Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03-02-2020 Planning Commission Agenda Packet
Kalin Wilson Atrp,·or Co1mdl ,I/embers Kel'in G. Boone Rober1 A. Brown Jack Burrell, ACMO Jimmy Conyers Jay Robinson Lisa A. Hanks, MMC City Cl.erk Deborah A. Smith, CPA nry rr,asurer 16 J Norrh Section Srreet P.O. Drawer 429 Fairhope. Alabama 36533 25 l -928-2136 251·928-6776 Fax 11~vw.fairhopeaLgov 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes City of Fairhope Planning Commission Agenda 5:00 PM Council Chambers March 2, 2020 • February 6, 2020 3. Consideration of Agenda Items: A . ZC 19.08 Public hearing to consider the request of the City of Fairhope Planning and Zoning Department for a proposed amendment to Article V. Special Districts and Uses in the Zoning Ordinance to establish a Greeno Road Corridor (GRC) Overlay District. B. ZC 20.02 Public hearing to consider the request of FST Linda Walker to rezoned property from RA Residential/ Agriculture District to R-1 Low Density Single Family Residential District. The property is approximately 7.9 acres and is located on the south side of Morphy Avenue between Bishop Road and County Road 13, at 8800 Morphy Avenue . PPIN #: 14591 C. SD 20.05 Public hearing to consider the request of Provision Investments, LLC for Multiple Occupancy Project approval of Thompson Hall Quadplexes, a 16-unit multiple occupancy project. The property is approxi mately 1.98 acres and is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of County Road 44 (a.k.a Twin Beech Road) and Thompson Hall Road. PPIN #: 14615 D. SD 20.06 Public hearing to consider the request of Wayne and Sherry Mozley for plat approval of Mozley Estate Farms, a 3-lot minor subdivision . The property is approximately 10 .3 acres and is located on the north side of Dominion Drive just east of Mary Ann Beach Road. E. SD 20.09 PPIN #: 242283 Public hearing to consider the request of BYC, LLC for plat approval of NW Corner Hwy . 181-Hwy. 104 Subdivision, a 2-lot minor division. The property is approximately 56 .69 acres and is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of State Hwy. 181 and State Hwy. 104. PPIN #: 98366 F. SD 20.10 Public hearing to consider the request of Joyce Hagle for plat approval of Guthrie Estates, a 2-lot minor subdivision . The property is appro ximately 32.14 acres and is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of County Road 13 and County Road 32. PPIN #: 17754 G. SD 20.11 Public hearing to consider the request of Two Hands Design & Development, LLC for Preliminary plat approval of Hill Top Subdivision, Phase II, an 8-lot division . The property is approximately 4.71 acres and is located on the west side of S. Section Street and north of Hill Top Subdivision, Phase I. PPIN #: 40591 H. SD 20.12 Public hearing to consider the request of The Retirement Systems of Alabama for Final plat approval of Battles Trace, Phase 6, a 45-lot subdivision . The property is approximately 15 .2 acres and is located on the west side of S. Section Street approximately½ mile north of Battles Road . PPIN #: 20948 and 63314 I. SD 20 .13 Public hearing to consider the request of the Highlands at Fairhope Village, LLC for Preliminary and Final plat approval of Highlands at Fairhope Village Subdivision, a 24-lot subdivision. The property is approximately 7 .34 acres and is located on the north side of Fly Creek Avenue behind Publix Shopping Center. PPIN #: 369509 J. SR 20.01 Request of Wise Properties, LLC for Site Plan approval of Pier Street Marketplace, a 4 -unit project. The property is approximately .20 acres and is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Pier Avenue and S. Mobile Street, at 15 Pier Avenue . PPIN #: 16630 4. Old/New Business • Agricultural and Rural Subdivision discussion • Greenspace discussion • Submittal requirements discussion • By-laws and Procedure discussion 5. Adjourn February 3, 20 20 Planning Commission Minutes The Planning Commission met Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:00 PM at the City Municipal Complex, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers. Present: Lee Turner, Chairperson; Art Dyas; Hollie MacKellar; Clarice Hall-Black; Richard Peterson; Robert Brown, Com1cil Liaison; Buford King, Development Services Manager; Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager; Mike Jeffrie s, Planner; Carla Davis, Planner; Samara Walley, Planner; Emily Boyett, Secretary; and Ken Watson, City Attorney Absent: Rebecca Bryant and Harry Kohler Chairman Turner called the meeting to order at 5 :04 PM and announced the meeting is being recorded. Mr. Turner announced agenda items D . and E. will be heard first. UR 20.01 Request of Mediacom for an 11.52.11 Utility Review and approval of the proposed underground installation of approximately 1,106 linear foot of fiber optic cable and CATV cable. The project will nm along Morphy A venue from Edington Street east to Hollow Haven Street. Mrs. Walley gave the staff report saying the applicant proposes utilizing directional boring. No open trenches shall be allowed. Staff recommendation is to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. Submission of plans and profiles ( drawn to scale) verifying the new conduit has the required 36" separation prior to the issuance of a Right-of-Way permit; and 2. Consultation with the City 's horticulturist, Paul Merchant, to determine the required depth of bore so that no trees are impacted by the project, and reflect this depth on the plans and profiles . Mr. Dyas asked if performance deposits are required to cover expenses if there is damage to city utilities and Mr. Peterson responded no, if there is damage the contractor is billed for the cost of the repair. Richard Peterson made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. Submission of plans and profiles ( drawn to scale) verifying the new conduit has the required 36" separation prior to the issuance of a Right-of-Way permit; and 2. Consultation with the City's horticulturist, Paul Merchant, to determine the required depth of bore so that no trees are impacted by the project, and reflect this depth on the plans and profiles. Art Dyas 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -Art Dyas, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar, Richard Peterson, Clarice Hall-Black, and Kevin Boone. NAY -none. UR 20.02 Request of Southern Light, LLC for an 11.52.11 Utility Review and approval of the proposed underground installation of approximately 991 linear foot of fiber optic cable. The project will run along Morphy A venue, Y om1g Street, and Horns Lane. Ms. Davis gave the staff repo1t saying the applicant proposes utilizing directional boring. No open trenches shall be allowed. Staff recommendation is to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1 February 3, 2020 Planning Co mmi ss ion Minute s 1. The applicant shall follow the general comments related to utility work, as stated in the staff report. 2. Applicant and applicant 's contractor shall follow the Right-of Way Installation and Permitting and Work Procedures docwnent provided by the Building Official. Mr. Boone asked how As-Builts are provided for this type of job and Mr. King stated he would have to confer with the Building Department for an answer. Richard Peterson made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall follow the general comments related to utility work, as stated in the staff report. 2. Applicant and applicant's contractor shall follow the Right-of Way Installation and Permitting and Work Procedures document provided by the Building Official. Art Dyas 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE-Art Dyas, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar, Richard Peterson, Clarice Hall-Black, and Kevin Boone. NAY -none. SD 20.04 Public hearing to consider the request of Wise Properties TN, LLC for plat approval of Bancroft and Pine Subdivision, a 2-lot minor division, Larry Smith. The propeity is approximately .4 acres and is located at the northeast comer of the intersection of Bancroft Street and Pine Street. Mr. Jeffries gave the staff report saying the property is zoned B-4 Business and Professional District and is also located in the Central Business District (CBD). He noted the existing building on proposed Lot 2 will be located within 5 ' of the new property line and will need to meet fire rating and building code. Staff recommendation is to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. The building on proposed Lot 2 shall meet the fire rating and all current building codes. 2. Add signature block for Fairhope Gas. 3. Amend the first note with one asterisk under Building Setbacks to read as follows: ''Non-Residential buildings in the CBD shall be built at the right-of-way line , unless a courtyard , plaza or other public open space is proposed." Larry Smith addressed the Commission saying the plat has been revised to move the lot line further from the existing building to bring it into conformance. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing . Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. Art Dyas made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. The building on proposed Lot 2 shall meet the fire rating and all current building codes. 2. Add signature block for Fairhope Gas. 3. Amend the first note with one asterisk under Building Setbacks to read as follows: "Non-Residential buildings in the CBD shall be built at the right-of-way line , unless a courtyard , plaza or other public open space is proposed." Hollie MacKellar 2 nd the motion and the motion canied unanimously with the following vote: A YE -Art Dyas, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar , Richard Peterson, Clarice Hall- Black, and Kevin Boone. NAY -none. 2 Febru ary 3, 2020 Planning Commission Minutes SD 20.05 Public hearing to consider the request of Provision Investments, LLC for Multiple Occupancy P1·oject approval of Thompson Hall Quadplexes , a 16 -unit development, Larry Smith. The project approximately 1.98 acres and is located at the northeast comer of the intersection of County Road 44 and Thompson Hall Road. Mr. King gave the staff report saying the property is unzoned in Baldwin County but falls within Fairhope ' s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. He noted concerns with the proposed design regarding greenspace. Staff recommendation is to TABLE to allow greenspace revisions as described in the staff report. Larry Smith addressed the Commission saying the County's highway construction setback took a half acre of the subject property because County Road 44 is designated as a "collector." He stated he disagrees with staff regarding what can be counted and calculated as greenspace . Mr. Turner asked how the proposed design meets the spirit of the regulations and provide a play area for future residents of this development and Mr. Smith stated the proposed grass swale is 6" and 20' long and two-thirds of the prope1ty is landscaped. Mr. Dyas asked if the swale is calculated in the drainage and Mr. Smith responded no. Mr. Smith asked for clarification as to the way greenspace is to be calculated. Mrs. MacKellar stated she wants to be consistent in how the calculations are done and said more review is needed. Mr. Turner suggested holding the case over until the March meeting to allow clarification. Mr. Smith requested to hold the case over to the March meeting. SD 20.08 Public hearing to consider the request of 24 7 Development Partne.rs of Alabama, LLC for Preliminary plat approval of Summer Lane, a 15-lot subdivision , Casey Hill. The property is approximately 5.22 acres and is located at th e east terminus of Summer Lane and on the west side of S. Section Street. Mr. Jeffri es gave the staff report saying the property is zoned PUD (Planned Unit Development) and has an approved site plan. Staff recommendation is to APPROVE with the following conditions : 1. Add note on the plat to reflect fence restrictions per the approved PUD Ordinance #1661. 2. Add lot coverage for principle structure and accessory structure per the approved PUD Ordinance #1661. 