Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-07-2010 Planning Commission MinutesJune 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 1 The Planning Commission met Monday, June 7, 2010 at 5:00 PM at the City Administration Building, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers. Present: Jean Wilson, Chairperson; Dick Charles, Vice-Chair; Bob Clark; Tim Kant; Jennifer Fidler; Lee Turner; Fran Slade and Mike Ford. Jonathan Smith, Planning and Building Director; Chris Gill, Attorney; Nancy Milford, Planner; Emily Boyett, Secretary. Absent: Gary Moore Chairperson Jean Wilson called the meeting to order at 5:03 PM and announced the meeting is being recorded. The minutes of the May 3, 2010 meeting were considered and Dick Charles moved to accept the minutes as written and was 2nd by Fran Slade. Motion carried with one abstention by Mike Ford. Mrs. Wilson stated Item F. would be heard first to allow Steve Seay to leave to attend another meeting. UR 10.11 Request of the City of Fairhope Gas Department for 11.52.11 Utility Review and Approval of the proposed replacement of approximately 2,500 linear feet of a 2” gas main. The project will run along Laurel Avenue between Bay Breeze Lane and Liberty Street; and along Pomelo Street, Kumquat Street and Satsuma Avenue between Fig Avenue and Laurel Avenue. Nancy Milford gave the staff report saying the project is part of a ten year plan by the Federal Government to replace existing cast iron pipe with polyethylene pipe. Ms. Milford stated the work will be underground at a minimum depth of 24 inches staying within the utility easement and using directional boring. Staff recommendation is to approve with the following four conditions: 1) The applicant should work with the City of Fairhope Horticulturist to protect existing trees; 2) All existing utilities must be located and proper separation must be maintained between utilities; 3) Any work performed in a drainage way should have positive drainage and be restored to pre-disturbance grades; and 4) Stabilize right-of-way cuts at the end of each day and re-vegetate disturbed areas with sod when the project is completed. City of Fairhope Gas Superintendent, Steve Seay addressed the Commission saying this is only the beginning of a ten year project to replace all of the cast iron gas pipe the City has, so he will be back on a regular basis. Mrs. Wilson opened the floor for public comments, but no one was present to speak. Lee Turner moved to accept the staff recommendation to approve the request with the four conditions. Dick Charles 2nd the motion and the motion passed unanimously. Mrs. Wilson stated there are five utility reviews for Mediacom and she would like to hear them all a once. Dick Charles moved to consider a consent agenda for items A through E and was 2nd by Jennifer Fidler. Motion carried unanimously. UR 10.05 Request of Mediacom for an 11.52.11 Utility Review and Approval of the proposed installation of approximately 5,663 linear feet of underground CATV cable throughout Edington Place Subdivision. June 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 2 UR 10.06 Request of Mediacom for an 11.52.11 Utility Review and Approval of the proposed installation of approximately 3,979 linear feet of underground CATV cable and a 750 linear foot bore throughout Falls Creek Subdivision. UR 10.07 Request of Mediacom for an 11.52.11 Utility Review and Approval of the proposed installation of approximately 2,170 linear feet of underground CATV cable throughout Arlington Farms Subdivision. UR 10.08 Request of Mediacom for an 11.52.11 Utility Review and Approval of the proposed installation of approximately 330 linear feet of underground CATV cable throughout the Oaks of Fairhope Subdivision. UR 10.09 Request of Mediacom for an 11.52.11 Utility Review and Approval of the proposed installation of approximately 2,563 linear feet of underground CATV cable throughout Fairfield Point Subdivision. Nancy Milford gave the staff reports saying each project consists of placing CATV cable underground at a minimum depth of 30” within the utility easement. She noted that pedestal placement will be at the same locations as the current power and AT&T utilities to service homes in each of the subdivisions. Staff recommendation for each is to approve with the following conditions: 1) The applicant should work with the City of Fairhope Horticulturist to protect existing trees; 2) All existing utilities must be located and proper separation must be maintained between utilities; 3) All mechanical equipment should be screened by painting the equipment Munsell Green; 4) Any work performed in a drainage way should have positive drainage and be restored to pre-disturbance grades and; 5) Stabilize right-of-way cuts at the end of each day and re-vegetate disturbed areas with sod when the project is completed. Mrs. Wilson opened the floor to any public comments but no one was present to speak and no one was present to represent the applicant. Jennifer Fidler move to accept the staff recommendation