HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-04-2017 Planning Commission MinutesDecember4 ,2017
Planning Commission Minutes
The Planning Commission met Monday, December 4 , 2017 at 5:00 PM at the City
Municipal Complex, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers.
Present: Lee Turner, Chairperson; Art Dyas; Rebecca Bryant; Charles Johnson; Richard
Peterson; Ralph Thayer; Hollie MacKellar; Tim Simmonds; Jay Robinson; Wayne Dyess,
Planning Director; Nancy Milford, Planner; Emily Boyett, Secretary; and Ken Watson,
City Attorney
Absent: Buford King, Planner
Chairman Turner called the meeting to order at 5:01 PM and announced the meeting is
being recorded.
Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) Review and Approval, Wayne Dyess. Mr.
Dyess stated the City operates under Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
Phase II General Permit Number ALR040040. The SWMP is submitted yearly and is a
permit requirement. Assessment and public review of this plan is also a requirement, and
is specified in the current plan as being evaluated by the Planning Commission. The
Commission watched a MS4 video. Mr. Dyess stated the video is on the City's website
as well as the SWMP plan. Art Dyas made a motion to accept the Storm Water
Management Plan as presented. Ralph Thayer 2nd the motion and the motion carried
unanimous I y.
ZC 17.17 Public hearing to consider the request of Community Bank Coast for a PUD
Amendment to Lot of the Greeno Professional Village, Neil Polen. The property is located
on the northeast comer of the intersection of Greeno Road (a.k.a. US Hwy. 98) and Edwards
Avenue, at 200 N. Greeno Road. Mr. Dyess gave the staff report saying the applicant is seeking
an amendment of the Greeno Professional Village Planned Unit Development (PUD). The
purpose of the amendment is to change the building orientation and parking area orientation and
to allow 25' -0" tall light poles for Lot 1 of the Greeno Professional Village. The Greeno
Professional Village PUD was approved April 8, 2002 via Ordinance 1142. The development
requirements of Ordinance 1142 require a site plan review and approval by the Fairhope
Planning Commission and the Fairhope City Council before building permits may be issued for
the various lots comprising the PUD. The as-built configuration of the access road in the
existing PUD as well as the building layout of the structure located on Lot 2 of the existing PUD
do not match Exhibit "A" of Ordinance 1142. As a result, the orientation of the Community
Bank facility to be constructed on Lot 1 as well as the layout of the parking areas of Lot 1 differ
from Exhibit "A" and are adjustments required to fit onto Lot 1. Changes of configuration of
building layout, parking layout, and access road path have occurred throughout the PUD and
affect the layout of Lot 1 as the access road was not constructed in a fashion to allow the angled
building layout included in Exhibit "A" of Ordinance 1142. The submitted building and parking
layout and subject application allow Lot 1 to be utilized without re-configuring the existing
access road.
The subject request for PUD amendment further requests the use of area lighting utili zing
25 '-0" light poles. It is likely the original intent of Ordinance 1142 was to prevent light
pollution onto adjoining residential properties to the greatest extent practicable by
creating a requirement more stringent than that of the City Fairhope Zoning Ordinance.
As a result, Ordinance 1142 requires light poles be no taller than the 8' shadowbox fence
along the east property line.
1
December 4, 20 I 7
Planning Commission Minutes
Staff recommends that the rezoning be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:
1. The light standards shall be no taller than the fence to be constructed at the rear property
line, i.e. the original lighting requirements of Ordinance 1142 shall remain in effect.
Mr. Dyas asked how the original PUD was constructed not in conformance with the
approved design and Mr. Dyess responded he is unsure and each site would have to be
looked at to see what changes were approved administratively. Dr. Thayer stated 25'
light poles would be overlooking the residential backyards. Mr. Dyess stated the
applicant requested the 25' poles but staff does not support the request. Mrs. Bryant
stated the original design has the road and parking in the rear and this proposed design
has a drive in the front.