3. Add maximum building height per the approved PUD Ordinance #1661. 4. Add minimum structure separation between primary and accesso1y structure per the approved PUD Ordinance # 1661 . 5. Add note that states "All lots shall be accessed from the rear alley." 6. Add Finished Floor Elevations to the plat for each lot. Mr. Tumer opened the public hearing. Juanie Noland of 11 Pope Court -She stated concerns with the proximity of the alley to her property. Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing. Ms. Hill stated the alley is 15 ' from the property line at the closest point. Art Dyas made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. Add note on the plat to reflect fence restrictions per the approved PUD Ordinance #1661. 3 February 3, 2020 Planning Commission Minutes 2. Add lot coverage for principle structure and accessory structure per the approved PUD Ordinance #1661. 3. Add maximum building height per the approved PUD Ordinance # 1661. 4. Add minimum structure separation between primary and accessory structure per the approved PUD Ordinance # 1661. 5. Add note that states "All lots shall be accessed from the rear alley." 6. Add Finished Floor Elevations to the plat for each lot. Kevin Boone 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE-Art Dyas, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar, Richard Peterson, Clarice Hall-Black, and Kevin Boone. NAY -none. Old/New Business 2020 Agenda Schedule Amendment, Emily Boyett -Mrs. Boyett stated the November meeting date needs to be rescheduled to Thursday, November 5th due to a conflict with the City Council's Organizational meeting. Art Dyas made a motion to move the November meeting date to Thursday , November 5 2020. Richard Peterson 2 nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -Art Dyas, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar, Richard Peterson, Clarice Hall- Black, and Kevin Boone. NAY -none. Family Subdivisions, Buford King -Mr. King explained the city cannot use the term "family" subdivision and staff is looking to possibly revise Article V , Section D.c. Rural Subdivision to address the concerns with these subdivisions. Incomplete Submittals, Buford King-Mr. King stated staff enforces the posted and approved deadlines as well as the required documentation for submittals. He stated late or incomplete submittals will not be accepted. ZC 19.08 Greeno Road Corridor (GRC) Overlay District, Hunter Simmons -Mr. Simmons explained the schedule of dates for the proposed amendment. Mr. Turner announced the next public input meeting for the GRC Overlay District will be Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 5:00PM and will be a roundtable discussion. He said the location is still to be determined but all legal notice requirements will be met. Having no further business , Hollie MacKellar made a motion to adjourn. Art Dyas 2nd the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 PM. Lee Turner, Chainnan Emily Boyett, Secretary 4 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 27, 2020 TO: The Planning Commission FROM: Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager RE: Expected Revisions of the Greeno Road Corridor Overlay Districts Commissioners, First, thank you for your time during the previous six weeks. The additional meetings to discuss the Greeno Road Corridor Overlay Districts (GRC Districts) required many extra hours of your voluntary time. Your time, and the public feedback we received, is reflected in the following proposed amendment. Due to the short time period since our last meeting, and because we accepted feedback as late as possible, staff still needs to review portions of the proposed language with the City’s land use attorney. We simply ran out of time and must produce a draft for your packets today. Some language may change prior to the Planning Commission meeting on Monday, March 2, 2020. We will send the final version to you all via email ASAP. We will also post a copy for the public on the City’s website under Departments > Planning and Development Services > Planning and Zoning > Publications and Forms. To clarify, the language is substantially complete. The regulations have been reviewed, and we do not foresee changes. We will revise sections 4 and 5, namely the regulating plan and the maps to make sure the boundaries we have already discussed are clearly and legally described. We will also be adding an additional illustration to the Frontage Type Diagrams to help clarify impact on corner lots. Your patience is greatly appreciated, and once again, thank you for the time and effort you give to the City of Fairhope. Greeno Road Corridor Districts February 26, 2020 1 I. GRC – Greeno Road Corridor Overlay Districts 1. Intent and Description: This Section I creates the Greeno Road Corridor Overlay Districts (“GRC Districts”) and in general provides certain use and design standards which are applicable in such districts. These provisions are intended to ensure that portions of U.S Highway 98, also known as Greeno Road, within the city limits of Fairhope are developed in a way that is unique to Fairhope, and do not become a more typical congested and unattractive commercial corridor. This is particularly important as a result of significant population growth in the City, and Baldwin County as a whole, more intense uses being developed along the corridor in general, and increases in requests to rezone historically residential properties for commercial uses. 2. Application and Exemptions a. Unless otherwise provided herein, these standards apply to properties and all principal and accessories structures thereon within the GRC Districts, and apply to all use categories. b. In accordance with Alabama law, properties outside the City’s corporate limits are not subject to the City’s Zoning Ordinance, including this Section I. c. Properties zoned single-family residential, i.e. R-1, R-2, and R-3 (excluding R-3 PGH and R-3 TH), are exempt from the requirements of this Section I. d. Properties zoned R-A are exempt from the requirements of this Section I. e. The expansion of existing structures which conform to the requirements of the zoning ordinance prior to this Section I becoming effective, but excluding legal non-conforming structures within the meaning of Article VII, Section B, are exempt from the design standards of this subsections 7 and 8 below, provided that such expansion do not exceed 50 percent of the square footage of the structure as it existed upon this Section I becoming effective. For properties within the GRC Districts a lawful, non-conforming use that ceases for any reason may be reinstated provided that such use is resumed within 365 days. Except as provided in this subsection 2e., the provisions of Article VII relating to non-conformities apply in the GRC Districts. f. Unless otherwise provided in this Section I, all provisions of the Zoning Ordinance shall apply. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this Section I and other provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, this section shall take precedence. g. Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) existing at the time this Section I becomes effective shall be exempt from the requirements of this section only if the exact locations of the structures were approved in the Ordinance creating the PUD or an amendment thereto. 3. Appeals and Variances - Appeals and Variances shall be subject to the same standards contained within Article, II, Section C.3. of this ordinance. 4. Regulating Plan for Districts: Generally, the GRC Districts extend radially from the intersection of the centerline of the right-of way for Highway 98 and the centerline of the right-of-way for roads with a signalized intersection at the time this Section I becomes effective. From north to south, those roads are: Rock Creek Parkway, Parker Road, State Highway 104, Gayfer Ave., Fairhope Ave., Morphy Ave., Nichols Ave., Middle St./Spring Run Rd., and Twin Beech Road. East to west, all parcels which lie entirely within, and the entirety of parcels bisected by, lines running parallel to and 400 feet west and 400 feet east of the centerline Highway 98 are within a GRC District as further defined below. Parcels Greeno Road Corridor Districts February 26, 2020 2 the entirety of which are outside that 800 foot strip are not within a GRC District. Core Districts radiate 250 feet from the above intersections; Buffer Districts radiate 700 feet from those intersections, but exclude the area within Core Districts; and Transitional Districts radiate 3000 feet from those intersections, but exclude the area within Core and Buffer Districts. The following subsections, as well as the GRC District maps, more specifically determine which district a property falls within. a. Core District: Property, located in whole or in part, in a Core District as designated on the GRC Districts Maps shall chose between the frontage type design standards allowed in Table 5-1: GRC Districts Frontage Types. b. Buffer District: Property, located in whole or in part, in a Buffer District as designated on the GRC Districts Maps shall chose between the frontage type design standards allowed in Table 5- 1: GRC Districts Frontage Types, provided, however, no part of the property is within a core district. c. Transitional District: Property, located in whole or in part, in a transitional district as designated on the GRC Districts Maps shall chose between the frontage type design standards allowed in Table 5-1: GRC Districts Frontage Types, provided, however, no part of the property is within a core or buffer district. 5. GRC Districts Maps: Parcels are provided on the maps below as reference. Parcel boundaries are shown as they exist on the City of Fairhope’s Zoning Map at the time this section becomes effective. Greeno Road Corridor Districts February 26, 2020 3 Figure 1: GRC Districts Overview Map 6. Allowable Uses a. The uses allowable within the underlying zoning districts applicable to a particular property within the GRC Districts shall continue to apply, subject to the additional provisions in this Section I. Article III, and the Use Table 3-1 identify the zoning districts created by the zoning ordinance and reflect seven general categories of uses: (1) residential; (2) civic; (3)office; (4) retail; (5) service; (6) manufacturing, and (7) rural. Within each category, specific uses are listed and indicated as either allowed, allowed subject to special conditions, or allowed by special exception. b. Special Provisions for Uses within the Greeno Road Corridor Overlay Districts i. Stand-alone ice vending machines are a prohibited use ii. Stand-alone automatic teller machines (ATMs) are a prohibited use iii. The provisions of Article II, Section C.2 (b) through (g) relating to Site Plan Review and action shall apply to the following: 1. Car wash facilities, both automated and self-serve 2. Any use that includes a drive-through 3. Any hotel, motel, or bed and breakfast with more than 20 rooms 4. Automobile repair Legend -Cor•Datticll Tr•nstion•I Distticll r.:J FH C ty Limits ~P .,etillwilhin F•irhope MOBILE BAY Greeno Rd Corridor Overlay Districts: Overview Map Greeno Road Corridor Districts February 26, 2020 4 5. Automobile service stations 6. Convenience store iv. Parking, unless otherwise allowed in the design standards in subsection 7 below, shall be located to the side and rear of buildings. 