with the five conditions and to add the condition that all work is to be directional bored. Dick Charles 2nd the motion passed unanimously. ZC 10.02 Public hearing for the request of Maria Gilheart and Laticia Peralez to rezone property from R-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential District to B-2 General Business District. The property is located on the east side of State Highway 181, just south of Margaret Drive at 20132 State Highway 181. Nancy Milford gave the staff report saying the property consists of one residential lot which is approximately 64,565 sf. She stated the property is bordered by RA zoned property to the north, R-2 zoned property to the east and south, and R-1 zoned property to the west. Ms. Milford explained the B-2 zoning designation represents the General Business District, which is intended to provide opportunity for activities causing noise and heavy traffic, not considered compatible in the more restrictive business districts. Ms. Milford stated it is the staff’s opinion that the B-2 zoning designation for this property will not be compatible with the zoning designations of the surrounding properties and there are no commercial properties contiguous with the subject property. Staff recommendation is to deny the rezoning request. Mrs. Wilson stated the Commission’s decision is only a June 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 3 recommendation to the City Council and the Council will have the final decision. Mrs. Wilson opened the public hearing, having no comments Mrs. Wilson closed the public hearing. Dick Charles moved to deny the request to rezone due to spot zoning and forward an unfavorable recommendation to the City Council and Bob Clark 2nd the motion. The applicant, Maria Gilheart addressed the Commission saying the property is on the same side of State Highway 181 as Walmart and there are several other businesses in the area. She added the request for commercial zoning is to try to help her sell the property. Mrs. Wilson called for a vote for the motion and 2nd to deny the request and the motion passed unanimously. ZC 10.03 Public hearing for the request of the City of Fairhope Planning and Building Department for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance – Article IV, Section G. (Signs). Jonathan Smith gave the staff report saying on December 7, 2009 the Commission established a Sign Ordinance Committee to review the City’s sign ordinance and discuss possible revisions. The committee consists of Bob Clark, Jennifer Fidler and Jonathan Smith. Mr. Smith said with the guidance of the committee, staff has prepared several amendments to the sign ordinance as part of some Zoning Ordinance “clean-up” efforts as well as efforts to assist business owners throughout the community. With the exception of a couple of amendments that will help with consistency throughout the Ordinance, the most substantial of the proposed amendments are as follows: • a reduction in maximum height allowed for freestanding signs from twenty feet (20’) to eight feet (8’); • establishing provisions specifically addressing political signs; • establishing a 30 day time limit and a maximum allowed face area of four (4) square feet for temporary signs; • reducing the face area allowed for certain real estate signs; • reducing the additional maximum allowable face area for Complex Signs from fifty (50) square feet to twenty (20) square feet; and • a provision to allow for A-Frame signs in all commercial districts. Staff recommendation is to approve the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Article IV, Section G. (Signs). Mrs. Wilson stated this was looked at last month by the Commission. She opened the public hearing and having no one present to speak, she closed the public hearing. Mr. Charles asked if there was any portion addressing electrical signs. Mr. Smith explained if a sign has electricity run to it then a permit must be obtained, but the ordinance does not allow flashing signs. Mrs. Slade asked about political signs and the removal of signs in the case of a run-off. Mr. Smith said his interpretation is signs may be left up until after the run-off election. Mr. Clark stated the law has changed regarding the time between an election and a run-off election which will allow the signs to be up much longer. He asked if this means candidates would have to take down their signs five days after the first election and put them back thirty days prior to the run-off election. Mrs. Slade said she needs clarification on this before voting. Mr. Turner suggested adding the word “final” to the sentence so it reads as follows: “Political signs may be placed on private property after the qualifying deadline for the election, but must be removed within 5 days after the final election.” Bob Clark moved to accept the staff recommendation to approve the Zoning Ordinance Amendment and to add the word “final” to Article IV, Section G. (Signs), 3. Sign Permits and Exceptions, b. 9. Dick --- June 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 