Neil Polen, applicant, addressed the Commission saying they have worked with staff to
present the best design. He stated they would like to have the 25' light poles for safety
reasons but will agree to the 8' requirement.
Mr. Turner opened the public hearing.
Mac Walcott of 12330 Live Oak Street-He asked how the PUD was changed. Mr.
Turner explained PUDs typically outline character, square footage, density, and uses but
not necessarily building orientation. Mr. Dyas asked if parking and road reconfiguration
are minor changes and Mr. Turner said no, but the angle of the building may have been
viewed by previous staff as a minor change. Mr. Dyas asked who has the authority to
make changes and Mr. Dyess responded PUDs are designed to be flexible and staff does
have some authority to approve minor changes. Mr. Walcott asked what happens if staff
deems the change as more than minor. Mr. Dyess stated a PUD amendment such as this
would be done. Mrs. Bryant asked how the Commission can change the design when
they don't know what was originally approved. Mr. Dyess stated the original layout is in
the packet. Mr. Dyas asked if this will set a precedent and Mr. Dyess responded no, the
scope ofreview is only applicable to this property. Mr. Turner stated this PUD is 14
years old. Mrs. Bryant asked if the drawings included with the PUD for approval are just
for illustration and the site plan is where there is a firm design. Mr. Dyess stated the
approved PUD shows enough information and the proposed design was significant
enough to require this PUD amendment.
Gary Gover of 300 Lincoln Street -He noted there is not a sidewalk proposed on the
south side of the lot and he requested one be added to connect the site to existing
neighborhoods. Mr. Turner stated sidewalks would be a function of the site plan and Mr.
Dyess agreed.
Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing.
Art Dyas made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to approve the rezoning
request with the following condition:
1. The light standards shall be no taller than the fence to be constructed at the rear property
line, i.e. the original lighting requirements of Ordinance 1142 shall remain in effect.
Ralph Thayer 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously.
SR 17.03 Request of Community Bank Coast for Site Plan approval of Community
Bank, Neil Polen. The property is located on the northeast comer of the intersection of
Greeno Road (a.k.a. US Hwy. 98) and Edwards Avenue, at 200 N. Greeno Road. Mr.
Dyess gave the staff report saying the applicant is requesting site plan approval for
Community Bank, located on Lot 1 of the Greeno Professional Village PUD. The
Greeno Professional Village PUD was approved April 8, 2002 via Ordinance 1142, case
number ZC 02.01. The development requirements of case number Z C 02.01 / Ordinance
2
December 4, 2017
Plannin g Commission Minutes
1142 requires a site plan review by the City of Fairhope Planning Commission as we ll as
the Fairhope City Council before building permits may be issued within the PUD . The
applicant provided a supporting document describing six (6) LID techniques to be used
on the project and has requested a waiver of the remaining LID techniques. The waiver
of the remaining LID techniques is acknowledged in staff's recommendation for the site
plan review. Staff recommends APPROVAL of the site plan with the following
conditions:
1. Acceptance of the applicant's request for a waiver often (10) LID techniques for
surface drainage processing. The third-party engineer h as verified that he
submitted drainage system comprised of six (6) LID techniques removes 80% of
the total suspended solids (TSS) from the site's drainage, and by submitting six
LID techniques the applicant has comp lied with the spirit and desired outcome of
the LID requirement s. Further, staff is preparing an amendment to the City of
Fairhope Subdivision Regulations, Article V, Section F.11., removing the
required using often (10) LID techniques though retaining the use of LID
techniques to attain 80% TSS removal.
2. Approval of Case ZC 17-17, a rezoning request of subject property to amend
Ordinance 1142 allowing the changes to the building layout and parking layout in
the subject application.
