Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-21-1972 Regular and Public MeetingFAIRROPE PLANNING AND ZONING CO11MISSIOII Regular and Public Hooting,, •londay, tugu.sT 21- 1972 at 5:00 P.M. City Administration Building, Fairhopo, Alabama. Pronont: Chairman Parker, memborss Box, Pitnan, Arnold, Kirk,. bacon, Absent: Ileambers Frederick, Gates, Bung. Visit6rs: Harnon Stesarnsi, Ruby Dale, John Beasley, Robert Lunsford, Carlton. Niemeyer.. James-ISi.x, Dan Corte.. Hatt Dial and approxiwately 30 residents of Inglesi.aa Highlands. Minutes of meeting of JAlY 3, 1972 approved as written. i OLD BUSIIIESS: Public hoaring on application of M. P. Dial to rozone from R-�i to B-1, lots 7,8.9 Black 10, Ingleside highlands. Mr. Ray 23salone, Spokoss man for the opposition stated that the group opposed any and all re -- zoning on they went aide 'of Greeno Road in. Ingleside, Heights. Letter of objection from W. Kenneth Hughes, ownor of lots 10, 11 and 12, in. block 10 was read and placed on file. Mrs. Schneider and ?ir. sand. Mrs. 46 Willie4 S p�poesd proposed rozoning. Major Homes presented revised plans; for Ilolokai. Village, Mr. Cortex reading from letter of Planning Consultant pointed out changes. made. 1. Easement between 10t 3 and 5 and 5 and 6 widened to desired size. 2. Square footage on all Lots computed as 15,000 Sq. Ft.,. or more. 3. Sidewalks have been eliminated. 4* Ten foot easement on $forth had been oliminatod and replaced by 15y.feet easement on South.. 5. State Hirhway Department stated thore were no plans to widen Hwy. 96 so developers do not consider Hwy. 98 an arterial streer so de- velopers, ;are not dedicating an additional R.0.14.. John Beasley accompanied by his engineer Robert Luns.ford presented two resubdivisionss of lot 3, Green's .S/D. 1. Ressubdivisioned into lot A: with dimensions as .follows: N-332.3$1, S-325-871, E-3301, W-332-04t, (dividing lino between A and B) Lot H: E-332-04' , 11-333.�71' , N-301 t , 3-300. Lotion by fir. Arnold seconded by Mr. Pitman that preliminary and final approval be g1ven to John Beasslesy's reaubd; vision of Lot 3, Green's. S/D into lots.A & B,& motion carried unanimously. 2. Resubdi.vision of lot IB, West portion of Lot 3, Green's S/D into five lots.; discussion ogntored on proposed access and drsaina o of lots. Copy of minutes df Planning Commission, meeting of 1/9/68 placed on files in which, "futurel street" and Proposed ,street" kk botwen lots 235 and 236, Fairwood #15 are: mentioned... • • .. • • ... • . .. • .. • .. • • ! -2- and in which final approval was given "subject to a letter to the City that the real estate Company Will furnish bond as required guaranteeing nscesearyiimprovements" Motion by Mr. Arnold, seconded byMr. Pitman that preliminary approval be given the "subdivision of lot B. rosubdivision of lot 3, Green's S/D, following discussion, both motion and socoddtl wero withdrawn and decision reached that no approval be given until legal opinion has been obtained as to mbethor fifty feet between lots 235 and. 236, Fairwood #15 marked on plat as "avail- able for future street; constitutes a dedicating of a street. Motion by Mr. Pitman, seconded by Mir. Macon that final approval be given Major Homes, Inc. "Molokai Village S/D contingent upon receipt of letter stating that developers will iratall at their expense all utilities and street improvements required by Subdi- vision regulations and indicated on plat. Motion carxisd unanimously. Bayvi.ew :Services, Inc., presented application to rezone from R-2 is and B-1 to B-2, lot B of Gables S/D located in N/W '-.: of S/W14 of S/Wa Of Section 16, Township 6 South; Rango 2 East, containing 7.13 Acre*--. and situated on Southeast intersection of Groeno 31vd., and 16orphy Avenue. Motion by Mr. Arnold seconded by Mr. Pitman that the application of Bayview Services, Inc., be accepted for advertising for Public Hearing at the next regular meeting. Motion carried unan- imously. Application of Ruby male to rezone from R-2 to B-1 the following described property: From the 1/2 Sec. Corner on South line Section 17, Township 6 South; Range 2 Baste run East 1114.35 feet and North 10.08 foot for a point of beginning; thence run East 196 feet; thence run North 130 feet; thence run West 1,50 feet; thence run Forth 70 Beet; Thence run West 46 Feet; thence run South 200 feet to the point o f beginning. Lying and being; in Section 17, Township 6 South; Range 2 East, Baldwin County, Alabama and situated on Northwest Corner of Nichols Street and Ingle side Avenue at 713 Nichols Ave. Motion by Mr. Pitman that the above Ruby Dale applicathn be accep- ted for publio advertising for public hearing at the neat regular meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Carlson Niemeyer presented for preliminary and final approval Sub- division of the Les Parker Lea.sohold on F.S.T.C, land in the W 112 of the N.W. 4 of the SE of Section 16, Township it 6 South; Range 2 East land extendin3 from Norphy to Fairhppe Avenues in the Police Jurisdiction. Discussion centered on 60 foot marked "Reserved for future R.O.W." 3iseotinZ land. Motion by Mr. Arnold seconded byMr. Pitman that preliminary and final approval be given to the Subdivision of Lee Parker leasehold