4 Charles 2nd the motion. Mr. Ford asked if the loser of the elections would be allowed to keep their signs up as well. Chris Gill asked the Commission to hold this case over until the end of the meeting in order for him to draft language to insert to clarify their concerns. Bob Clark withdrew his motion and Dick Charles withdrew his 2nd. Bob Clark moved to table this item until the end of the meeting and was 2nd by Dick Charles. The motion passed unanimously. ZC 10.05 Public hearing for the request of the City of Fairhope Planning and Building Department for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance – Article V Special Districts, Section G. Tourism Resort (TR) District. Jonathan Smith gave the staff report saying the Comprehensive Plan specifically identifies the goal of implementing a specific resort and tourism planning area and mentions numerous policies relative to such an area that are reflected in the proposed TR District amendment. He stated the proposed Tourism Resort District is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Smith explained that as proposed, a TR District must contain at least 175 contiguous acres and be located within two miles of an existing full service hotel with a minimum of 300 hotel rooms, an 18-hole championship golf course with related facilities and a marina. The maximum residential density allowed in a TR District is 3.5 units per acre and a minimum of 20% Open Space is required throughout. The development zones permitted in a TR District are as follows: Recreation Zone (RZ), Low-Rise (LR) Residential Zone, Mid-Rise (MR) Residential Zone, Limited Commercial (LC) Zone and High-Rise (HR) Residential Zone. Staff recommendation is to approve the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Article V Special Districts, Section G. Tourism Resort District. Mrs. Wilson announced several people had signed up to speak and she opened the public hearing. John Carden waived his time to speak. David Clark of 5497 Pine Grove Drive spoke in favor, saying he has worked at the Grand Hotel for 21 years and is currently General Manager. He stated he has worked with Daniel Corporation for several years and the plan is exciting and is in keeping with the area. Mr. Clark said this project will add tax dollars and quality to the City and the future success of the Grand Hotel heavily depends on the success of the Colony at the Grand project. Gary Gover of 300 Lincoln Street said he would have rather seen something that made the district a better integrated part of the City. He stated concerns with the project such as lack of connectivity, no provisions for housing workers or gardening, absence of the “Complete Streets” philosophy, and the plan does not invite the community to participate in its features and any or all of the facilities or streets may be private. Having no other public comments, Mrs. Wilson closed the public hearing. Mr. Charles asked if the street plan meets requirements for turning radius for City vehicles and fire/rescue vehicles. Mr. Smith responded yes, they must meet our standards in order to come inside City limits. Mrs. Slade stated concerns with the size of the project and felt this is the only place a TR District would be allowed due to all of the requirements that must be met. Mrs. Slade questioned if commercial uses allowed in other zones would be included in the 108,000 sf. allowed for commercial or would it be in addition to. Mrs. Wilson asked if the 108,000 sf. of commercial area is a cap or is more allowed. Mr. Gill stated the wording can be modified to make it clear that 108,000 sf. is the maximum allowed for commercial. Mrs. Slade stated she likes the aspect of non-public roads to not have curb and gutter and the privacy of the development. Mr. June 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 5 Turner asked what the advantages and disadvantages were to doing this project this way instead of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and if this request is approved, what type of site plan or review is required. Mr. Gill stated the PUD rules just didn’t allow for this sort of development. Mr. Smith added a PUD requires a detailed site plan and this type development has different types of development zones within one piece of property, but each stage of the development will go through a review process such as Subdivision Approval or Site Plan Review. Mr. Charles said the Complete Streets Policy addresses publicly maintained streets. He also added he does not know of any resort that allows or has provisions for gardening. Mr. Smith stated he believes there is a garden on the site currently and that staff would not consider gardening as a harmful use in a commercial district. Mr. Charles asked if any revision needed to be made regarding the language for government vehicles and contract vehicles if the City decides to contract out garage and trash collection. Mr. Smith said the City usually has some type of franchise agreement and the vehicles should be covered. Mr. Ford asked the height