Mr. Dyess stated there is not a sidewalk shown on the south side of the property, but staff
would support one as a condition of approval. Mrs. MacKellar stated the sidewalk along
Edwards is on the opposite si de of the street. Mr. Turner opened the floor to public
comments . No one was present to speak. Mr. Dyas asked if there is room in the right-of-
way for a sidewalk on the north side of Edwards Avenue to connect the existing
subdivision to the east.
Art Dyas made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to approve the site plan with
the following conditions:
1. Acceptance of the applicant's request for a waiver often (10) LID techniques for
surface drainage processing. The third-party engineer has verified that he
submitted drainage system comprised of six (6) LID techniques removes 80% of
the total suspended solids (TSS) from the site's drainage, and by submitting six
LID techniques the applicant has complied with the spirit and desired outcome of
the LID requirements. F urther, staff is preparing an amendment to the City of
Fairhope Subdivision Regulations, Aliicle V, Section F .11., removing the
required using of ten (10) LID techniques though retaining the use of LID
techniques to attain 80% TSS removal.
2. Approval of Case ZC 17 -17, a rezoning request of subject property to amend
Ordinance 1142 allowing the changes to the building layout and parking layout in
the subject application.
3 . A sidewalk shall be installed on a long the south prope11y line of the subject site
on the n011h side of Edwards Avenue.
Ralph Thayer 2 nd the motion.
Mrs . Bryant stated the sidewalk will not connect to anything because the ex isting
sidewalk for Edwards Avenue is on the south side of the street. Mrs . MacKellar asked if
this project meets the new parking requirements for Greeno Road. Mr. Dyess responded
those parking requirements are not in place at this time but no, it would not meet the
proposed an1endments. Mrs. Bryant noted this proposal has less parking in the front than
the property to the n011h.
3
December 4, 2017
Planning Commiss ion Minutes
The motion carried unanimously.
ZC 17.18 Public hearing to consider the request of the Annette Sanders to rezone
property from R-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential District to R-4 Low
Density Single Family Residential District. The property is located at 401 N. Mobile
Street. Mr. Dyess gave the staff report saying the applicant is requesting a rezoning of
102 'x 728' lot from the existing R-2 Medium Density Single-Family Residential District
to the R-4 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District. The subject prope1ty is
nearest the North Village Node where the Publix is located. The development pattern
around this village node is more dense as prescribed by the Comprehensive Plan.
However, the subject property is located well outside the area of dense development and
is located in an area predominantly single family residential. The requested R-4 zoning
will introduce a higher density and a housing type such as apartment/multi-family which
is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This rezoning has the potential to disrupt a
well-established single-family neighborhood and alter is character significantly. The
introduction of R-4 into an area predominantly comprised of R-2 Single Family
residential would be out of character with the surrounding properties. The R-2 zoning
district does not allow short-term rentals. The proposed R-4 does allow short term
rentals. The introduction of a short-term rental property into an area predominantly
comprised of a traditional single family neighborhood would introduce a use and related
impacts that are inconsistent with the character of the area. Staff is aware of a code
violation case regarding the subject property related to short term rental of t he subject
property. The area of North Mobile Street is predominantly zoned R-2. The R-2 zoning
is exclusively for single family homes, the proposed R-4 allows single family, two
family, town houses and apartments. The introduction of higher densities and multi-
family uses are inconsistent with adjacent properties. Staff recommends the rezoning
request be DENIED due to failure to meet the criteria provided in A1ticle II.C. l.e. of the
City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance.
Mrs. Sanders addressed the Commission saying s he purchased the property in 2014 and
built a guest house with garage for family and friends. She provided pictures and a
narrative to the Commission. She explained the long term rentals in the area are much
more of a detriment than her short-term rental. She stated she helps Fairhope by paying
taxes for a business and directs her clients to Downtown to shop and eat.
Mr. Turner opened the public hearing.
