIVE, A 30% FENESTRATION REQUIREMENT FOR A SECOND STORY AND THE 20% FENESTRATION REQUIREMENT FOR THE THIRD STORY.

I WOULD SAY LET'S JUST DELIBERATE ON THESE ONE AT A TIME. AND THEN WE'VE GOT TO VOTE ON EACH OF THEM PRETTY MUCH. THE APPLICANT IS HERE, WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR IT.

IT IS JUST -- WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU ALL HAVE AND ASK TO THE APPLICANT. SO JUST KIND OF PROVIDING CONTEXT, IF YOU WANT TO GO TO THE PICTURES OF IT, I KNOW THE 15-FOOT GROUND FLOOR WAIVER HAS BEEN SOMETHING Y'ALL HAVE SEEN PRETTY FREQUENTLY. FOLKS ASK FOR IT.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS GOING TO BE A HEAVY DISCUSSION ON CHANGING THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD TABLES.

JUST BECAUSE I THINK THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION AROUND THE 15-FOOT WITH SOMETHING THAT WAS DESIGNATED FOR THE URBAN CORE AND THEN GOT ADOPTED DOWN TO THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO I GUESS THAT IS THE STAFF'S POSITION, SOMETHING WE ARE ACTIVELY LOOKING AT. THERE JUST HADN'T BEEN THE DRC INPUT ON THESE WAIVERS PARTICULARLY SINCE IT HASN'T BEEN HERE FOR THE SUMMER, OUR FIRST MEETING WAS NEXT WEEK.

SO THE 15-FOOT GROUND FLOOR, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF

OR THE APPLICANT, FEEL FREE. >> JUST A GENERAL QUESTION, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS PACKET, STAFF IS PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH ALL

OF THIS. >> JUST SPEAKING TO THE BREATH OF THEM, THE 15-FOOT ONE HAS BEEN ONE THAT HAS BEEN HOTLY DEBATED, EVEN ON THE INTERPRETATION AND ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN THINGS LOOKING LIKE THEY ARE 15 FEET.

KIND OF ADDING STEPS, ADDING PORCHES, THINGS RISING UP TO ACHIEVE THE 15 FEET. AND THE REST OF THEM ARE KIND OF DOWNSTREAM FROM, SECONDARY OF THAT UPPER STORY HEIGHT.

THE REST OF THEM ARE DOWNSTREAM OF THE LOT.

SO IF YOU CAN KEEP GOING THROUGH THEM, THIS WOULD BE A PRETTY GOOD EXAMPLE OF. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT IS KIND OF HERE IN THE STREET A LITTLE BIT, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE VIEW FROM THE SIDEWALK, YOU WOULD BE LOOKING INTO THE BOTTOM FLOOR BASEMENT. SO A LOT OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY OF IT. THIS IS SOMETHING -- THIS ISN'T A REQUEST WE HAVE GOTTEN ON ANY OTHER LOTS IN TOWN.

WHERE WE ASK THEM TO FRONT THE STREETS WITH THE BUILDING AND TAKE PRIMARY ACCESS OFF OF IT AND THAT IS BECAUSE THOSE ARE FLAT LOTS, THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY FUNCTIONING AS WALK UPS.

EVEN IF WE WERE TO REQUEST IT, THERE WOULDN'T REALLY BE A WALK UP SCENARIO IN THIS ONE, YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE.

SO YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO WALK INTO THIS BUT YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO WALK INTO THE UNIT. A LOT OF THAT IS REALLY JUST DOWNSTREAM OF THE AGGRESSIVE SLOPE FROM ONE SIDE OF THE LOT TO THE TOP AND WHAT THE PUBLIC LOOKS LIKE IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. THAT DRASTICALLY IMPACTS THE FENESTRATION AND HOW THEY DO IT BUT YOU ARE REALLY LOOKING AT THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING AND IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FOR THEM TO TURN THE BUILDING. I GUESS TO TURN THAT UNIT IN THE SCENARIO, WHERE IT WOULD STILL ACHIEVE WHAT WE ARE AFTER.

I THINK THERE ARE ALSO PICTURES OF IF THEY WERE GOING TO ACHIEVE THE FENESTRATION IF YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH IT.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION FOR CLARITY ABOUT THE GROUND FLOOR? IS THE GROUND FLOOR THE GARAGE FLOOR?