7. Design Standards – Frontage Types: Frontage types define how buildings are located on a site, with an emphasis on the area between the primary (front(s)) façade and the lot frontage line(s), which, collectively, create a uniquely Fairhope vision. Table 5-1: GRC Districts Frontage Types Overlay Districts / Frontage Types Core Buffer Transitional Core Street Front Buffer Street Front Transitional Street Front Outdoor Sales/Dining Landscape Screened Internal Circulation Park Permitted subject to general ordinance standards and conditions. Permitted, but requires mandatory Site Plan Review (Article II, Section C.2.) Frontage Type Diagrams (See Attachments) 8. Design Standards – Building Form Four-sided architecture a. Blank, featureless walls are prohibited b. Between 50% and 80% of ground level, street-facing facades of non-residential buildings shall be transparent with glazing. c. Between 25% and 60% of upper floor, street-facing facades of non-residential buildings shall be transparent with glazing. d. Roofs shall be pitched between 6:12 and 12:12, or be flat with parapets or decorative cornices. Roof mounted equipment shall be screened from public view on all sides. Greeno Road Corridor Districts February 26, 2020 6 D E SI GN STAN DARDS FRONTAGE IYPE : BUFFER STREET FRONT LEG E ND Bl'rLD TO j \ RE.t~ (I 01 GR.EENSPAc:;E. BUFPER (10') . I ADDITIONAi. fll'ILOABLE ARJ:..1 SETBACl-:S FLEJG13Le OUTDOOR SJ>ACI:: (JO'\ Lnr L :iymn N o1c~: I I r he fn •nl 1:1c.atlc, 1f 1lw building mu.:-.1 ;-,ccur in the UU1JJ 'It , \rc:1~ p rt'l\ idL1<l, J,r,,\c','l!r, 1hm lhl.· H \1ild IP \n:;1 1111,~ l.11.! V!\h.:rn,h:d :111 ~1.1 .. 1iv ,rn,1 l tl fo<:t \11 ;Jtq,nuJ ...!11, ... : f}tl..'scn<: hc,;cllQ~e 1TCl~, 1. >irrucrurcs s ha!J bt: hmm:d ro rhc nllownb lc b111 ld11blr :tl'.c.".l., wluch is a comb1n:rnun of ,he Bu1IJ l11 \1•c,l ,ll)cl the ,\d1liuMa1I li111J1hhk \rr.1. 1'01·km)! ,l1all b, pLlc('<l olnng rh,' ,i,lcos o pd n '-nr ol LU .. .slrm!tun.:(t). nm.I .I.I\ th, i.:n:-1,;J .shall cJ..lcrtd p :ts1 th'-· frf..l1ll IJutkL.1-1.g Juk m t lu: Jm.·dL;u uf ,he nghr nr 1\Sl)C J , \\/111:rc u s ir,l,·wal~/L~1il i~ prcsenL iu \ht" ;1tli:1c,•1J1 riJ,,~11 nf w,1). p~d c,;iri.111 ntcess s l1111l he pr•mdcd l\'lllun the tiroeus1Mc~ Ku fkr. ·SEl'BJ\CKS _-\S REQt"!REP BY D,'DBRLYI?-<G ZONTh!G ADDITIONAL BUILDING AREA BUILDTOARF.A PLEXreJ..E OU 'fDQOR sm \CF. GREENSP.\CE 13L1f1PER Emily Boyett From: Hunter Simmons Sent: To: Monday, February 24, 2020 2:34 PM Emily Boyett Subject: FW: Greeno Road Corridor Overlay From: Daphne Stainbrook <dgstainbrook@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 9:51 AM To: Hunter Simmons <hunter.simmons@fairhopeal.gov> Subject: Greeno Road Corridor Overlay Dear Mr. Simmons, I write you in the hopes you can put my notes into the correct hands. I wanted to reach out as a citizen of Fairhope to voice my opinion regarding the Greeno Road Corridor Overlay. I feel this overlay is a fantastic and necessary amendment that will certainly help maintain the unique charm of this great city that has enraptured us all. By requiring parking in the rear, a more stringent landscaping design, and banning jarring and distracting signage, Fairhope will remain a beautiful, peaceful city in which to reside . In fact, in reading through the ordinances and restrictions for the overlay, I believe the rules could be written even stronger to ensure the city is protected, as opposed to developments holding the reins. After moving around to different southern cities, I decided to return to Fairhope due to its absolutely remarkable small-town feel with great amenities, and of course the beach! I would hate for Fairhope to turn into another typical American city, saturated with drive-throughs and ugly chain stores. I understand there has been some push-back on the passing of this overlay, but please remain strong and not soften the regulations . It would be a tremendous shame if we lost our beautiful, quaint town to generic, industrial greed. Thank you for your time and God bless, Daphne Stainbrook Citizen of Fairhope (251) 327-5645 1 Emily Boyett From: Sent: To: Subject: Emily, Marcus Moseley <marcusmoseley@mac.com> Saturday, February 22, 2020 12 :20 PM Emily Boyett RE: Greeno Overlay Distric As a property owner in the proposed overlay district, I strongly support the move. Further regulating the look and operation of Greeno is vital to keeping Fairhope from becoming something horrible. Planning and zoning is a mandatory obligation for both the city, and those who choose to live within it. And our elected officials must do their job. Thanks. Marcus Moseley 55 Pleasant St. 1 Emily Boyett From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Hunter Simmons : Linda Stevens <cbesmama@yahoo .com > Wednesday, February 26, 2020 8:55 PM Emily Boyett Greeno Rd . Overlay, ATTN : Hunter Simmons My name is Linda Stejskal Stevens, sister to Larry Stejskal, and I am emailing you to be certain that you know that Larry has my approval and confidence in all things involving our Fairhope properties. I have a few issues with the Overlay project for Greeno Road , and how it will effect our property in the future . 1) the "taking" of the title to our property and issuing a "use restriction" without compensation to us . 2) after the above "taking" (no longer our property) without compensation , we will still be required to pay taxes on what is no longer ours . I am 74 years old and for as long as I can remember, our parents would save a little HARD earned money and buy a "piece" of land so that they would have something to hand down to us for our future . The fact that this one act of love from them , to take care of their childrens' future (and of their future grandchildren), is slowly being "taken" away is difficult for me to handle . I am afraid that I will not be able , in the future , to pass my inheritance down to my children, my parents' grandchildren . Thank you for your time . Linda S. Stevens Linda Stevens 1 1 ZC 20.02 8800 Morphy Avenue – March 2, 2020 Planning Commission March 2, 2020 Zoning Change: R-A to R-1 Case: ZC 20.02 8800 Morphy Avenue Project Name: ZC 20.02 8800 Morphy Avenue Project Type: Zoning Change R-A to R-1 Project Acreage: Approximately 7.9 acres Jurisdiction: City of Fairhope PPIN Number: 14591 General Location: South side of Morphy Avenue Between Bishop Road and County Road 13 (also know as Oberg Road) Engineer: Geo-Surveying Applicant: Linda Walker School District: Fairhope Intermediate Fairhope Middle Fairhope High Recommendation: Approval with conditions Prepared by: Samara Walley, MCP City Planner Subject Property Subject Property Morphy Ave. County Rd. 13 N N Leg•nd -•SllbJC~P•~ i,,,o,:,:'"-"""',:Cf -,,:-..,.,:-_,,,,,.,,,..1'?:".-,,---j CITY OF FA IRHOPE ZONING R-3 PGH Pa;iolGttdtn Sr>Qlt: ht'l\ty 2 ZC 20.02 8800 Morphy Avenue – March 2, 2020 Summary of Request: The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject property from R-A, Residential Agriculture District to R-1, Single Family Residential District. There are two existing dwellings on the lot. If the rezoning application is approved, the applicant will submit a subdivision application in an effort to create a family subdivision. Due to the configuration of existing dwellings on the subject property, the applicant would be unable to subdivide the property and meet the lot width requirement without rezoning the property. Single-family dwellings are allowed in an R-1 district. It should be noted that only one dwelling is allowed per residentially zoned lot. Therefore, the approval of this rezoning request would create a non-conformity until a subdivision is approved Comments: The subject property is bounded to the North by R-2, Two-Family Residential District, PUD, and R-1, Single- Family Residential District. It is bounded to the West by R-A, Residential Agriculture District property. It is bounded to the East by R-2, Two-Family Residential District property and to the South by an unimproved right- of-way, Fleming Road. The site plan notes that it is “not in use”. Criteria – The application shall be reviewed based on the following criteria: (1) Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan; Response: The requested zoning is R-1, Single-Family Residential District and subject property is R-A, Residential Agricultural District. Because the use will not be changing, Staff finds this request consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. (2) Compliance with the standards, goals, and intent of this ordinance; Response: The R-1 district is designated for residential uses. (3) The character of the surrounding property, including any pending development activity; Response: The surrounding property is primarily residential and will therefore be compatible to the recommended zoning change. (4) Adequacy of public infrastructure to support the proposed development; Response: There are current structures that utilize utilities. (5) Impacts on natural resources, including existing conditions and ongoing post-development conditions; Response: Subject property is already developed. 3 ZC 20.02 8800 Morphy Avenue – March 2, 2020 (6) Compliance with other laws and regulations of the City; Response: At the time of any redevelopment all applicable laws of the City will be applied. (7) Compliance with other applicable laws and regulations of other jurisdictions; Response: At the time of a redevelopment all applicable laws will be applied. (8) Impacts on adjacent property including noise, traffic, visible intrusions, potential physical impacts, and property values; and, Response: Staff does not anticipate any significant issues relating to this criterion. (9) Impacts on the surrounding neighborhood including noise, traffic, visible intrusions, potential physical impacts, and property values. Response: Staff does not anticipate any significant issues relating to this criterion. Recommendation: Staff recommends Case: ZC 20.02 8800 Morphy Avenue rezoning from R-A to R-1 be Approved with the following conditions: 1. Approval of a Subdivision indicating a single-family residence on a single lot. 1 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 Planning Commission February 3, 2020 Multiple Occupancy Project Case: SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes Summary of Request: Project Name: Thompson Hall Quadplexes Site Data: 1.98 acres +/- Project Type: Multiple Occupancy Project Jurisdiction: Fairhope Planning, Permit, and Police Jurisdictions Zoning District: Unzoned Baldwin County PPIN Number: 14615 General Location: Northeast intersection of Thompson Hall Rd and Co. Rd 44 Engineer: S.E. Civil, LLC Developer: Provision Investments, LLC Geoff Lane and Alise C. Lane School District: Fairhope Elementary,Middle and High Schools Recommendation: Table to allow revisions Prepared by: J. Buford King Development Services Manager Lege:nd •-$1:.,Q'..,:,.-4'0M ClTV OF' FACRHOP-E :ZONING 11'1~11 .. l'll)._,,.'9 .. r;t!,1:-F■ ....... ll'l-1H ... :lltnW,S.,,,._-F Fl-> PGM ,. .. tl'Gal'Offl $ in;;Je '•rdp lc'-"lll.R.HCW1CoamtnW.IS.flllla-Dil'IMm ~ n--...O~N I\W01~ •~ U!lf;I "~•J I "'"~"II 2 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 Public hearing to consider the request of S. E. Civil, LLC on behalf of Geoff Lane and Alise C. Lane of Provision Investments, LLC for a request for approval of Thompson Hall Quadplexes, a sixteen (16) lot Multiple Occupancy Project. Subject property is located at the northeast intersection of Thompson Hall Road and Baldwin County Road 44 (Twin Beech Road). Subject property consists of approximately 1.98 total acres, and is located within unzoned Baldwin County. Mr. Larry Smith, PE of S.E. Civil Engineering and Surveying serves as the engineer of record (EOR) for subject application. Comments: MULTIPLE OCCUPANCY PROJECT CRITERIA The following item are excerpts from the various checklists utilized by staff to evaluate subject application’s compliance with the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance, City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations and other relevant ordinances and are included here to provide relevant background and rationale behind staff’s recommendation. Any items remaining in red italic text will be cured by conditions of approval, or in the case of a recommendation for denial of an application, provide rationale for the recommendation of denial. Any items initially marked “revise and resubmit” have been cured by the notations in blue text, which may include conditions of approval. Article IV, Section C.1. Certificate of County Zoning (IF APPLICABLE) ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Baldwin County Planning and Zoning staff verified subject property is unzoned by Baldwin County. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(7) Building set back lines shall be shown on the plat as required by the zoning ordinance or in absence of zoning, as required by deed restrictions. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Cross-Reference Article IV, Section H.2.(d) as applicable. Comments: Subject property is located within unzoned Baldwin County. As a result, the 20’ building setback line on all sides required by Article IV, Section H.2.(d) is required, and is reflected on drawing C01 to satisfy this requirement. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(8) Plan and profiles of all proposed utilities with connections (8) Plan and profiles of all proposed utility with connections to existing utility system and all proposed improvements. Approval of private utility connections for water and sewer shall be subject to the standards of Article VIII, Sections E. and G., respectively of the Fairhope Subdivision Regulations, and Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fairhope. The applicant shall submit one copy of utility letters stating availability of service. Utility letters and layout must be submitted from electric, water, sewer, phone, trash provider, and gas (if applicable), stating the property may be adequately served by such utility. ☐N/A ☐Accepted with comments ☒Revise and Resubmit per comments Cross Reference: Approval of private utility connections for water and sewer shall be subject to the standards of Article VIII, Sections E. and G., respectively of the Fairhope Subdivision Regulations, and Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fairhope. Comments: Letters of availability form AT&T, Baldwin EMC, and Fairhope Public Utilities (Water and Sewer) were furnished with the application. This review assumes natural gas service, if desired, will be coordinated with the Fairhope Public Utilities Gas Department. This review assumes a commercial waste service will provide waste collection and removal from the site, as a dumpster/compactor enclosure is depicted on various drawings. Please contact Jay Whitman, Water and Sewer Superintendent, for additional review comments related to the proposed routing of water and sewer mains and laterals as well as the location of the lift station. Drawing C04 has been amended with various revisions. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(9) Location/dimensions of lands to be dedicated or reserved for parks, open space or other public use ☐N/A ☐Accepted ☒Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Greenspace location and dimension not identified. Though 0.50 acres of greenspace is noted on drawing C01, the locations and dimensions are not identified as required by this section. Drawing C05 has been added to plan set and indicates location and sizes in square feet of proposed greenspace. See “additional staff comments” regarding greenspace. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(11) Flow model data submitted to the standards of the COF Water Department. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: A fire flow model indicating 1883 GPM at 20 PSI was furnished with subject application and copies provided to Fairhope Public Utilities staff. Additional review comments may be provided by Fairhope Public Utilities under separate cover or during the Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(12) Street lighting plan ☐N/A ☐Accepted ☒Follow-up correspondence requested I I I I I I I I I I 3 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 Comments: No streetlighting appears to be in place along Thompson Hall Road and the intersection of Twin Beech Road. Provide follow-up correspondence clarifying what type of site lighting will be utilized within the project. The EOR’s follow- up correspondence indicates lighting has been added to drawing C04, however no lighting was found on this drawing. Should the planning commission desire to approve subject application, staff will request via condition of approval the EOR coordinate any street lighting with the Fairhope Public Utilities Electrical Superintendent, and reflect lighting on the “for construction” drawings. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(13) and Article V, Section D.5.a.(9) Tree protection plan for all required street trees or trees over 24” DBH. Tree protection fences shall be installed prior to land disturbance activities. (See Appendix G) ☐N/A ☐Accepted ☒Landscape Plan to be reviewed separately Cross Reference: Ordinance number 1444, Tree Ordinance Comments: A tree survey was not included with subject application. A contractor began removing trees from the site prior to the submission of subject application. The landscape plan provided with the application will be reviewed for compliance with ordinance 1444 and a review will be provided under separate cover. Revisions to the landscape drawings were submitted and have been reviewed by the horticulturalist and are acceptable per correspondence dated 1/21/2020. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(16) Pedestrian circulation plan ☐N/A ☐Accepted ☒Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: The internal circulation of the site is self-explanatory; however, sidewalks are not indicated on the preliminary plat and plans along Thompson Hall Road and Twin Beach Road. The Planning Commission may require sidewalks to be installed via condition of approval if not indicated on the plat and plans. Acknowledged by EOR. Article IV, Section C.1.d. Drainage plan prepared by professional engineer, including proposed method of storm water detention and means of controlling erosion during construction. Any portion of the land in the proposed subdivision subject to periodic inundation by storm drainage, overflow or ponding shall be clearly identified on the plat. Lands lying within the flood plain, V or A Zones, shall be clearly identified on the plat. Storm-water detention facilities shall be shown in the plans and calculations provided. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Cross Reference: Article V, Section F.3.a., b., and c. Comments: The FEMA flood map viewer indicates subject property lies within Zone “X”, an area of “minimal flood hazard”. Article IV, Section C.1.g. State or County ROW detailed highway improvements plan: If any state right-of-way or any improvement thereon is proposed to be changed or modified, a detailed Highway Improvements Plan, with the written approval of the responsible official of the Alabama Highway Department, showing all existing features within the rights-of-way and all proposed changes, including, but not limited to, changes in traffic patterns, markings, signs, curbs and barriers, neutral zones, signals, warnings, plantings and landscaping. There shall be submitted with and as a part of the Plan a written statement setting forth means proposed for traffic control and safety during construction and for restoration of the site. All of the foregoing shall also apply to rights-of-way controlled by the County, except that the County Engineer's approval shall appear on the Plat to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. ☒N/A with comments ☐Accepted ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: The Engineer of Record (EOR) included a PE-stamped letter of correspondence indicating the subject development will generate 8 peak trips, therefore not “triggering” the requirement for a traffic study. As a result, a highway improvements plan is not required because a traffic study (which would likely recommend highway improvements) is not required. Article V, Section C.4. Greenspace Design Requirements - All eligible greenspace shall conform to the following design requirements: a. Maximize public exposure and public access to greenspace. b. Streets shall align adjacent to greenspace. c. Greenspace shall not be located adjacent to a collector or arterial street. d. Due regard shall be shown for all natural features such as lakes, ponds, water courses, historic sites and other similar features which, if preserved, will add attractiveness and value to the property. e. The amount, distribution, location, and type of greenspace provided shall be context sensitive with the built environment around it. f. Refer to table 4-1 which indicates the categories, types, and general sizes of greenspace that are to be used to meet the City requirements. For the purposes of this section rural character is considered 1 dwelling unit per acre or less, suburban character is considered 2-4 units per acre and urban character and village center is considered more than 4 units per acre. ☐N/A ☐Accepted ☒Revise and Resubmit per comments I I I I I I I I I I 4 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 Comments: Indicate which type of Greenspace in Table 4-1 is utilized for subject development. Further, note that Twin Beech Road (CR44) is a collector, and this section prohibits greenspace located adjacent to a collector. Please consult the Baldwin County Highway Department to verify if a 50’ or a 75’ construction setback from the centerline of Twin Beech Road will be required (minor collector vs. major collector) per Baldwin County Subdivision regulations Article 5.4. (The 2010 ALDOT classification map indicates this is a major collector however the BCHD may have updated information). If the required greenspace type is identified per this section, and is located outside the 50’ or 75’ highway construction setback required by Baldwin County, as well as labeled and dimensioned per Article IV, Section C.1.b.(9), the revise and resubmit condition of this section is likely cured. Drawing C05 has been added to the plan set to reflect greenspace not included within the 75’ highway construction setbacks. However, the type of greenspace within table 4-1 was not identified. None of the hardscapes or fixtures to qualify as a courtyard, playground, or plaza are shown on drawing C05. A “green” requires at least ¼ acre, however there is not a contiguous area of green space of ¼ acres (10,890sf) with the exception of the northern greenspace, however that greenspace contains a vegetated swale. Sufficient space on site does not exist for a preserve, trail/greenway, or park. Staff’s position is that the disjointed, non-contiguous greenspace presented for the proposed development does not sufficiently satisfy this section for the requested density of the site and is not context sensitive to the site – primarily due to disjointed areas as small as 240sf. The addition of hardscapes and fixtures (playground equipment) are possible methods of attaining greenspace compliance for the proposed development. Staff will recommend tabling of the application to allow revisions; however, the planning commission may wish to approve with conditions. Revised drawings submitted 2/21/2020 reflect a single greenspace area of 0.498 acres, which exceeds the required greenspace of 0.495 acres, and thus qualifies as a “green” per table 4-1. Article V, Section C.5. Greenspace Street Design – All construction, radii, and other specifications of the city are required to be met. a. In those locations that a public street is adjacent to the required greenspace, it is permissible to construct a street according to the following standards: (1) ROW: 50 feet (2) Paved: 18 feet minimum (3) On Street Parking: Posted one side; minimum width of 7 feet for parking; spaces must be painted on the paved surface. (4) Signage: The street must be posted as a one-way street. b. In those instances where it is permissible to construct a smaller street the following design guidelines must be adhered to: 1) There shall be no cul-de-sac; 2) The street must provide thru access; and 3) Valley gutter, roll down, or saucer type curbs designed and constructed to City standards may be used adjacent to the park area. ☒N/A with comments ☐Accepted ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: The internal street for subject development is labeled “private” on drawing C01 and thus not necessarily designed to a public standard (ribbon curbs in lieu of valley curbs, etc.) otherwise required by this section. Article V, Section F.3.a.