Rob Stankoski of 8335 Gayfer Road Ext. -He addressed the Commission on behalf of
the residents in the adjacent neighborhood. He stated they are opposed to the accessory
dwelling unit on the subject prope1ty. He explained the existing building is not what was
submitted and approved by the City for construction. He said the applicant is advertising
and renting the property on AirBnB as a short-term rental which is not an allow use in R-
2. He asked the Commission to deny the request.
Terry Passman of 400 N. Mobile Street -He stated the right-of-way in this area is a
narrow gravel drive and the increased traffic is a potential danger.
Gail Diederich of219 Perdido Avenue -She presented a petition from the neighborhood
to deny the request. She stated the area is a residential neighborhood and not a
commercial area.
Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing .
Mr. Dyess stated the C ity is aware of the illegal short-term rental and it is being pursued.
Mr. Peterson stated he has enjoyed staying in AirBnBs in the past, but he also sees the
4
December 4, 2017
Planning Commissio n Minutes
concerns of the neighborhood. Mrs. Bryant stated the accessory dwelling units are a
different issue than the rezoning. She said short-term rentals are an enforcement issue.
Mr. Dyess stated this zoning change is not compatible with the ex isting neighborhood.
Dr. Thayer stated New Orleans is over-run by AirBnBs. Mr. Dyess stated the City's
regulations need to catch up to the new trends and we can look at strengthening our
regulations to include best practices and establish appropriate locations. Mrs. Sanders
stated she has already been to court for the zoning infraction and has paid all her fines.
She stated she has received a business license to rent for 30 days or more. She also added
the Police Chief conducted traffic counts on N. Mobile Street. Mr. Turner said this
request if approved would put R-4 in the middle of all R-2 zoned property and that is spot
zonmg.
Richard Peterson made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to deny the rezoning
request due to the failure to meet the criteria provided in Article II.C. l .e. of the City of
Fairhope Zoning Ordinance.
Rebecca Bryant 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously.
ZC 17.19 Public hearing to consider the request of HMR, LLC to establish initial zoning of
TR Tourist Resort District conditional upon annexation into the City of Fairhope for
property to be known as Camellia at the Colony, Tim Lawley. The property is located on the
west side of Battles Road just south of Watershed South subdivision. Ms. Milford gave the staff
report saying the subject property is currently unzoned and approximately 1.5 acres. The
applicant desires to modify the previously approved Co lony at the Grand Tourist Resort
(approximately 18 6 .2 acres) District to include the Camellia at the Colony parcel. The applicant
proposes the additional 1.5 acres to be included in the low-rise portion of the overall Colony at
the Grand Tourist Resort Development. The additional acreage added is proposed to be
Camellia at the Colony, which will be annexed into the City and consist of 7 single family lots
that conform to the minimum lot and layout standards outlined in the TR District Regulations for
the Colony at the Grand. The total acreage of the Colony at the Grand TR District development
will be 187.7 acres after the annexation, per the engineer ofrecord. The additional land is
contiguous w ith the TR District; per the TR District provisions in the Zoning Ordinance, the
subject 1.5 acres can be added to the existing Land Use Map.
Staff recommends approval contingent upon the fo llowing conditions:
1. The pending water and sewer issue infrastructure issues shall be resolved between the
applicant and the City of Fairhope Water and Sewer Department.
2. All aspects of the Colony at the Grand TR District shall remain as is, unless otherwise
specified in the subject application.
Mr. Dyess stated this is a rezoning request but there are concerns with the water and
sewer. He explained this is the first round of submittals since the moratorium and there
are four cases where th e City utility superintendents have not concurred with the
applicant on design. He stated the Water and Sewer Construction Specifi cations are part
of the Subdivision Regulations and gravity sewer is the preferred method. However, low
pressure and grinder pumps can be approved but they must meet certain standards and
they need a waiver. He said the waiver must be advertised and it was not for these cases.