>> YES. SO IT IS THIS PICTURE RIGHT HERE, GO BACK, IT IS THE CONDO'S, THAT ONE.

TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES. THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY FUNCTION AS A BASEMENT. OFTENTIMES ONE OF THE THINGS WE PUSHED FOR RECENTLY IS GETTING LIVING SPACE ON THE GROUND FLOOR ON THE STREET LEVEL. BUT IN THIS SCENARIO, ONCE AGAIN IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, IT IS BURIED.

THERE IS NOT EVEN REALLY A CONSIDERATION OF SOMEBODY WALKING OUT, JUST WITH HOW THE SITES ARE ORIENTED.

SO THIS VISUAL SHOWS WHAT THE SITE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK LIKE, WHAT THE WINDOW SIZES WOULD BE, IT IS THOSE OUTER TRIM ONES.

SO SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF WINDOWS, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD LOOK BETTER OR WORSE, THE ARCHITECTS MAY HAVE A LOT OF

[02:40:03]

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN REQUIRED ON THE BIGGER BUILDINGS, WHAT THE FENESTRATION REQUIREMENTS FOR NOT REALLY SOMETHING INTENDED FOR THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING, IT'S SOMETHING THAT REGULAR TOWNHOMES HAVE NO PROBLEM MEETING IN THE PICTURE

WINDOW ET-CETERA. >> SO AGAIN, GROUND FLOOR IS THE

GARAGE? >> CORRECT.

>> THIS IS THE SECOND FLOOR? >> SO THE LIVING SPACE REALLY STARTS ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR.

>> AND THAT IS THE REASON FOR THE TEN AND A HALF FOOT?

>> YES. SO THEY PUSHED BACK.

THEY BEING THE DEVELOPERS, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN TALK ABOUT. LIKE I SAID, WE HAVEN'T SEEN ONE ON THE UPPER STOREY, WE'VE SEEN ONE ON THE GROUND FLOOR FOR THE SECOND STORY. BUT I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE FIRST WAIVER REQUESTS FOR TEN AND A HALF FEET.

>> SO WE WILL TAKE THIS SEPARATELY AND HAVE THE APPLICANT COME UP PLEASE. SO WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT OUR QUESTIONS. STATE YOUR NAME PLEASE.

>> RYAN. >> ALL RIGHT.

THE FIRST ONE IS THE 15-FOOT REQUIREMENT FOR GROUND STORY HEIGHT, YOU NEED A WAIVER FOR THAT.

SO WHAT IS THE HEIGHT GOING TO BE FOR THE GROUND STORY?

AND I GUESS THAT IS THE GARAGE. >> THAT ONE KIND OF CONFUSES ME AS WELL. WHERE I MEAN, THE WHOLE THING CONFUSES ME. [LAUGHS] LET'S JUST BE CLEAR. SO OVER THE PAST MANY YEARS, MAY BE EVEN MENTIONED TONIGHT, WE ARE TASKED AS BUILDERS, I AM ASKED TO BE MAKING IT TALLER TONIGHT.

BUT WE ALSO WANT IT SHORTER. BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE TALL BUILDINGS IN AUBURN. SO WE WANT 15 FEET ON THE GROUND, THIS IS THE NEWER THING THAT KIND OF GOT PASSED DOWN FROM THE DC COMMITTEE. BUT AGAIN IT'S LIKE HEY, WE DON'T LIKE TALL BUILDINGS, BUT LET'S MAKE IT TALL.

SO IN A BUILDING LIKE THIS, I THINK A LOT OF THESE RULES KIND OF STEM FROM WHAT WE WERE SAYING IN THESE LARGER DEVELOPMENTS.

FIVE, SIX, 700 DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE RUNNING TWO, 300 FEET LONG ON CITY BLOCKS. AND I THINK THE STAFF PUT TOGETHER SOME SORT OF BOILERPLATE THINGS TO TRY NOT TO HAVE BUILDINGS THAT ARE JUST BIG BOXES.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SAYING AND A LOT OF THE BRICK REQUIREMENTS, I THINK WE PULLED BACK SOME OF THE BRICK AND AD ADDED. BUT THE 15-FOOT THING WHEN YOU GET ON THESE SMALLER BUILDINGS, AND I GUESS THAT IS PLATED ON THESE BIGGER ONES WHERE THEY HAVE ELEVATORS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. MY WHOLE BUILDING IS 50 FEET LONG. THE WHOLE WIDTH OF THE BUILDING AND THE LENGTH FROM THE PODIUM BACK HERE.