(3)(a)(3) Storm Water Standards – Submittal Requirements - Minimum Requirements-Operations and Maintenance Plan (3) Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement for maintenance of detention facilities and other storm water quantity and quality BMPs during development and documents providing for continued inspection and maintenance after completion of development and sale of all lots, such documents running as a covenant with the lands. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: An Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement was furnished with subject application as required. Staff’s recommendation for approval of the development will be that of a preliminary plat only, and a final plat process including submission of as-built drawings and a recorded O&M Plan and Agreement for stormwater structures will be required at the time of Final Plat request. Article V, Section F.3.a.(3)(a)(4-6) Storm Water Standards – Submittal Requirements - Minimum Requirements (4) Basic Design Data and calculations including routing calculations in legible tabulated form and proof of adequacy of volume of retention and sizing computations for low flow structures. (5) Copy of notice of coverage and storm water pollution plan for coverage under the Alabama Department of Environmental Management for issuance of NPDES Permit, and permits from any other agency, where required; and, (6) Any additional engineering information City of Fairhope Staff or the Planning Commission deems necessary to make a decision on subdivisions and other development where adequacy of drainage is reasonably questioned. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments I I I I I I 5 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 Comments: The EOR included correspondence requesting approval of subject development with an ADEM NDPES permit to follow via separate correspondence after preliminary plat approval is granted. Staff will request preliminary plat approval but request as a condition of approval the existing land disturbing activities be temporarily suspended until an NPDES permit (with ALR#) is submitted to staff. Once the NPDES permit is received, land disturbance activities may resume. Article V, Section F.3.b. Storm Water Standards – Submittal Requirements - Adverse Effects b. Adverse Effects - Where it can be reasonably anticipated that additional quantity or velocity of runoff from development of a subdivision will overload existing downstream drainage facilities, approval shall be withheld until there is submitted to the Commission a plan to mitigate damage to downstream property which would or might result from the subdivision under consideration. Downstream drainage structures should be considered when sizing detention outfall structures, with proof of this submitted to the Commission. The hydraulic elevations resulting from channel detention shall not adversely affect adjacent properties. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: The EOR included a downstream analysis statement and indicated that discharge from the site is to be reduced to lower than pre-development flows as indicated by the chart in section IV of the submitted drainage narrative. The EOR further indicates the discharge from the site enters the Twin Beech Road ROW, follows the ROW to the east and under SR 181 eventually entering Cowpen Creek. The EOR indicates that no downstream adverse effect is believed to occur because there is no increase of stormwater flow from the site to the ROW. Staff was assisted by the Public Works Director in evaluating downstream adverse effects. Article V, Section F.5.a. Storm Water Standards – Flow Control-Scope of Design a. Scope of Design - All subdivisions or other developments shall be provided with adequate storm water drainage facilities. The project engineer shall provide a design adequate to control storm water peak flows, runoff volume and velocity in accordance with paragraph 7 of this section. In general, the project engineer shall use design storm criteria based on the site-specific conditions that relate to protection of life and property. Culverts shall generally accommodate a 25-year storm frequency under arterial roadways; drainage systems within subdivisions should accommodate a 2 through 25-year storm frequency; bridges shall accommodate a storm frequency of 50 years. When recommended by City of Fairhope Staff, the Planning Commission may require a storm frequency design as great as 100 years. (1) There shall be no storm water pumps. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Section IV of the drainage narrative includes an “Existing vs. Proposed” condition chart that indicates existing vs. proposed runoff for 2,5, 10, 25, 50 and 100-year storm events, and as a result the drainage system is designed to handle 100-year storm events, thus complying with this section. Article V, Section F.7b.- e. Storm Water Standards – Detention and Retention Facilities (Continued) b. Such facilities shall be owned, operated and maintained by the development entities and shall not be accepted for inspection and maintenance by the City of Fairhope. The burden shall be on the developer and his engineer to provide evidence in support of any proposal to alter or modify the requirement for detention. Storm water runoff from new development or significant redevelopment must not adversely affect downstream properties. In determining whether runoff from the new development or significant redevelopment causes an adverse impact, the following procedures will be used: c. Detention facilities shall be provided with obvious and effective control structures. Plan view, sections and details of the structure shall be included in submittals. Sizing of the low flow pipe shall be by inlet control or hydraulic gradient requirements. Low flow pipe shall be not smaller than eight inches in diameter, except in parking lot and roof retention where the size shall be designed for the particular application as approved by the Commission. d. The overflow opening, or spillway shall be designed to accept the total peak runoff of the improved tributary area. Proper engineering judgment, with 25-year, 50-year or greater storm frequencies considered, shall be exercised in secondary routing of discharge greater than the basic design storm for the protection of downstream properties. e. Aerators are required for all retention ponds. The Public Works Director shall approve the specifications for said aerator. ☐N/A ☐Accepted with comments ☒Follow-up correspondence requested Comments: The stormwater pond is designed to process 2, 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100-year storm events, and less than 1 cubic feet per second (cfs) discharges from the pond following a 10-year storm event and not discharge a 2 and 5 year storm events as designed. All calculations are clearly identified in the stormwater narrative. The stormwater pond is depicted on drawing C02 with details of the outlet control structure, berm side slopes, and skimmer clearly detailed on drawing C06. An aerator is not included in the proposed stormwater management system. Please identify compliance with the “ten percent” rule in follow-up correspondence. The drainage narrative has been amended to include a paragraph within the downstream analysis describing compliance within the 10% rule. Article V, Section F.8.e.-g. Storm Water Standards – Post Development Water Quality Best Management Practices (Continued) e. A developer should consider low impact site design practices early in the design process in an effort to reduce the overall water quality treatment volume requirement. These practices tie directly into the storm water quality program, the WQv I I I I I I 6 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 calculation, and/or the storm water treatment volume. These practices should only be implemented when not in conflict with other City regulations. f. Structural storm water controls, or Best Management Practices (BMPs), are engineered structures designed to treat storm water or mitigate the impact from storm water runoff. The following table presents a pre-approved listing of structural BMP practices. These BMPs have been assigned a TSS removal capability, based upon existing research, and can be used by developers to meet the pollutant reduction goal of 80% TSS removal. The structural BMPs have been divided into two categories: (1) General application BMPs are assumed to achieve the 80% TSS reduction. (2) Limited application BMPs which have to be used in combination with other BMPs to achieve the 80% reduction goal. These BMPs may not be applicable for certain sites and require frequent intensive maintenance to function properly. Pre-Approved BMPs BMP Removal Efficiency for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Structural Control TSS Removal (%) General Application BMPs Wet Pond 80 Storm Water Wetland 80 Bioretention Area* 80 Sand Filter 80 Enhanced Swale 80 Limited Application BMPs Filter Strip 50 Grass Channel 50 Organic Filter 80 Underground Sand Filter 80 Submerged Gravel Wetland 80 Infiltration Trench 80 Gravity (Oil/Grit Separator) 40 Proprietary Structural Control Varies Dry Detention Basin 60 g. The increase in the frequency and duration of bank full flow conditions in stream channels due to development is the primary cause of accelerated streambank erosion and widening and downcutting of stream channels. Therefore, streambank protection criterion applies to all development sites for which there is an increase in the natural flows to downstream feeder streams, channels, ditches, and small streams. On-site or downstream improvements may be required for streambank protection, easements or right-of-entry agreements also may need to be obtained. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments *Cross Reference: Section 20.5-17 (1) and (2) Ordinance 1444 Tree / Landscape Ordinance Required Native Plants for Bio Retention/Detention Use Comments: Section I., of the drainage narrative indicates the detention pond will be over-excavated to reach naturally occurring sands on the subject property to aid in infiltration of the stormwater within the pond. Article V, Section F.9. Storm Water Standards – Location and Easement a. Drain-ways, whether conduit or open channel, shall be located within the right-of-way insofar as is practicable. b. Where topography or other conditions render impracticable the inclusion of drainage within road rights-of-way, perpetual unobstructed easements not less than fifteen (15) feet in width shall be provided across the property with access to the road right-of-way. Such easements shall be clearly delineated on the plat as areas dedicated to public use as drainage easements, with provision for maintenance by the landowners. The City shall not maintain such easements. c. Off premises drainage easements and improvements lying outside the proposed subdivision may be required of the Owner to handle runoff into a natural drainage channel. d. Where a subdivision or development is traversed by a watercourse, drainway, channel or stream, there shall be provided a storm-water easement conforming substantially to the lines of such water course and of such width and construction as is adequate for the intended purpose, including maintenance operations. e. No storm water detention shall be located in public right-of-way for any private development. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: No blue line streams or isolated wetlands are depicted on the Baldwin County GIS viewer when the “hydro” function is enabled. As a result, no easements are required for any drainage ways within the property. All drainage infrastructure is outside the public ROW and is thus not maintained by the City of Fairhope or Baldwin County. This review I I I I I I I I 7 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 assumes the standard notes indicating drainage infrastructure is not maintained by Baldwin County or the City of Fairhope shall appear on the final plat. Article V, Section F.11.f.