Mr. Dyas said rules and regulations have obviously not been followed and we want to
break away from how it's always been done and if the specifications state gravity shall be
used then so be it. Mr. Dyess said gravity is the preferred method and a waiver can be
granted for lo w pressure if the criteria are met. Mr. Peterson explained gravity systems
can help w ith our capacity issues and the criteria are not to restrict development but to
5
December 4, 2017
Planning Commission Minutes
protect the city residents and property owners. Mr. Robinson asked if this case can be
heard if the waiver wasn't advertised. Mr. Dyess responded the zoning case can be heard
but not the subdivision case. Mr. Lawley explained the required forms have been
submitted and they meet the criteria to allow a low pressure system. He said this is his
first time to be required to submit this information. Mr. Peterson stated he did not see the
information and Mr. Lawley responded it is in the detailed report. Mr. Dyas asked the
applicants to work with staff and the Commission while we get a grip on what's going
on.
Mr. Turner opened the public hearing .
Ray Hammock of 525 Owl's Nest Place -President of Watershed HOA -He stated it is
hard to separate the two cases. He said the TR District allows short-term rentals and they
request the zoning be denied.
Mac Walcott of 12330 Live Oak Street -He said the low pressure system is existing and
it is the easiest way to provi de sewer. He passed out an article to the Commission. He
said the regulations are clear and if there is a sewer moratorium then the City should just
say it. He stated a 22 unit apartment project was killed last week due to the se rules. He
said the developers cannot get comments or answers from the utilities. Mr. Dyas
responded that just because the design meets the standards it doesn't mean the system can
handle it. Mr. Dyess added these regulations are not new and maybe they haven't been
followed in the past, but staff is trying to make sure they are followed now. He added it
takes time to get a handle on the new requirements and processes. Dr. Thayer asked why
the Commission is voting on the zoning cha nge and Mr. Dyess responded it meet s the
criteria.
Effie Thompson of 18182 Woodland Drive -She said she was not not ifi ed of this
meeting until earlier in the day. She asked if the property would be rentals and she stated
concerns with water run-off. Mr. Turner stated the requested zoning is a special district
for this specific area and is different than the tourist zonings Downtown.
Shelly West of 159 Mulberry Lane -She asked if a traffic study was done and how the
stormwater will be handled. Ms. Milford stated the site did not meet the density
requirements for a traffic study. Mr. Lawley explained the overall site was approved for
630 units but the final development will be under 400. Mr. Turner stated a traffic study
only makes recommendations for improvements and is not a traffic count.
David Lemons of 63 5 Carolina Court -He said the depth of the lots will be limited due to
the golf course. He also stated concerns with traffic and the multiple driveways onto
Battles Road.
Ann Miller of 18160 Woodland Drive -She asked why the applicant is re questing a
tourist resort zoning if it will be residential houses. Ms. Milford said the property will be
developed like the A zalea at the Colony subdivision and the zoning was the result of a
court case .
Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner clo sed the public hearing.
Art Dyas made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to approve contingent upon
the following conditions:
1. The pending water and sewer issue infrastructure issues shall b e resolved b etween
the applicant and the City of Fairhope Wate r and Sewer Department.
2. All aspects of the Colony at the Grand TR District shall remain as is , unless
otherwise specified in the subj ect application.
3. The property shall be Low Rise Residential Zone.
6
December 4, 2017
Planning Commission Minutes
Ralph Thayer 2nd the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: A YE -Art
Dyas, Rebecca Bryant, Charles Johnson, Ralph Thayer, Lee Turner, and Tim Simmonds.
NAY -Hollie MacKellar and Richard Peterson. ABSTAIN -Jay Robinson.
SD 17.31 Public hearing to consider the request of HMR, LLC for Preliminary and
Final plat approval of Camellia at the Colony, a 7-lot subdivision, Tim Lawley. The
property is located on the west side of Battles Road just south of Watershed South
subdivision. The applicant requested to table the application.
ZC 17.20 Public hearing to consider the request of the City of Fairhope Planning
and Zoning Department for a proposed amendment to Article IV, Section E.