IT TAKES LIKE 23 FEET TO GO UP 15 FEET, YOU KNOW? ON A FLIGHT OF STAIRS. THE WHOLE UNIT IS ALMOST HALF THE BUILDING TO TRY TO GET UP TO THE SECOND STORY.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WITH IT KIND OF FRONTING BUT WE ARE KIND OF CREATING THIS SIDE STREET, IT IS A FULL ON ROAD, IT IS 26 FEET WIDE. IT ALLOWS FOR FIRE TRUCKS THROUGH THERE TO SORT OF ACHIEVE THAT MAXIMUM HEIGHT.

I SORT OF FEEL LIKE THE 15 FEET -- I. WOULD STILL BE ASKING FOR A WAIVER BUT IT'S REALLY THE SECOND FLOOR BECAUSE IT IS REALLY PRESENTED TO THE ROAD. AT THAT POINT I KIND OF GOT OUT THERE WITH MY SON, WE WERE SHOOTING AND WITH THE SEVERE SLOPE COMING ACROSS MAGNOLIA, IT'S FALLING ALMOST 10 FEET FROM THE UPPER SIDE OF THE BUILDING TO THE LOWER SIDE OF THE BUILDING. ON THAT LOWER SIDE, THAT SORT OF SECOND FLOOR LINE, I GUESS YOU WOULD CALL IT THE THIRD FLOOR, IT'LL PRESENT TO THE STREET AS LIKE 19 FEET TALL.

IT IS GOING TO FEEL TALL. THAT IS WHY WE DESIGNED THE BUILDING LIKE WE DID, WHERE YOU'VE GOT THE ONE STORY IN THE GROUND. I WANT TO BRING IT INTO THE GROUND. I DON'T WANT IT STICKING UP FROM THE TOP OF THE HILL. SO THE GROUND FLOOR IS 9 FEET BASEMENT, THEN THERE IS A 16-INCH FLOOR SYSTEM, THAT WOULD BE WHAT, 10-FOOT FOR, 10-FOOT 51ST FLOOR, GROUND FLOOR.

IT'S GETTING A LITTLE CONFUSING BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE BUILDING WAS DESIGNED. THAT NEXT FLOOR -- THIS IS

[02:45:01]

THERE'S A LOT GOING ON HERE. >> LET ME STOP YOU.

OBVIOUSLY. SO THE 15-FOOT REQUIREMENT FOR THE GROUND STORY HEIGHT THAT YOU WANT A WAIVER FROM, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE GROUND STORY, WE TALK ABOUT THE FIRST FLOOR LIVING QUARTERS, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE BASEMENT?

>> IT WOULD BE THE BASEMENT. >> THEY ARE SAYING THE BASEMENT.

>> THE GARAGE? >> I MEAN I WOULDN'T THINK THAT WOULD BE IT, BUT SURE. SURE.

THAT ONE. LIKE YOU SAID, AS STATED EARLIER, I HAVE DONE MAYBE FOUR PROJECTS IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS, ALL IN THIS AREA, I HAVE HAD ONE OF THEM WHERE I HAD TO GO TO THE DRC. WHY NOT ON THE OTHER ONES? I DON'T KNOW. BUT I BUILT A NINTH FLOOR ON ONE OF THEM SO THERE HAS NOT BEEN SOME CONSISTENCY WITH THIS.

>> SO THE 15-FOOT IS GOING TO WHAT?

>> 106. >> IT'S GOING TO 106, BUT YOUR INTENT FOR THE WAIVER REQUEST WASN'T FOR THE FIRST FLOOR ON THE GROUND STORY, I GUESS WHICH WOULD BE THE SECOND LEVEL OR THE

BASEMENT LEVEL? >> I MEAN -- TO ME, WE ARE TAKING A BOILERPLATE SET OF STANDARDS AND LIKE THERE IS NOT A BUILDING LIKE THIS IN TOWN. NO ONE IS REALLY DEALING WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY THAT I AM DEALING WITH.

SO I DON'T KNOW. I WANT TO BUILD A BUILDING LIKE I HAVE PRESENTED IT. THE ARCHITECTURE ELEMENTS AND

THE PROPORTIONS ARE ACCURATE. >> SO THE SECOND FLOOR OR THE

FIRST FLOOR? >> THE BASEMENT, I GUESS.