of the high-rise and the other proposed buildings. Mr. Smith responded the current high-rise is 96 feet and the spa is approximately 55 feet. Mr. Ford stated that overall he liked the project, but usually projects this size are tweaked down the road. Mr. Clark asked if a shuttle service would be used to transport tourist to downtown and Mr. Smith responded the applicant has indicated there will be something similar to the shuttle service the Grand Hotel uses. Mr. Smith added there are provisions in this amendment that require internal circulation pedestrian connectivity and the applicants do have a pedestrian plan for their development. Mr. Turner asked if the existing buildings on the site will be included in the 108,000 sf. of commercial area allowed for the development and Mr. Smith stated if it is the intention for the Commission to approve the 108,000 sf. of commercial throughout the subject property in a TR District, then any existing commercial will be included. Mrs. Fidler asked how much of the district will be public. Mr. Smith responded the streets in this development will not be public at all. Mr. Gill stated anyone that zones their property TR District will not be required to dedicate any of the streets, but could if they wanted to. Mrs. Fidler asked if the commercial area inside the development would be private as well. Mr. Gill stated it would be private but they will have to allow the public access to the commercial or they would not survive. Mr. Charles said the amendment states that any additions to the district could be made public and privacy restrictions do not extend to any expansion of the property. Mrs. Wilson said she promotes tourism and it is a good industry to encourage because it is money coming into our community and it does not put a lot of strain on our infrastructure. She added she wants to do what she can to assist the Grand Hotel because it is a very important partner with downtown businesses and when the Grand Hotel suffers then so does downtown. Mrs. Slade said the application shows 180,000 sf. of commercial area and Mr. Gill stated it was 180,000 sf. initially but that it has been changed to 108,000 sf. Mr. Gill suggested inserting “subject to the requirements of paragraph 5.c.of Section F. of this article” into the last sentence of Section F. Uses and Development Zones, 7. Resort Zone, a. Permitted Uses to tie the commercial square footage back to the 108,000 sf. Lee Turner moved to accept the staff recommendation to approve the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Article V Special Districts, Section G. Tourism Resort District with the insertion of “subject to the requirements of paragraph 5.c.of Section F. of this article” into the last sentence of paragraph 7.a. of Section F. and forward a favorable recommendation to the June 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 6 City Council. Dick Charles 2nd the motion and the motion passed with the following vote: AYE – Tim Kant, Jennifer Fidler, Bob Clark, Jean Wilson, Dick Charles, Lee Turner and Mike Ford; NAY – Fran Slade. Mike Ford stated he reserves the right to change his opinion at the City Council meeting. ZC 10.04 Public hearing for the request of Point Clear Partners, LLC to establish City of Fairhope zoning of Tourism Resort (TR) District concurrent upon annexation into the City of Fairhope, Jason Tickle. The property, known as the Colony at the Grand, is located on the north side of Battles Road, just west of the intersection of Section Street and Battles Road. Jonathan Smith gave the staff report saying the subject property consists of approximately 184.6 acres with 637 total residential units proposed and approximately 108,000 sf. of commercial area. A minimum of 20% open space will be provided which calculates to approximately 37 acres of open space/green space throughout the project. The applicant is proposing private streets but will provide connectivity measures for the benefit of pedestrian traffic that meets internal connectivity and circulation across areas within the site. Residential density for the site is broken down between three development zones: Low-Rise (LR), Mid-Rise (MR) and High-Rise (HR) zones. Specific Tree and Landscaping provisions tailored for the subject property have been submitted. The developer is proposing a 40’ buffer along the eastern and southeastern portions of the property along Battles Road and proposes to retain most of the property’s stormwater runoff in “Sweetwater Lake” located on the property. Upon future development, the applicant will comply with the City’s minimum stormwater and buffer requirements. A traffic study has been submitted and the only traffic improvement recommended is that an “eastbound left turn lane should be constructed at the access to the proposed retail development.” A transit system is planned to be available for shuttling the patrons of the development to downtown. The development is proposed to be contained wholly within the subject 184.6 acres and is laid out in a way that it is intended