Parking of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to Low Impact Development
requirements and the Greeno Road Corridor Parking, Wayne Dyess. Mr. Dyess
gave the staff report saying the City of Fairhope adopted the mixed use village concept as
early as 2001 and re-enforced this development concept in the 2004 Comprehensive Plan
update. The 2015 Plan Update further clarified the concept by providing preferred sizes
and locations for village centers and emphasized walkability. In accordance with the
Comprehensive Plan, Greeno Road corridor is comprised of two village centers. North
Village, located at the intersection Greeno Road/US 98 south of Parke r Road (location of
the Publix Shopping Center), and the second village at the intersection of Greeno Road
and Fairhope A venue. The Comprehensive Plan also calls for two commercial nodes at
the intersection of Twin Beech Road and Greeno Road and C.R. 32 and Greeno Road.
The City Fairhope has adopted a planning method where the Comprehensive Plan
identifies the locations and sizes of village centers and the Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision regulations provide the legal method to fulfill these planning goals .
However, to date these districts have not been used on the zoning map . In order to
effectuate the village development concept, the Fairhope Zoning Ordinance contains
three Village Districts in Aliicle VI.:
1. CVC Community Village Center which serves as a large walkable mixed-use
community center of approximately 40 acres and 100,000 and 350,000 square feet
of non-residential uses.
2 . NVC Neighborhood Village Center is a smaller mixed-use center of
approximately 5 + acres established to that support s the scale and character of
existing neighborhoods within a I-mile radius.
3. VRM Village Residential Mix district intended to create a compact neighborhood
with land use arrangement compatible with the village centers. The predominant
land use is residential.
These three village districts are the "building blocks" of the Fairhope village concept.
The CVC district is intended to be located at the intersection of two arterial street s, in
conjunction with village locations and sizes prescribed by the Comprehensive Plan.
The village center designated for Fairhope A venue and Greeno is currently deve loped in
a typical suburban pattern with large parking lots dominating the streetscape with a low
walkability. Overparking based on single use parking requirements is prevalent. This
overparking creates a visual blight of property that could otherwise be used for compact
development purposes. The Fairhope village concept is typical of the rural to urban
transect contained in the Smart Code. The Smart Code is a form-based code that
incorporates Smart Growth and New Urbanism principles. It is a unified development
ordinance, addressing development at all scales of design, from regional planning on
7
December 4, 2017
Planning Commission Minutes
down to the building signage. The Greeno Road/Fairhope Village Center is clearly
defined by both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. However, the areas
beyond the village center aren't well defined and has created difficulty in the rezoning
process. The current sin gle-family residential zoning is not practical along Greeno Road
due to the high volume of traffic and related adverse impacts. A better method to address
this gateway must be developed. Pursuant to the 2016 Plan, the Development
Framework, provides the following objective: "Guide commercial and high density
growth to locations that can be efficiently and effectively served with utilities and public
services such as police, fire, and public works." A strategy under this objective calls for
the City to "Define the commercial growth of Greeno Rd. with edges, thus, ensuring an
appropriate ending point." By defining the gateway areas and the Community Village
Center, criteria can be established to carry out the intent of the Comprehensive Plan by
identifying centers and edges. The parking amendment is one step towards attaining that
goal. The Greeno Road corridor is the primary entrance into Fairhope and serves as a
"gateway" into the City. Gateways are an important placemaking and urban de sign tool.
The serve to provide a sen se of arrival, distinguishable from other roadways by its scenic
and visual interesting quality. They also help define the village boundaries. Mr. Dyess
requested the Commission hold the public hearing tonight but wait until the January
meeting to vote.
Mr. Turner opened the public hearing.
Anna Miller of 257 Westley Street -She asked if a commercial overlay is being proposed
for Greeno Road and how the boundaries will be determined. She said she agreed with
the visual enhancement from Greeno Road but also wants to make sure the residential
properties are protected for visual blight. She also recommended more public input be
allowed as well.