>> SO THE BASEMENT. SO YOU WANT THE WAIVER ON THAT

ONE FOR THE GROUND STORY ONE. >> FROM 15-FOOT TO 106.

>> AND TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION ABOUT SOME OF THE BUILDINGS, HE'S BUILT THAT ARE DIFFERENT USES IN THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD TABLES THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THESE.

SO YOU BUILT A DUPLEX THAT WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO IT.

SO THERE ARE SEVERAL USES THAT ARE.

>> THE 15-FOOT WAS MORE FOR COMMERCIAL.

>> COMMERCIAL ON THE BOTTOM REALLY MAKES USE AS.

LIKE I SAID, KIND OF SOMETHING THAT WAS A CARRY OVER FROM URBAN

CORE. >> OKAY.

>> BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, WE PROVIDED A WAIVER BEFORE FOR THE 15 FEET. AND NOW IT'S DOWN TO 12 FEET?

>> LIKE I SAID, THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE ON THIS ONE.

BUT EVEN STILL, THE FIRST FLOOR IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.

THAT IS THE BIG THING. >> IT IS NOT THE FIRST FLOOR.

>> I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT ALL OF THE MEASUREMENTS IN TOTALITY ARE SO THAT YOU HAVE AN ACCURATE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING TO MAKE THOSE WINDOW REQUIREMENTS AND PROPERLY BE ABLE TO -- YOUR STAIRS TO MAKE CODE, TO BE ABLE TO GET THE ADDITIONAL SPACE.

IS THAT HOW THESE NUMBERS ARE? >> SO THE THING WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND, IT IS A TOWNHOME. IT IS NOT A COMMERCIAL BUILDING.

I'M NOT TRYING TO DESIGN A TOWNHOME IN A COMMERCIAL BUILDING. THE PROPORTIONS OF THE BUILDING ARE FOR TOWNHOMES. THEY ARE VERY -- APPROPRIATE.

AND IN FACT, SORT OF MORE ON THE LUXURY END OF THINGS.

ON MY SORT OF MAIN LIVING AREA, 9 FEET IN THE BASEMENT, 9-FOOT ON THE UPPER FLOOR THERE. SO I GUESS YES, GENERALLY YES.

>> ALL OF THESE ARE REQUESTED SO THAT --

>> SO YOU CAN BUILD A TOWNHOME, WHICH IS OF COURSE THE RIGHT THING IN THIS AREA. I'M TRYING TO MEET HEIGHTS THAT I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY THEY ARE HEIGHTS, EXCEPT THEY ARE WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, THAT NO ONE CAN EVER EVEN ARTICULATE WHY WE

HAVE CREATED THESE HEIGHTS. >> WE CAN ASK HIM FOR THE REST OF THE WAIVERS HE WANTS SO THAT WE CAN FINISH THIS AND THEN WE

[02:50:01]

SO THE 15-FOOT ON THE GROUND STORY WHICH IS THE BASEMENT, WHICH IS GOING TO 10-6, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE SECOND WAIVER YOU WANT, THAT IS THE 10.5-FOOT REQUIREMENT FOR THE UPPER STORY.

I ASSUME THAT IS THE FIRST FLOOR.

LIVING SPACE. OR IS IT REALLY THE SECOND FL

FLOOR? >> I GUESS -- I. DON'T KNOW.

I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW I WAS WANTING THAT ONE.

[LAUGHS] >> ALL RIGHT, SO IT SAYS THE GROUND STORY HEIGHT TO 10.7, THE REST WOULD HAVE TO BE 10.6.

AND THEN THE STORY HEIGHT WOULD SNEAK UNDER THAT AND BE 9.3.

IN THE TABLE, THE GROUND STORY HEIGHT AND THE UPPER STORY IS ALL REGULATED, THE GROUND STORY IS 15 FEET, EVERYTHING ABOVE IT IS TEN AND A HALF. SO TEN AND A HALF WOULD BE THE GROUND STORY IN THIS ONE, THE SECOND STORY FROM THE GROUND AND THEN YOU ARE REQUESTING TO GO DOWN TO 9.3 ON THE FOURTH ONE.

SO THAT'S WHAT THAT WOULD BE. >> WELL THE FOURTH STORY IS EFFECTIVELY THE ATTIC. SO IT'S NOT EVEN A STORY.