subject to the execution of the owners Certificate by the Fairhope Single Tax Corporation, as provided on the S/D flat. Motion carried unanimously. -3- in too matter cf t1w Dial re onL•,Y cyplio atIon, Er. Dlal was re- quented to return to t z s nazt C=ie bima moetlnr; wi;. Y detailed plat plan ghoul-Ir, locatl*n cf buildiziZ, paPI,�, 1�"a " l r zone , ac - /^ toss roe, d, such pletn to indicate type of m.terl all, plaaI;Anj,v *to. September mestii-,5 to be held Thesday, 3epte9tkeir S. 1972 due to L31a- Dcy Holld-V. Miere beinro Pa.rther buakeas, r tin. ; adjourK..ad. �► as :1 soli, near®t ,4 1 Claude IV. Arnold 100 North Bancroft Street Fairhope, Alabama iAugfist"14, IW21 LL - Hon. R.C. Macon, Mayor City of Fairhope Fairhope, Alabama Dear Air. Macon The several years time that your appointment has enabled me to serve Fairhope as a member of the City Planning Commission and of the City Zoning Commission, have been interesting and instructive years, al- though at times somewhat harrowing. However, a very strong question now arises as to whether or not it is still possible for me to be of any real service to the community in this capacity. The lame and halting nature of the endeavors of the Planning and Zoning Commiss- ions, and the mediocrity of our achievements, are disheartening to the extent that the value of whatever contributioh my presence at the meetings might have to the community is greatly outweighed by the cost of that participation to me and to my engineering survey firm. The ordinances under which we work are apparently non -understandable, as the majority of Fairhope's population seems to almost totally mis- understand them. There is virtually no correlation between the word- ing styling of the Planning and Zoning Ordinances, and the conceptions of the public concerning the meaning of the terms used. And our Plan- ing Consultants have not succeeded in dispelling the miasma of mis understanding that has developed between the Commissions and the Public. For instance, I submit that the popular conception of an 11R-1" Zone can be simply stated as "Residential, First Class" meaning a zone of well constructed, well kept,. attractive homes in which the residents live good, quiet, respectable lives. The popular conception has nothing to do whatever with "squar,e footage" --- but our Zoning Ordinances applies one criteria, and one only - 1115,000 Square Feet of Lot Area." Above I criticize the ordinance, only: not the Commission, and not the Consultants. I'm riot at all sure that eliminating public mis- understanding is any part at all of the Consultant's responsibilities, and I feel that our Consultants have in fact done rather well. In view of the rather inadequate compensation and even more inadequate instruction as to desires of the City Council and the Commissions, together with the more than considerable lack of attention paid to their advice by the Commissions, and the frequent political over- ruling of their recommendations, it strikes me as surprising that they have continued in their efforts to serve us. The adverse Brit- icisms that their efforts have garnered for them could be deemed of greater cost than their payments have been worth. Hon. R.C. Macon Page 2 It may help to clear the way for some needed changes if some of those of us who have been members of these two Commissions for several years would resign, and make way thereby for some fresher ideas. With this thought in mind, please consider this as my resign- ation, effective September 15th, 1972. I offer this resignation as a move of possible significant usefulness to the community, and be- cause I feel that I can no longer afford the cost of remaining as a member of the commissions Which I feel places me in a definite "conflict of interests" situation. And I offer the effective date with the thought that this will put the date past the last meeting of these commissions during your administration, and late enough, to eliminate the necessity of your appointing a replacement in the event that you do not wish to do so. It would be less than fair, perhaps for me to close this letter without pin -pointing the major sources of my dissatisfaction with the existing situation which areal -the City Council has repeatedly failed to act co-operatively on requests from the Planning Commission, and from the Zoning Commission, for what we felt and feel were and are needed additional tools and assistance; and, 2- A majority of the Zoning decisions made in recent months have been political sol- utions, often arrived at bya "show of hands", whereas questions arising before the Commission should be arrived at on a basis of facts and cool, calm consideration of the relative effects of the existing facts upon the situation under consideration. Conclusions arrived at under emotional stress are almost invariably going to re- act to the detriment of all concerned in nearly every instance. Please accept my thanks for the enrichment and broadening of my experience and outlook that my term on the commissions has afforded. It has been a personal pleasure to have been as closely associated with you as this situation has made possible. With warm personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, GV CWA/s