Mac Walcott of 12330 Live Oak Street -He asked if this amendment will affect the
Comprehensive Plan redo.
Bobby Green of 415 Maple Street -He said if this is good idea for Greeno Road then
why not apply it to every street in Fairhope. He said there are places on Greeno Road
that may change to commercial and this will put the parking abutting residential
properties.
Debra Green of 415 Maple Street -She asked if PUDs will be required to put their
parking in the rear.
Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing.
Mr. Dyess responded to the comments say in g existing PUDs would govern their
property. He stated this amendment would only apply to the established corridor and
villages, but staff can lo ok for other areas t o incorporate these same requirements . He
explained the amendment would not have anything to do with the tmderlying z oning but
be specific to the defined corridor.
SD 17.29 Public hearing to consider the request ofHMR, LLC for Preliminary plat
approval of Battles Trace, Phase 5, a 73-lot subdivision, Tim Lawley. Th e property is
located on the north side of Battles Road, no1th of the Colony at the Grand. The
applicant requested to table the application.
SD 17.30 Public hearing to consider the request of HMR, LLC for Preliminary plat
approval of Fox Hollow, Phase 2, a 59-lot subdivision, Tim Lawley. The property is
located on the south side of Morphy A venue, between County Road 13 and Thompson
8
December 4,2017
Planning Commission Minutes
Hall Road. Mr. Dyess gave the staff report saying Fox Hollow Phases 1 and 2 received
preliminary subdivision plat approval on June 6, 2016 (Case SD 16-11) and Phase 1
received final plat approval July 3, 2017 (Case SD 17-15). Subject application modifies
the previously-approved phase 2 plat via addition of three lots as well as removal of a
"stub" street in phase 2 to allow one of the additionally-request lots. Staff
recommendation is to APPROVE the amended preliminary plat as requested.
Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, Mr. Turner
closed the public hearing.
Mrs. Bryant asked if the stormwater runoffs are calculated by the maximum allowable
buildout for each lot and Mr. Lawley responded it is based of an assumed square footage
for each lot as well as the roads and sidewalks. Mrs. MacKellar asked if the common
areas are recreation or detention and Mr. Lawley answered they will be wet ponds, so
they could be both. Mr. Turner commented they did a great job on the bridge and
sidewalk along Morphy A venue.
Ralph Thayer made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to approve the amended
preliminary plat as requested.
Charles Johnson 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously.
UR 17.06 Request of Southern Light for an 11.52.11 Review and approval of the
proposed installation of approximately 708 linear feet of fiber optic cable. The
project will run along the west side of Greeno Road and the north side of Nichols Avenue
to service the Warehouse Bakery at 759 Nichols Avenue. Ms. Milford gave the staff
report saying the Warehouse Bakery is within the City of Fairhope Planning, Permit and
Police Jurisdictions. The City owns the right of way in this location. Southern Light
proposes to dig two (2) four (4') foot wide and twenty-four-inch deep (24") pits for bore
machine and handhole placement. Southern Light also proposes installing two (2) one
and one quarter inch (11/4") HDPE SDR 11 conduits or better. Fiber optic cable is
proposed in one (1) of two (2) conduits and a twelve (12) gauge copper locate wire shall
be placed in the remaining conduit. Southern Light will close any open trenches or holes
overnight and properly flag/cone them during construction. The applicant anticipates two
(2) full day s of construction. The City will allow some trenching with a vibratory plow
as long as the utility work is at the very back of the ROW and if a lot is not built out.
Vibratory plows leave no open trench. No open trenches shall be allowed. Directional
boring shall be u sed in sensitive areas, such as under roads, in proximity to trees, on
finished lots, etc. Staff recommendation is to approve conditional upon the following:
1. The applicant shall follow the general comments related to utility work, as
stated above.
2. All mechanical and locator equipment shall be painted Munsell green.
3. Contractor shall attend a pre -construction meeting with City Department Heads prior
to issuance of a ROW permit.