AGAIN, THESE CHARTS ARE CONTEMPLATED ON THE BUILDING THAT YOU SHOWED EARLIER, GREAT LOOKING BUILDING.

IT IS A COMMERCIAL STYLE BUILDING IN A FLAT ROOFED, PARAPET WALL, ALL OF THESE THINGS FIT VERY NICELY IN THIS CHART THAT HAS BEEN CREATED. THIS IS NOT THAT.

WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE A BUILDING THAT WAS NOT DESIGNED TO LOOK LIKE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING FIT THIS CHART THAT JUST SIMPLY

DOESN'T MEET. >> I THOUGHT WE FOUND THAT STAFF WAS PRETTY GOOD WITH ALL OF THESE CHANGES AND I'M KIND OF WONDERING WHY WE ARE WRAPPING AROUND THIS.

>> I THINK WE ARE JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE WHICH STORY IS WHICH.

>> IS THE FOURTH ONE. >> IT WAS BASICALLY THE ATTIC.

AND TO THE POINT OF -- THERE ARE SO MANY RULES.

I KNOW EVERYONE THINKS WE JUST ROLL UP IN HERE AND DO WHATEVER WE WANT, BUT FIRE AND THE ROAD, IT IS 30 FEET, 3 INCHES.

WELL THE ROAD NOW HAS TO BE 26 FEET WIDE.

IT JUST GOES ON AND ON. SO I'M TRYING TO KIND OF GROUND THE BUILDING HERE. I DID ANOTHER PROJECT ON ROS RECENTLY WHERE WE DID GET A WAIVER, WE WENT TO THE DRC, WE WERE IN THE MEETING AND I GUESS DAVID WAS LIKE, WHY DO WE HAVE THIS 15-FOOT? AND I SAID I THINK YOU MADE IT

UP. >> SO I GUESS WE COULD PROBABLY -- UNLESS YOU ALL HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

>> SO LOCK UP THE STORAGE AND LET'S JUST GET IT.

10.6, 10.5, 10.5, NINE, THREE. >> AND THE OTHER WAIVER, THE SECOND MAJOR WAIVER IS THAT THE BUILDING NORMALLY SHOULD FACE THE FRONT AND INSTEAD IT'S FACING THE SIDE.

AND THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE SLOPE.

>> SO NORMALLY WHAT WE HAVE REQUIRED IS THE END UNIT TURN ADDRESSES THE STRAIGHT. AND I THINK ON THIS ONE IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE SINCE THE SIDEWALK WOULD PUT YOU ABOVE THAT. SO THE FENESTRATION IS THE AMOUNT OF OPENINGS ON A FACADE ON THE SIDE OF A BUILDING, THE DOORS AND WINDOWS, PRETTY MUCH. THAT'S WHY IF YOU GO TO EXHIBIT SIX, EXHIBIT SIX SHOWS THE EXPANDED WINDOWS.

AND SO LIKE I SAID, I THINK ON THIS ONE -- LIKE I SAID, THE SITE REALLY DOES KIND OF MESS WITH THE DESIGN.

>> SO WE ARE SAYING IN THIS CASE, THE -- THE REQUIREMENT IS

THE BIGGER -- >> THAT'S WHAT THE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE IF IT MATCHES. BECAUSE I GUESS IF YOU GO BACK TO THE OTHER EXHIBIT, WHERE YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT FROM THE SIDE -- NOT THAT ONE. KEEP GOING, KEEP GOING BACK.

THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. THAT ONE IS REALLY THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE. FACING THE STREET, THAT'S WHAT

IT WILL LOOK LIKE, PRETTY MUCH. >> WILL WE BE DECIDING THESE

SEPARATELY? >> CORRECT.

SO I GUESS IF YOU ALL DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE

APPLICANT -- >> NO.

>> MAYBE I DO HAVE A QUESTION. AS FAR AS THE STREET FRONTAGE, MAGNOLIA, COULD IT BE DESIGNED SO THAT IT APPEARS?

[02:55:04]

>> DO WE HAVE A EXHIBIT THAT SHOWS THAT LOOK?

>> IF YOU GO BACK TO EXHIBIT SIX, I DON'T THINK IT HAS THAT

DOOR ON IT. >> THAT IS WHAT I WOULD SEE IF

I'M STANDING ON MAGNOLIA. >> BUT THE WHOLE GENERAL IDEA, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SORT OF THE WHOLE ROW, THE FEEL, THERE IS HOUSING THAT DOESN'T HAVE A FRONT DOOR, THEY HAVE A DOOR AND A PORCH, THIS IS THE EFFECT OF THE WALL.