to have minimal impact on adjacent properties. Staff recommendation is to approve the proposed TR District zoning for the subject property concurrent upon annexation into the City of Fairhope with the following condition: 1) An eastbound left turn lane shall be constructed prior to the issuance of any land disturbance or building permits for the entrance to the proposed limited commercial zone. Jason Tickle, the applicant’s representative, addressed the Commission saying this request is different from what they normally see because this project is already in motion. The Retirement Systems of Alabama (RSA) bought the Grand Hotel in 1999 and in 2001 a developer purchased the subject property and obtained approval from Baldwin County for a 24 building condominium development. In 2005, RSA and Daniel Corporation purchased the subject property and began developing a plan for the property that would first and foremost substantiate the Grand Hotel’s long-term economic vitality. In 2006 construction began on the Bayview building and it was completed in the spring of 2008. Construction of the Clubhouse was completed in July of 2009. Since October of 2009 the developers have been working with City staff and the community group to be able to submit something that would be satisfactory to all of the parties. The applicants want to bring the property inside City limits even though the existing improvements are nonconforming. They want to reach a compromise with the City and still honor the contractual agreements with the existing owners who bought private streets and a 100’ June 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 7 tall condominium. Mr. Tickle asked the Commission to take time to consider their request and all the work that has been put into it. Mrs. Wilson opened the public hearing and no one wanted to speak. Mrs. Wilson closed the public hearing and opened the floor to the Commissioners. Mrs. Fidler asked the size of the lake because the lake can be part of the green space. Mr. Tickle responded the lake is 20 acres and the total required green space is 37 acres, but 43 acres have been set aside. Mrs. Fidler asked about the community group the applicants worked with and if anyone was present from the group and two audience members raised their hand. Mr. Kant asked if there are any plans to install a traffic light at US Hwy 98 and County Rd. 34 (Old Battles Road). Mr. Tickle stated the traffic engineer and traffic study did not recommend or warrant the installation of a light in that location and the developer would not be involved with a light on Greeno Road and there is no consideration at this time. Mr. Kant said traffic backs up now in downtown and with an additional 600 houses, Scenic 98 will become overcome with vehicles and he asked that as the development moves along that consideration be made for the traffic. Mr. Kant stated concerns with the high-rise towers and he asked the developers to work to try building something smaller around 55’ tall. Mr. Clark stated creating a Tourism Resort District is a huge undertaking, it has never been done before and it contains multiple special provisions. He said he spent lots of time going over the application to try to be as familiar with it as possible and after making a list of pros and cons and the pros far outweighed the cons and there he has no question that this is the right thing to do. Mr. Clark said this type of development is in the Comprehensive Plan and the applicant has a right to do it and he has no problems with it. He added he made sure the public was aware of what was going on so e-mails were sent out to the neighborhood groups and it was advertised in the paper and he has not received any calls against this project. Dick Charles moved to accept the staff recommendation and forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed TR District zoning for the subject property concurrent upon annexation into the City of Fairhope with the following condition: 1) An eastbound left turn lane shall be constructed prior to the issuance of any land disturbance or building permits for the entrance to the proposed limited commercial zone. Tim Kant 2nd the motion. Mrs. Slade asked if previous plat approvals would remain as they are and Mr. Tickle responded that new approvals will supersede those approvals. Mr. Turner asked for a description of what the applicant would propose in the commercial areas and what the target demographics were in the residential areas. Mr. Tickle explained the limited commercial area would be live/work type buildings with loft apartments above and retail space below and would be similar to what is downtown with the same scale, use and character. The commercial tenants would be accountants, ice cream shop or some convenience retail to service the immediate area. Mr. Tickle said the existing residential is all across the board and the rest of the residential area will vary depending on the need and demand they see. Mrs. Wilson said there was a motion and a 2nd and she