Richard Peterson made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to approve
conditional upon the following:
1. The applicant shall follow the general comments related to utility work, as
stated above.
2. All mechanical and locator equipment shall be painted Munsell green.
3. Contractor shall attend a pre-construction meeting with City Department Heads prior
to issuance of a ROW pe1mit.
Ralph Thayer 2nd the motion and the motion canied unanimously.
9
December 4, 2017
Planning Commission Minutes
Resolution 2017-02 -Public hearing to consider the request of the City of Fairhope
Public Utilities to accept Resolution 2017-02 amending Article VI, Section F.C. and
H.2. of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations, Emily Boyett. Mrs. Boyett
gave the staff report saying this amendment will authorize the Director of Operations to
revise the Construction Standards within the Standards Specifications for Constructing
Sanitary Sewer Facilities and Water Facilities. Mr. Peterson stated the regulations
contain design criteria and technical criteria that sets the level of service that is the
expectation for the Planning Commission to review. He explained due to new
technology, materials, and ways the design criteria can be incorporated into a project then
the technical side of these things can change. He said this amendment will allow more
options for the technical side of things and an easier process to insert language into the
Construction Standards.
Mac Walcott of 12330 Live Oak Street -He said he believes there is a process that is not
being followed. He asked if the regulations are changed tonight, then would a project
that has already been submitted be required to meet the new standards and Mr. Turner
said no. Mr. Walcott asked to see the changes highlighted. He also asked if there is a
sewer capacity issue in Fairhope. Mr. Peterson responded yes, when it rains hard there is.
Mr. Robinson asked who is this amendment taking the authority from and Mr. Watson
responded the Planning Commission because it is part of the Subdivision Regulations.
Mr. Robinson asked if the City Council votes on this and Mr. Watson said no, the
Planning Commission is the authority for the Subdivision Regulations.
Mr. Turner opened the public hearing.
Mr. Turner said staff is bringing up applicable issues and are making sure things are not
overlooked. He also stated Mr. Peterson is doing a great job reviewing each of these
projects. Mr. Robinson said people want to see consistency. Mr. Dyess stated times
change and staff just wants to make sure everything is done correctly even if that means
things change from the way it was done in the past. Mr. Walcott asked ifthere are other
mechanisms for recourse. Mr. Dyas said there are issues the Commission has to
understand and it will take time.
Having no one else to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing.
Art Dyas made a motion to accept Resolution 2017-02 amending Article VI , Section F.C.
and H.2. of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations authorizing the Director of
Operations to revise the Construction Standards within the Standards Specifications for
Constructing Sanitary Sewer Faci lities and Water Facilities.
Ralph Thayer 2nd the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: A YE -Art
Dyas, Rebecca Bryant, Charles Johnson, Ralph Thayer, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar,
Tim Simmonds and Jay Robinson. NAY -none. ABSTAIN -Richard Peterson.
Resolution 2017-03 -Public hearing to consider the request of the City of Fairhope
Planning and Zoning Department to accept Resolution 2017-03 amending Article V,
Section F . Storm Water Standards of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations,
Wayne Dyess. Mr. Dyess gave the staff report saying this amendment will simplify the
Low Impact Development (LID) requirements. He said the percentages will not change
only how they are required to meet them.
Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, Mr. Turner
closed the public hearing.
December 4,2017
Planning Commi ss ion Minutes
Mr. Turner stated these changes do not have anything to do with the volume but only the
treatment. He said the last rain event was 4 ½" and it acted like an 8 ½" event and the
only difference is the County has opened all the culverts.
Art Dyas made a motion to table Resolution 2017-03 to the January meeting.
Ralph Thayer 2nd the motion and the motion canied unanimously.
Having no further business, Art Dyas made a motion to adjourn. Ralph Thayer 2 nd the
motion and the otion canied unanimous! he meeting was adjourned at 8:06 PM.
~
Lee Turner, Chairman
11