AND IT PRESENTS TO YOU THAT COURTYARD.

WHICH ULTIMATELY, BRINGS YOU TO THE FRONT DOOR OF EVERY UNIT.

>> I GET IT. >> DO WE DELIBERATE? OR JUST FROM A DESIGN PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THE DRC HAS TYPICALLY PAID A LOT OF ATTENTION TO THE STREET FRONTAGE. AND AS FAR AS WINDOWS, DOOR OPENINGS, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WOULD BE DONE SO THAT YOU HAVE MORE OF THE PUBLIC FACING ON THIS SIDE THAT WE ARE SEEING.

IT SEEMS LIKE -- I THINK THE STORY HEIGHTS MAKE PERFECT SENSE AS FAR AS THE GARAGE AND ATTIC SPACE THAT TYPICALLY I WOULD THINK THE DRC HAS PAID A LOT OF ATTENTION TO ON WINDOW DETAIL.

>> RIGHT. >> WHICH WE ARE NOT CONCERNED

WITH. >> WE ARE CONCERNED WITH IT

BECAUSE OF THE FENESTRATION. >> ON THE FENESTRATION, YOU SAID THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE SECOND STORY WAS 30%.

SO WHAT ARE WE COMING DOWN TO? >> FOR THE SECOND STORY, COMING DOWN TO 15%. AND FOR THE THIRD STORY, COMING DOWN TO 13%. 13.2%.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I SEE IT NOW.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> NO, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

LET'S START WITH WAIVER NUMBER 1.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION REAL QUICK? JUST BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT. WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO SATISFY THE WAIVER? BECAUSE IT HAS A PRETTY HIGH

THRESHOLD AS I RECALL IT. >> WAIVERS ARE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME THING AS VARIANCE. SO THEY NEED TO BE KIND OF HARSH ON THE SITE, A DESIGN STANDPOINT, THAT REALLY DO CHALLENGE THE APPLICANT. SO OFTENTIMES IT WOULD EITHER BE TOPOGRAPHY, SITE STUFF LIKE DRAINAGE, YADA YADA.

STUFF LIKE THAT. SO WAIVERS ARE PARTICULAR TO IF I DON'T GET THIS WAIVER, THIS IS GOING TO RADICALLY ALTER MY DESIGN TO A POINT WHERE IT WOULD MAKE IT UNTENABLE.

>> WHAT ABOUT THO -- AS AN APPLICANT, AS SOMEBODY WHO IS BUYING A PIECE OF PROPERTY, YOU KNOW WHAT THE GUIDELINES ARE TO THAT PROPERTY. WHAT THE ZONING IS TO THAT PROPERTY BEFORE PURCHASING IT. SO DOES THAT MEAN -- I'M TALKING PHILOSOPHICALLY. AND SO THEREFORE, ISN'T THE HARDSHIP CREATED BY THE INDIVIDUAL GOING TO BUILD MAYBE A STRUCTURE THAT DOESN'T BELONG ON THAT PROPERTY?

>> SO THAT CAN BE THE ARGUMENT. I THINK FOR THE GROUND FLOOR, FLOOR ONE, LIKE I SAID I THINK EVERYTHING IS KIND OF DOWNSTREAM OF THAT. IT IS JUST NOT -- YOU ARE NOT ENTERING THE BUILDING ON THE GROUND FLOOR BECAUSE IF THEY WERE TO GRADE THAT OUT AND MAKE IT ALL FLAT, YOU WOULD NEED A LADDER TO GET UP TO THE COURT, WHICH IS THE NEXT PROPERTY.

SO I THINK THAT IN SOME OF THESE THINGS, IT MIGHT BE DESIGN STUFF. BUT I THINK A LOT OF THESE REQUESTS ARE DOWNSTREAM OF THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

>> SO IS THE ISSUE THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR STRUCTURES LIKE THIS?

>> NO, BECAUSE FOR THIS, THERE IS A HEAVY EMPHASIS ON WALKUPS

[03:00:01]

SO WE UTILIZE THAT KIND OF WITH BREAKS ON BIGGER BUILDINGS BUT ALSO ON THE BIGGER BUILDINGS AND THESE TYPES OF BUILDINGS, ADDRESSING THE STREET AND GETTING DOORWAYS ON THE STREET AND LIVING SPACE ON THE STREET, THAT IS THE EMPHASIS.