called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously. Mike Ford stated he reserves the right to change his opinion at the City Council meeting. SD 10.02 Public hearing for the request of the City of Fairhope Planning and Building Department for an amendment to the Subdivision Regulations to create provisions for a Tourism Resort (TR) District. Nancy Milford gave the staff report saying a TR District is unlike any other zoning district in the City and specific provisions June 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 8 have been drafted to allow for the development’s flexibility. She stated examples of exemptions that are allowed such as private streets, gates or other controlled access measures, cul-de-sacs, no curb and gutter, alternative storm water and surface water drainage measures, no street lights, double frontage lots, and street layout. Staff recommendation is to approve as requested conditional upon the City Council approval of the Tourism Resort (TR) District Zoning Ordinance amendment. Mr. Gill explained the reason for the condition is if the City Council does not approve the TR District Zoning Ordinance amendment then there will not be any need for this Subdivision Regulations amendment. Mr. Gill said in order to clarify buffer strip requirements he suggests to amend the wording of paragraph y to read as follows: “Buffer strips otherwise required per Article V, Section E, paragraph 6 of these subdivision regulations in residential areas shall not be required in a TR District.” Mrs. Wilson opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, she closed the public hearing. Mrs. Wilson stated this amendment is necessary to put in effect the zoning for the TR District should the City Council approve it. Lee Turner moved to accept the staff recommendation to approve the Subdivision Regulation amendment conditional upon the City Council approval of the Tourism Resort (TR) District Zoning Ordinance amendment and amend paragraph y to read “Buffer strips otherwise required per Article V, Section E, paragraph 6 of these subdivision regulations in residential areas shall not be required in a TR District.” Dick Charles 2nd the motion and the motion passed unanimously. Bob Clark moved to re-open case ZC 10.03 Public hearing for the request of the City of Fairhope Planning and Building Department for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance – Article IV, Section G. (Signs). Dick Charles 2nd the motion and the motion passed unanimously. Mr. Gill suggested amending the wording of Article IV, Section G., 3.b.9. to read as follows: “Political signs may be placed on private property after the qualifying deadline for the election. A candidate shall remove his/her political signs from private property within five (5) days following the first to occur of (i) said candidate not winning a primary election or prevailing to a run-off in a primary election; (ii) said candidate not winning a primary run-off election; (iii) said candidate not winning a general election or prevailing to a run-off in a general election; or (iv) the general election (provided, that the foregoing use of the term “general election” shall include a run-off in a general election).” Mr. Clark stated it is very important to have something in writing to operate from and Mr. Smith agreed. There was discussion regarding whether there could be a run-off of the general election. Mr. Gill suggested voting on the amendment as it is presented and then have another motion to amend it. Lee Turner moved to accept the staff recommendation to approve the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Article IV, Section G. (Signs). Dick Charles 2nd the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: AYE - Tim Kant, Jennifer Fidler, Fran Slade, Jean Wilson, Dick Charles, Lee Turner and Mike Ford; NAY – Bob Clark. Lee Turner moved to amend Article IV, Section G., 3.b.9. to read as follows: “Political signs may be placed on private property after the qualifying deadline for the election. A candidate shall remove his/her political signs from private property within five (5) days following the first to occur of (i) said candidate not winning a primary election or prevailing to a run-off in a primary election; (ii) said candidate not winning a primary run-off election; (iii) said candidate not winning a general election or prevailing to a run-off in a general June 7, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 9 election; or (iv) the general election (provided, that the foregoing use of the term “general election” shall include a run-off in a general election).” Jennifer Fidler 2nd the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: AYE – Tim Kant, Jennifer Fidler, Fran Slade, Jean Wilson, Dick Charles, Lee Turner and Mike Ford; NAY – Bob Clark. Having no further business, Dick Charles moved to adjourn and was 2nd by Jennifer Fidler. Motion passed unanimously and the meeting was duly adjourned at 6:47 pm. ________________________ ________________________ Jean Wilson, Chairperson Emily Boyett, Secretary