EVEN JUST DOORS AND WINDOWS THAT AREN'T IN USE, IT IS THE INTENT.

THIS IS A FUNCTIONAL ENTRANCE ON THE STREET THAT ACTIVATES THE STREET. SO EVEN IF THEY WERE TO BUILD IT THAT WAY, IT WOULDN'T BE REALIZED BECAUSE OF WHAT THE

TOPOGRAPHY IS OF THE SITE. >> AND WHEN WAS THAT?

>> SO THAT WAS -- THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD TABLE -- THOSE WERE CHANGED AFTER THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN WHEN EVERYTHING WAS KIND OF -- THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES, ALL OF THE REZONING HAPPENED, CREATED THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD TABLES WERE THEN DRAFTED AS THE PURVIEW OF

HOW THEY INFLUENCE -- >> WHEN WAS THAT?

>> TWENTY-ONE. >> I WOULD BE CURIOUS HOW LONG THE APPLICANT HAS OWNED THAT PROPERTY.

>> THIS PROPERTY HASN'T REDEVELOPED UNDER URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS -- UNDER THE NEW TABLES UNTIL NOW.

>> WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF WE ARE GOING BY THE PHILOSOPHICAL CONVERSATION OF THE APPLICANT PURCHASES A PROPERTY AND THE ZONING, I WOULD BE CURIOUS IF THE APPLICANT PURCHASED THAT PROPERTY BEFORE OR AFTER THE ZONING.

IF WE ARE GOING TO BRING IT UP, WE DESERVE THE WHOLE STORY.

>> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE WAIVERS, IT CANNOT BE -- YOU CANNOT REQUEST A WAIVER IF YOU CREATED THE HARDSHIP.

SO IF HE PURCHASED THAT PROPERTY LONG BEFORE THE ZONING, THEN HE HASN'T CREATED THE HARDSHIP. AND THAT'S PRETTY STRICT IN SOME CITIES. IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT IS VERY

STRICTLY APPLIED HERE. >> YOU ARE FREE TO ASK HIM.

>> APPLICANT, MAY WE ASK -- CAN YOU TELL US WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE PROPERTY? SO PRIOR TO THE ZONING.

>> THAT IS NOT A HARDSHIP OF HIS CREATING.

>> IT IS A HARDSHIP HE DID NOT CREATE.

>> FAIR. >> OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S START WITH THE FIRST

WAIVER. >> WE HAVE TO WAIVE EVERYTHING

SEPARATELY? >> I WOULD SAY SEPARATE.

>> I NEED A MOTION FOR WAIVER NUMBER 1.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO WAIVE THE CASE FOR CASE 2026-01.

REQUEST NUMBER 1 FOR THE GROUND STORY AND UPPER STORY HEIGHT.

>> JUST THE GROUND STORY HEIGHT. SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE 15-FOOT REQUIREMENT FOR GROUND STORY HEIGHT TO BE WA WAIVED.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. NOW, NUMBER 2 WAIVER.

TEN AND A HALF FOOT REQUIREMENT FOR THE UPPER STORY DOWN TO

9-FOOT -- >> 3 INCHES.

OR WAS IT 4 INCHES? MAKE A MOTION FOR THE CASE FOR THE UPPER STORY HEIGHT, FOURTH STORY FROM 10 FEET TO 9 FEET

4 INCHES. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.

THE THIRD ONE, THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WAIVING THAT TO NOT BE THERE.

>> I MOVED THE CASE TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE ENTRANCE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT

OF WAY SIDEWALK FOR THE UNIT. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. THEN THE FOURTH WAIVER, THE 30%

[03:05:05]

>> I MAKE A MOTION FOR THE FENESTRATION TO BE ON THE SECOND STORY TO BE MOVED FROM 30% TO 15%.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ALL OPPOSED? AND THE LAST ONE, NUMBER 5.

>> MAKING A MOTION FOR THIS CASE FOR THE THIRD STORY FENESTRATION TO BE MOVED -- WAIVED FOR THE 20%.

>> OKAY. TO 13.2%?

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

>> YES, I AM OPPOSED. ANY OTHER BUSINESS?

>> I HAVE NO COMMUNICATIONS. >> MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN, ALL IN FAVOR?

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.