(1)-(5) Required Use of Low Impact Development (LID) Techniques (Continued) f. The following LID techniques are available for use by applicants given the particular circumstances and characteristics of the proposed subdivision: (5.) Grass Swales: The City finds that the potential benefits of grass swales are, among other items, in straining stormwater, providing limited quality treatments, while providing some moderate flow attenuation. Special design considerations are: Typically work best in smaller drainage areas where volumes are reduced, special consideration should be given in pervious soils, not recommended with high swell soils, should have low slopes, adjacent areas and layout should be considered in the design. Suggested characteristics where topography, soils, and slope permit vegetated open channels and spaces should be considered as a significant or a primary means of stormwater conveyance. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Section I., of the drainage narrative indicates a grass swale will be utilized as an LID technique for subject development. Enlarged Aerial Map Enlarged Zoning Map I I 8 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 The subdivision regulations contain the following criteria in Article IV.B.2. “Approval Standards”. Each of these criteria is addressed below with either a “meets” or “does not meet” comment. If any of the criteria is not met, a denial will be recommended. Consistency with Plans, Regulations and Laws - The Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; • Meets – The Comprehensive Plan contemplates roadway improvements to Twin Beech Road to improve East-West circulation. Subject development abides by the 75’ Highway Construction setbacks required by Baldwin County, thus allowing future ROW expansion. b. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; • Meets – see item “a” above c. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; • Meets d. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or • Meets e. The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” • Meets Site Photos: N 1."!l•"d --•• !...ajll,eiP.lt'tllt cnYOFFAIRtlOPE zo,.,~i; R-l..W...att11~r,S~• ltf R-l flt!! OtflM'('SUl;.11.fan.,,, B--2. O~l!IUalus DH-<1 -B-31. iou .. RH«'ll~gllatl1t1 -!-lti T,;iu"li.RfftW"I CD!"'mara.ai.S:r1Ya D'.,.ci -ID-' &!•f'Mr>Oilt-.<o!k•1U; D•llfii;! -M-t "'ri ~•!~ -~1P'o11'11"1P I = 9 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 Greenspace Map (original submission) Looking north along east side of Thompson Hall Road Looking southeast toward Twin Beech Road from east side of Thompson Hall Road Looking southwest toward Twin Beech Road from the east side of Thompson Hall Road Looking north within property 10 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 Greenspace Map (as amended) wn~~~ Cl# ,-------------....:"":::....,,,.=,::-.::.o:"""'=''-------------------.li r-= ---------------,,,.:s·~"':,_s_:______ ----------, <..., I I I I r I I I I • ,u'I~ rb I I I I I I I I l ' I I l r I I ·~ ,~ .~ .~ I I I I I I :1------==-=------1 I I )L---~-~---~-~--1 I I :¥ I lle I I ----------------- 6 ,818 SF j I I I I I I I I I I ,..._,._-,r-7'-..11.. ..... .._...-,----:7'-....,. .... : I I I I I I I I I I ) I .. , .. , ~---.----.• L------------------- __ 1 MC•-----------------Jt~ __ ..J I I ___ raaaL _________________ _J -,------------------------------~ N89"37"4-W "'567' ~ --~----------------~~~----------7 I I I I I I I J I I I >-----------a-------------1 I I I I I I I I I I I I ___ I_ GREENSPACE 0.498 AC BALDW IN CO. HWY 44 ---so~ ------- -.. "" ' 11 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 EJ E=J EJ EJ .. j .. FIRST FLOOR PLAN t,cA&.a, 11-t" o (,0° tlECOND FLOOR Pl.AN 12 SD 20.05 Thompson Hall Quadplexes – February 3, 2020 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL of case # SD 20.05, Thompson Hall Quadplexes subject to the following conditions: 1) Require final plat approval as contemplated by the revisions to Article IV Section H. adopted by the City of Fairhope Planning Commission on January 6, 2020. a. Subject application was submitted in advance of the afore-mentioned Subdivision Regulations amendment, however in order to properly capture the O&M agreement and various utility easements required for the site, final plat is requested. 2) Provide verification from the Baldwin County Highway Department the location of the proposed sewer lift station within the 75’ Highway Construction setback is acceptable. a. Though Act 45-2-260 excludes sewer utility lines, septic tanks and underground storage tanks within the 75’ highway construction setback are prohibited. The lift station wet well may not be allowable by Act 45-2-260. b. If acceptable, the lift station shall be reflected on the as-built drawings submitted with the final plat as well as its location noted on the final plat. 3) Coordinate any streetlighting with the Fairhope Public Utilities electrical superintendent and reflect the streetlighting on the “for construction” plans as well as as-built drawings. 4) Sidewalks are not reflected on the submitted plat and plans for subject development. a. The Planning Commission may require sidewalks to be installed as a condition of approval. b. This condition of approval serves as a placeholder so that the Planning Commission may take action if it desires. 5) Halt all land disturbance activities until a copy of the NPDES permit has been submitted to the Building Official. 6) Memorialize for the purposes of this approval that the building height cannot exceed 35’-0” 7) Submission of a revised landscape plan coordinated with the revised construction / civil plans. Submission of landscape plan shall precede submittal of “for construction/permit” plans and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Fairhope Horticulturalist. FRONT ELEVATION WEST 295.52' N89°54'15"W 200.00' S89°53'14"E 200.04'N00°22'23"E 326.75'N00°04'54"E 326.75'S89°34'18"E 199.85' N89°37'04"W 199.86'N00°22'24"E 291.95'N89°37'04"W 295.67' N89°38'02"W 2301.16'N00°22'24"E40.00'5 4 8 9S00°24'07"W 291.95'S89°37'04"E 295.82' CMF 1/2"CRF (FAIRHOPE) CMF 1/2"CRF (THOMPSON) 1/2"CRS (SE CIVIL) ASPHALT PAVING (TYP.) SEE DETAIL 45'74'STOP SIGN (R1-1), STREET NAME SIGNS, & STOP BAR N/F 05-46-05-22-0-000-001.535 FST MILLER, CHRIS E 9595 TWIN BEECH RD FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONED N/F 05-46-08-27-0-000-002.534 FST BYRD, JESSE ETAL BYRD, MARTHA 18965 SUMMER OAKS PL FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONED N/F 05-46-08-27-0-000-002.502 FST MALONE, MATTHEW D. ETAL MALONE, SCARL 104 PROFESSIONAL PARK DR FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONED N/F 05-46-08-27-0-000-002.521 FST KINDER, KYLE A 18964 SUMMER OAKS PL FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONEDSUMMER OAKS PLACE80 FT. R/WBALDWIN CO. HWY 44 80 FT. R/WTHOMPSON HALL RD.66 FT. R/W20' B.S.L. 20' B.S.L.20' B.S.L.20' B.S.L.N/F 05-46-05-22-0-000-001.538 FST HENDERSON, DORRIS L 19201 THOMPSON HALL RD FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONED N/F 05-46-05-22-0-000-001.562 FST ETHERIDGE, W ETUX SHARON K 19137 THOMPSON HALL RD FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONED N/F 05-46-05-22-0-000-001.557 FST NESLER, ANGELICA L ETAL NESLER, TODD 10043 WEXFORD LN DAPHNE, AL 36526 UN-ZONED RIBBON CURB (TYP.) SEE DETAIL GRAVEL PAVING (TYP.) SEE DETAIL12'CLUSTER MAILBOXES DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE SEE DETAIL CONCRETE PAVING SEE DETAIL 75' H.C.S.75' H.C.S.25'25'25'25' 25'25'25'25'45'45'45'85'85' 85'85' 5'(TYP.)22'18' R26' R 2 6 'R26'R26' 24" CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) SEE DETAIL TAPER CURB TO FLUSH OVER TWO (2) FEET CURB CUT (TYP.) SEE DETAIL 1200 15 30 60 30 SCALE SHEET C01 20190574 JRB DRAWN DATE SCALE JOB No. 2/18/20 1"=30'SEALAFFIXREVISIONDATER Know what's below. before you dig.Call SITE PLANCONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL RELOCATIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ARE TO BE ABANDONED, REMOVED OR RELOCATED AS NECESSARY. ALL COST SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE BASE BID. TO ALL UTILITIES, STORM DRAINAGE, SIGNS, TRAFFIC SIGNALS & POLES, ETC. AS REQUIRED FOR SITE WORK. ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNING AUTHORITIES THE DRAWINGS. CONCRETE FOR CURBING SHALL BE 3000 PSI. REFER TO THE LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR PLANTING LOCATIONS AND ISLAND DETAILS. PAINTED STRIPING SHALL BE BRIGHT AND CLEAR. STRIPES SHALL BE PER PLAN AND PAINTED CURBING SHALL BE FORMED AND POURED CONCRETE UNLESS OTHERWISE DETAILED WITHIN ALL DIMENSIONS AND RADII ARE TO THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. CONDITIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED TO BE TRUE AND ACCURATE PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. THE SURVEY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS IS SHOWN WITHIN THESE PLANS. ALL EXISTING ON CLEAN ASPHALT OR CONCRETE. THIS SITE IS UN-ZONED. ALL ISLANDS WITH CURB & GUTTER SHALL BE LANDSCAPED. NOTIFY CITY OF FAIRHOPE INSPECTIONS 24 HOURS BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF EVERY PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION. ALL STRIPING IN R.O.W. TO BE CLASS A TYPE 2 THERMOPLASTIC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED GOVERNMENTAL A COPY OF THE APPROVED LAND DISTURBANCE PLAN AND PERMIT SHALL BE PRESENT ON SITE WHENEVER LAND DISTURBANCE ACTIVITY IS IN PROGRESS. CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT BE PARKED IN REQUIRED R.O.W. AND MUST BE STORED WITHIN THE SITE. DURING CONSTRUCTION, ACCESS ROADWAYS CONSTRUCTED OF AN ALL WEATHER SURFACE CAPABLE OF SUPPORTING 80,000 POUNDS GROSS WEIGHT SHALL BE PROVIDED. THE WIDTH OF THE ACCESS ROADWAY, DURING CONSTRUCTION, SHALL BE 20 FT PER STANDARD FIRE PREVENTION CODE, LATEST EDITION. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS AND MARKINGS USED ON THE SITE WILL CONFORM WITH THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD), FHWA, LATEST EDITION. REFERENCE THE SIGN CODES CONTAINED IN THE MUTCD FOR ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS. NOTE THE COLOR AND SIZE OF ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS, REFERENCING DETAILS IN ALDOT'S ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC DESIGN STANDARDS WHERE APPLICABLE. NO "PROTECTED TREES" WILL BE REMOVED, DESTRUCTIVELY DAMAGED, MUTILATED, RELOCATED, DISFIGURED, DESTROYED, CUT DOWN, OR EXCESSIVELY PRUNED DURING SITE PLAN NOTES REGULATIONS AND CODES AS WELL AS O.S.H.A. AND ALDOT STANDARDS. ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE & BALDWIN COUNTY FIRE LANES AND SIGNAGE TO MEET REQUIREMENTS OF NFPA 1 CHAPTER 18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH ALL OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AT THE SITE; INCLUDING UTILITIES, SURFACES, ETC. AND SHALL BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES THEY CAUSE TO NEW AND EXISTING CONSTRUCTION, PROPERTY AND ANY UNAUTHORIZED DISRUPTION TO UTILITIES ON SITE AND TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED CONNECTIONS AND CROSSINGS SHALL BE FIELD EXCAVATED TO VERIFY LOCATIONS, ELEVATION AND SIZE. NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY WITH ANY DEVIATIONS OR CONFLICTS. TOTAL SITE ACREAGE =1.98 ACRES. INSPECTIONS. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. SPECIFICATIONS AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY SUCH. ALL COST SHALL BE INCLUDED IN BASE BID. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.Civil Engineering& Surveying880 Holcomb Blvd, Ste 2FFairhope, AL 36532251-990-6566PROPOSEDEXISTING SITE PLAN LEGEND TRAFFIC CONTROL ARROW EDGE OF PAVEMENT ASPHALT PAVING X" SYSL - X" WIDE SINGLE YELLOW SOLID LINE X" DYSL - X" WIDE DOUBLE YELLOW SOLID LINE X" SWSL - X" WIDE SINGLE WHITE SOLID LINE CONCRETE PAVING GRAVEL PAVING HEADER CURB RIBBON CURB PARKING DATA TOTAL REQUIRED (2 SPACES/ UNIT) = PARKING REQUIREMENT SPACES 32 BUILDING (UNDER ROOF) SITE ANALYSIS 15,570 SF (4 QUADPLEXES) SITE ACREAGE (PROPOSED) ±1.98 AC (86,342 SF) BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT YARD: SIDE YARD: REAR YARD: MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 20 FT 20 FT 20 FT 35' BUILDING HEIGHT 35 FT (MAX.) PROVIDED PARKING 32 SPACES REQUIRED PARKING 32 SPACES (SEE PARKING DATA) JURISDICTION BALDWIN COUNTY (C.O. FAIRHOPE ETJ) PERVIOUS AREA 1.33 AC (67.0%) IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.65 AC (33.0%) REQUIRED: PROPERTY AREA LAND USAGE --1.98 ACRES (86,342 SF) BUILDING AREA (UNDER ROOF)18.0%0.36 ACRES (15,570 SF) IMPERVIOUS PAVING 0.29 ACRES (12,865 SF) GRASSED/LANDSCAPED AREA 1.33 ACRES (57,907 SF) DESCRIPTION % OF PROPERTY AREAAREA 15.0% 67.0% ZONING UN-ZONED TOTAL PROVIDED =32 NOTE: THE INTERNAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY, ROADS, EASEMENTS AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES ARE PRIVATE AND WILL BE MAINTAINED BY THE DEVELOPER/OWNER. THE INTERNAL RIGHT-OF-WAYS, ROADS, EASEMENTS AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES WILL NOT BE MAINTAINED BY BALDWIN COUNTY. IF INDIVIDUAL LOTS, SITES, UNITS, ETC., ARE TO BE SOLD, THE DEVELOPER/OWNER SHALL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE CURRENT BALDWIN COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME, AND THE PROPERTY SHALL BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE REGULATIONS PRIOR TO SUCH SALE OR ATTEMPTED SALE. SITE DATA: 1. ACREAGE IN TOTAL TRACT: 1.98 ACRES 2. SMALLEST LOT/UNIT SIZE: 938 SF 3. TOTAL SQUARE FEET OF EACH LOT OR UNIT: 15,570 SF 4. TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS OR UNITS: 16 5. LINEAR FEET IN STREETS: 274 LF (PRIVATE) 6. NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES: 32 SPACES 7. AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 0.65 ACRES 8. DENSITY (GROSS):8.08 UNITS/AC 9. DENSITY (NET, FOR CALCULATING GREENSPACE, FAIRHOPE) 9.52 UNITS/AC 10. TOTAL SF OF ALL AREAS RESERVED FOR TOTAL OPEN SPACE: N/A 11. TOTAL SF OF ALL AREAS RESERVED FOR USEABLE OPEN SPACE: N/A 12. GREENSPACE:0.498 ACRES OWNER: PROVISION INVESTMENTS, LLC 19940 STATE HWY 181 FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 FLOOD ZONE: FIRM NO. 01003C0663M EFFECTIVE DATE APRIL 19, 2019, SHOWS THE PROPERTY TO BE SITUATED IN ZONE X UNSHADED. UTILITY PROVIDERS: WATER - FAIRHOPE UTILITIES SEWER - FAIRHOPE UTILITIES ELECTRIC - RIVIERA UTILITIES VICINITY MAP N.T.S. SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 2 EAST BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA SITE TWIN BEECH ROAD THOMPSON HALL ROADCO RD 13GREENSPACE CALCULATIONS (CITY OF FAIRHOPE): ACREAGE IN TOTAL TRACT: 1.98 ACRES WETLANDS:0 ACRES PONDS:0.13 ACRES ASPHALT ROADS:0.17 ACRES NET ACREAGE: 1.68 ACRES DENSITY (NET) = 16 UNITS/1.68 ACRES:9.52 UNITS/ACRE GREENSPACE REQUIRED (25% OF 1.98 ACRES): 0.495 ACRES GREENSPACE PROVIDED:0.498 ACRES PARKING - EACH UNIT HAS A SINGLE CAR GARAGE. THERE IS ALSO AN UNCOVERED PARKING SPACE (DRIVEWAY) Thompson Hall QuadplexesThompson Hall RoadFairhope, AL 36532CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCH. PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS23. OF EXIT PORCHES; PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS. THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF BUILDING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.24. CO W P E N C R E E K SR 1817 _J ij--------, ------- --------- I I I I 1 r--~--------------~--------~ ~-------~---7 l f i I I I 1-------------1 I i ~-I.,..........,..~~ .4.-· ..,. -•·. :-:·~ \-~ : ..•. • -:-.I> -:, ; ...........,...~---r----r-~I l I I I I I I I I I I I ------------------------------------------,--J I I L--------------------------------------------~ ---------------- ( / / ---------•-- --• I I 1· I I I I I ·-¾ -- ' i . -"vr------Hi--+ !-• .,,...--" . I I • ! ,, G oo gle ... 1--·-· (, N ., c:,-=:9 lii'Jo..iie.a .. 11,.,.,,9 l:!!. ~- WEST 295.52' N89°54'15"W 200.00' S89°53'14"E 200.04'N00°22'23"E 326.75'N00°04'54"E 326.75'S89°34'18"E 199.85' N89°37'04"W 199.86'N00°22'24"E 291.95'N89°37'04"W 295.67' N89°38'02"W 2301.16'N00°22'24"E40.00'S00°24'07"W 291.95'S89°37'04"E 295.82' CMF 1/2"CRF (FAIRHOPE) CMF 1/2"CRF (THOMPSON) 1/2"CRS (SE CIVIL) N/F 05-46-05-22-0-000-001.535 FST MILLER, CHRIS E 9595 TWIN BEECH RD FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONED BALDWIN CO. HWY 44 80 FT. R/WTHOMPSON HALL RD.66 FT. R/W20' B.S.L. 20' B.S.L.20' B.S.L.20' B.S.L.N/F 05-46-05-22-0-000-001.538 FST HENDERSON, DORRIS L 19201 THOMPSON HALL RD FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONED N/F 05-46-05-22-0-000-001.562 FST ETHERIDGE, W ETUX SHARON K 19137 THOMPSON HALL RD FAIRHOPE, AL 36532 UN-ZONED N/F 05-46-05-22-0-000-001.557 FST NESLER, ANGELICA L ETAL NESLER, TODD 10043 WEXFORD LN DAPHNE, AL 36526 UN-ZONED 75' H.C.S.75' H.C.S.GREENSPACE 0.498 AC SHEET C05 DRAWN DATE SCALE JOB No.SEALAFFIXREVISIONDATER Know what's below. before you dig.Call GREENSPACE PLANCivil Engineering& Surveying20190574 JRB 2/18/20 1"=20'880 Holcomb Blvd, Ste 2FFairhope, AL 36532251-990-6566 Thompson Hall QuadplexesThompson Hall RoadFairhope, AL 36532800 10 20 40 20 SCALE I z I , - -I I I ---, - -- -------- - I I I i -- -- - I - I I -- l - - - I I I I ----- - I --- I I 7 ----I I 7 ---7 I . . . ,.· / I I ry ·_· .. I I I .. ·-.. I w I I I I / "' • I • I I / "' ~-•----- I , ', ,[;. I . . . I I .t i • ~ / "' I " / "' I I ~ " ... .. -. I "' •• _,S_ .... :. I -• ' .a_ •• :s" .· ',,t. .. I " '-- • -• I .. .. ,. ..... _- L-- • ... _J,,'· ,. I '.", " • I le I .• ... " • '. • ~ • ·.• •· 1 {S :• -$·· • " ,', I •• • . ' ' • -" ' ,·· ... I ' •· -• • .• ,. ' j '.! . ..... . . " ' • ... s • • •. " -I ' " . ' • " ' •• • .. 4· I • .t • . _., .. ,. " j • .• ... " • ,. ' • • •. ·.• •·· I • .. ,{ ' · . .., .. ·.J ' • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7 I I I I I/ I I I .. • I .. ; .J' " •.. ' . •· • I I ' .• ' .,.. " . . · ' . ··; I. I • • .,.. . • -' ..... I ... " •. · •" ~-• I •. • " ...... ~ ' . .... --; .[ J . .. •·' ... • ·"'·. ; .f.., .· " ' •.. •" I .• ' .... " ,{' I I · ..... • • •j J . .• •·' • . .. _ .. : .t., I • .... ,, . _.,_ " I ._.., .• •j "' • .• .. • " ·- ..... I .. ~ ,, I/ • •.. •·· ... I I "' .• " ·- ._.., -· ·.1 • · .. •·· I I I/ • ,{ . . ._.., -· ·,1 I " V • I I "' I I I V I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' ' I I I I --- ~ --- i I -- I I T I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --I . -- ,. " , " L ------------------------I J ' -. :, .·· - - ---- - - - ----r --- ---- - - ---- - - --- I I - - - --- - ----- - - _J - -- - - - N ·. ... ·, ' ; ', . .,.; ,. '·-!.~ ,• .... ------- -- ------ - --- ~,--- 1 SD 20.06 Mozley Estate Farms – March 2, 2020 Planning Commission March 2, 2020 Subdivision Approval Case: SD 20.06 Mozley Estate Farms Project Name: Mozley Estate Farms Minor Property Owner /Applicant: Wayne & Sherry Mozley General Location: North side of Dominion Drive East of Mary Ann Beach Road Project Type: Minor Subdivision inside Fairhope’s ETJ Number of lots: 3 Project Acreage: 10.3 Zoning District: Unzoned Baldwin County PPIN Number: 242283 Surveyor of record: The Woodlands Group School District: J Larry Newton School, Fairhope Middle School, Fairhope High School Report prepared by: Samara Walley, MCP City Planner Recommendation: Approval with conditions Subject Site Subject Site Mary Ann Beach Rd Dominion Dr. Mary Ann Beach Rd Dominion Dr. N N ~ ES rt.1~ '" r>,1>111 ,U t,1• t 2 SD 20.06 Mozley Estate Farms – March 2, 2020 Summary of Request: Public hearing to consider the request of Wayne and Sherry Mozley for plat approval of Mozley Estate Farms, a 3-lot minor subdivision. The property is approximately 10.3 acres and is located on the north side of Dominion Drive just east of Mary Ann Beach Road. The applicant desires to divide the property into three residential lots. Comments: The subject property is in Fairhope’s Extra Territorial Jurisdiction and therefore must follow Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations. The proposed subdivision according to Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations is a minor subdivision and has been reviewed accordingly. Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations Article VI Section D requires the provision of sidewalks along all streets in the Planning Jurisdiction of Fairhope. The preliminary plat does not illustrate sidewalks and therefore the applicant is requesting a waiver. The proposed subdivision does not include the building of any infrastructure or improvements therefore a tree protection plan, landscape plan, and other criteria required for a major subdivision is not applicable. The proposed subdivision did not trigger a traffic study. Concerning storm water runoff none of the existing flow patterns will be changed by this replat. Water and Gas services are provided by the City of Fairhope. Power is available through Baldwin EMC. The submitted site plan illustrates three proposed lots fronting Dominion Drive. A table is located on the plan providing the proposed minimum building setbacks. If approved, the minimum building setbacks should be illustrated on the site plan. Waiver Request: Article VI Section D. Sidewalks requirement in the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations which states, “sidewalks shall be installed on all streets within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope.” The applicant has provided a letter stating that there are no sidewalks in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, a waiver has been requested. A. WAIVER STANDARDS: (Staff response in blue) Waivers may be granted where the Planning Commission finds that the following conditions exist: 1. An extraordinary hardship may result from strict compliance with these regulations due to unusual topographic or other physical conditions of the land or surrounding area not generally applicable to other land areas. Article VI Section D. - Sidewalks: Though no hardship is presented, currently there are no sidewalks in the nearby vicinity. 2. The condition is beyond the control of the sub-divider. Article VI Section D. - Sidewalks: Not applicable for this individual case. 3. The requested waiver will not have the effect of nullifying the purpose and intent of the regulations, the Zoning Ordinance, or the Comprehensive Plan. Article VI Section D. - Sidewalks: Staff finds that this waiver will not nullify the intent of the regulations because the existing character of the surrounding properties is such that there are no sidewalks. 4. The waiver is the minimum deviation from the required standard necessary to relieve the hardship; Article VI Section D. - Sidewalks: Because there are currently no sidewalks present in the vicinity, the waiver would be minimum deviation from the required standard. 3 SD 20.06 Mozley Estate Farms – March 2, 2020 5. The waiver shall not have an adverse effect on adjacent landowners, or future landowners, or the public; Article VI Section D. - Sidewalks: No, the waiver shall not have adverse effects. 6. The waiver is necessary so that substantial justice is done. Article VI Section D. - Sidewalks: Staff is neutral on this standard. The subdivision regulations contain the following criteria in Article IV.B.2. Approval Standards: “2. Consistency with Plans, Regulations and Laws - The Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; • Not applicable b. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; • Not applicable c. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; • Not applicable. d. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or • Meets e. The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” • Meets Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of SD 20.06 Mozley Estate Farms with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the Sidewalk Waiver; 2. Illustration of the minimum front building setback on the Final Plat; 3. Flow Model test should be stamped by a professional engineer; and 4. Fire hydrant(s) should be illustrated on site plan. Emily Boyett From: Sent: To: Subject: Daphne Marsh <daphnemarsh@icloud .com > Tuesday, February 25 , 2020 7:29 PM Emily Boyett Case Sd 20 .06 Total objection to Mosley Estates Farms, three house. Objection based on drainage, traffic flow, and my pursuit of happiness. Green grass equals happiness, not someone's idea of a beautiful house . Is there review committee? Who says these houses will blend with the other houses? What kind of planning will be used? Due diligence has not been done . Just throw up houses, and destroy my investment in my house? NO! Daphne Marsh Crocker Addition to previous letter, please attach this to previous letter Sent from my iPad 1 Emily Boyett From: Sent: To: Subject: Daphne Marsh <daphnemarsh@icloud.com> Tuesday, February 25 , 2020 7:10 PM Emily Boyett Mosley Estate Farms We live directly across the street from the proposed sub division and were told by the owners of the land that they had no intention of building on the parcel for a long time. Would these proposed houses be subject to plan and elevation review? They would not be subject to any assessment by the Owners of Dominion Farms. They would be using our streets, drainage systems. (we already have a drainage issue .)Our house has been flooded because of the lack of proper drainage . More houses would add to the already inadequate drainage system. We bought our lot 21 years ago because of its being unique and so livable, and I feel like it would no longer be that way . I am totally opposed to the subdivision. I like green grass! My view is unique. Build houses and you will destroy my happiness. Houses not green grass . Thank you. I am Charles Crocker United States Marine Corps Retired Sent from my iPad 1 Emily Boyett From: Sent: To: Subject: Daphne Marsh <daphnemarsh@icloud .com > Monday, February 24, 2020 2:4 0 PM Emily Boyett Mosley Estates I am objecting against the subdivision of 3 lot minor subdivision . I am also stating that if the 3 lots are going to build, that a sidewalk must be installed . No wa iver be allowed . Must abide by Article VI, Section D. Sidewalks be installed. Daphne Crocker Sent from my iPad 1 1 SD 20.09 NW Corner Hwy. 181- Hwy. 104 – March 2, 2020 Planning Commission March 2, 20202 2-Lot Minor Subdivision Approval Case: SD 20.09 NW Corner Hwy. 181 – Hwy. 104 Subdivision Project Name: NW Corner Hwy. 181 – Hwy. 104 Subdivision Property Owner /Applicant: BYC, LLC General Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of Hwy. 181 and Hwy. 104 Project Type: Minor Subdivision inside Fairhope’s ETJ Number of lots: 2 Project Acreage: Approx. 56.69 Zoning District: Unzoned PPIN Number: 98366 Engineer: Thompson Engineering School District: Fairhope Intermediate, Fairhope Middle, Fairhope High School Report prepared by: Samara Walley, MCP City Planner Recommendation: Approval with conditions Subject Property HWY. 181 HWY. 104 N R-A Resi:lentlllllAgnoi11ureDo11111ct R-5 11'W!'D•nM)'O""'"'ilRHIOentlll R.fl Mobt,Nom,Part.D•lnd -8-lloc.lS~n;Olltrla &-2 GenetOIEl\lllne.ttDit4nct -8-3a TOVtl•RtsOtll.odr,i ... oOomct -~ T~•Rt$0t!C0111merot1St1YUOIMl!C -8--' Elu•ne•iar!CIProre,;onalDl!Snd -M-1 Uontltlfflllll'll!Olttnd -P-\P1r\~ PUD Pl&nned Uni D11...ebpmenl 2 SD 20.09 NW Corner Hwy. 181- Hwy. 104 – March 2, 2020 Summary of Request: Public hearing to consider the request of BYC, LLC owner and applicant for a 2-lot minor subdivision. The property is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of State Hwy. 181 and State Hwy. 104. The subject property is approximately 56.69 acres and the applicant desires to divide the property into two lots. Comments: The subject property is in Fairhope’s Extra Territorial Jurisdiction and therefore must follow Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations. The proposed subdivision according to Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations is a minor subdivision and has been reviewed accordingly. The proposed subdivision does not include the building of any infrastructure or improvements therefore a tree protection plan, landscape plan, and other criteria required for a major subdivision is not applicable. The proposed subdivision did not trigger a traffic study. Concerning storm water runoff none of the existing flow patterns will be changed by this replat. Water, sewer and gas services will be provided by City of Fairhope. Power is supplied by Riviera Utilities. AT&T will supply services as well. The preliminary plat illustrates the 2-lot subdivision. There is an existing building on Lot 1. A 60-foot minimum building setback is illustrated along Highway 104 and a 50- minimum building setback is illustrated along Highway 181. 15-foot drainage and utilities easements as well as 20’ perpetual non-exclusive easement for ingress, egress and utilities are illustrated as well. Waiver Request: Article VI Section D. Sidewalks requirement in the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations which states, “sidewalks shall be installed on all streets within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope.” The applicant has provided a letter requesting to postpone the requirement of sidewalks to the time of submission of development plans. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(11) requires flow model data submitted to the standards of the City of Fairhope Water Department. The applicant has requested to postpone the provision of flow model data and nearby fire hydrants on the preliminary plat until the time of submission of development plans. Lastly, Article IV, Section C.1.b.(18) requires the provision of wetland delineation and wetland buffers. The applicant states that the area of hydric soils as illustrated on the USDA Soil Maps are located within Lot 1. The applicant acknowledges that wetlands may be present. The applicant requests to postpone the provision of wetland delineation and buffers until the time of submission of development plans. A. WAIVER STANDARDS: (Staff response in blue) Waivers may be granted where the Planning Commission finds that the following conditions exist: 1. An extraordinary hardship may result from strict compliance with these regulations due to unusual topographic or other physical conditions of the land or surrounding area not generally applicable to other land areas. Though no hardship is presented, the applicant will address the above requirements the time of development. 2. The condition is beyond the control of the sub-divider. Not applicable for this individual case. 3 SD 20.09 NW Corner Hwy. 181- Hwy. 104 – March 2, 2020 3. The requested waiver(s) will not have the effect of nullifying the purpose and intent of the regulations, the Zoning Ordinance, or the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds that these waivers will not nullify the intent of the regulations because the applicant acknowledges the requirements and will address them on development plans 4. The waiver is the minimum deviation from the required standard necessary to relieve the hardship; The waivers would be minimum deviation from the required standard. 5. The waiver shall not have an adverse effect on adjacent landowners, or future landowners, or the public; No, the waivers should have no adverse effects if acknowledged at the time of development. 6. The waiver is necessary so that substantial justice is done. Staff is neutral on this standard. The subdivision regulations contain the following criteria in Article IV.B.2. Approval Standards: “2. Consistency with Plans, Regulations and Laws - The Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; • Not applicable b. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; • Not applicable c. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; • Not applicable. d. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or • Meets e. The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” • Meets Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of SD 20.09 NW Corner Hwy. 181- Hwy. 104 Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the sidewalk waiver request; 2. Approval of the flow model data waiver request; and 3. Approval of the wetland delineation and wetlands buffer waiver request. 1 SD 20.10 Guthrie Estates – March 2, 2020 Planning Commission March 2, 2020 Subdivision Approval Case: SD 20.10 Guthrie Estates Subdivision Project Name: Guthrie Estates Subdivision Property Owner /Applicant: Joyce Hagle General Location: The property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of County Road 13 and County Road 32 Project Type: Minor Subdivision inside Fairhope’s ETJ Number of lots: 2 Project Acreage: 32.14 Zoning District: Unzoned PPIN Number: 17754 Surveyor of record: Moore Surveying School District: J Larry Newton, Fairhope Middle, Fairhope High School Report prepared by: Carla L. Davis City Planner Recommendation: Approval N Subject Property N Subject Site i CITY OF FAIR HOPE ZONING Zoning ~T /l Tr.1rlW ":-r-.,..,rt -M..A H ~1.:d~ntlal JA\'l ncu 1u~ L.1111:n ::t 1,1 .1 LC'w L>e-i-1.lly 'i r ql~l e ,n ly [ITili r.1 1(r ', m n 1(t,:, ~M1(Cl -n .:-llr,'11nrr-nrr.llitv! . .-titr ,.Fr m v -r.1 -.\ H 97 r>r>,.'\.t)'!'°~r !Jl~r m l)' H -~ I'(: l-'el •C•i(j11rt'ff 'J r QI ~ I ,m I\' C n -3-iW Tc,.,,,-hc.u-..c s n ~lc F1n,11v -r.1 -'-l n N n r.n.~tyN n tl.fn,lly M . ._. 11 0:,u,c ,1.~·1>v,,,m ,o ~:1,)([.i "ltl111 -R-·t 1 ,r:,1 r.,n,p n!) nt;t llrt u.:i U ~n ~ra U u sa ,~i. Ua:n,:t -B-3-J T oL•d~r?.C-'ICr1 U:,d~I-J Dl'lt"C': -L.1-4 UL sa ,c is ar,d ~·J'le 1.~0s,a 1Jo1stnct -1"-l .lqnt nd•J1.:de lDllt,1ct -l'l--rM<119 t'UO 1-'larned Ur t lJc~~Jrrc n: ';l -Fl-.\., T 111 d:Tr!r-J11",r1 (.nTir r.m1r 1=.r ,fV'r:~o,,,,,-~ l C P.s.-,:c L-'1:.ln ~ 11 •-•u Stbleci :arc:E.I C ITY OF FA.IR H O~E: Z ONI NC -n -A n r-.•u 1~n-r1 t A J dn III rr. n~r rr R-· .ow Dcn~t ,. ::---glc -fan ly [IlJ[ •. :,, ~R -~b ) °W R"'.e> -R ~ t,1.,,Jiu n Dlt'u~.y Si 1i,le =11 11 b, -R $ Hi1¥1D""n~l.v Si1 11 11 =11 11ily R 3 PG -Pat 01Garoe1 S lnJ le Farr ly R $ TH t ._, .. ,.,t ,.,,.w S i 11h "111 ,it:r -R ,t LowC-..1t.-.l~ Mu ~ Fi:.111ili RS Hlo,1 D~n.;:l:y Owe lln" Rsck13nts.l -B-1 l...uc :il 'S h'JPJ i 111 Di~\J d B :-. Gi:c11:11111/: -""'• -Di~\Ji,J -B~,111 T.>t.1itl A~u .LWl,Ji11 1,1 Did.iiJ -B-~,b T A 1i..t. R~vr .C1.•m ut:11.i11 I ~=,,..i~,:o Di~\J d -B <I BuJ ,.,::c:i:.mJ P .J F,ot,,.ju, 111tDi-.i i.:I -t.l I u ,,bl mJu-:::\J 111 Dit.-.1i.:I .,, ~-----~-------------- 2 SD 20.10 Guthrie Estates – March 2, 2020 Summary of Request: Public hearing to consider the request of Joyce Hagle owner and applicant for a 2-lot minor subdivision. The property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of County Road 13 and County Road 32. The subject property is approximately 32.14 acres and the applicant desires to divide the property into two residential lots. The proposed Lot 1 is approximately 29.05 acres (1, 265, 418 square feet) and has an existing dwelling on the property. The proposed Lot 2 is approximately 3.09 acres (134, 600 square feet). Comments: The subject property is in Fairhope’s Extra Territorial Jurisdiction and therefore must follow Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations. The proposed subdivision according to Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations is a minor subdivision and has been reviewed accordingly based on the subdivision review criteria. The plat depicts the total lot size in square feet and acres as well as the minimum building setbacks, and sidewalk, drainage, and utility easements. It should be pointed out, the labeling of the 15’ drainage and utility easements meet the minimum requirements, however the actual distances measured reflects 10 feet. The plat should be revised to reflect the actual distance measured at 15 feet. The proposed subdivision does not include the building of any infrastructure or improvements at this time; therefore, a tree protection plan, landscape plan, and other criteria required for a major subdivision is not applicable. The proposed subdivision did not trigger a traffic study. Concerning storm water runoff none of the existing flow patterns will be changed by this replat. Water and gas services will be provided by the City of Fairhope. Power is supplied by Baldwin County EMC; and AT & T is the telephone provider. Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulation Article IV, Section C.1.b.18 require site data be provided and applicable permits be obtained regarding soils, wetlands, flooding, drainage, natural features and potential archaeological features. The proposed Lot 1 appears to have wetlands on the rear portion of the site; thus, requiring a wetland delineation be conducted by a certified delineator. The applicant is requesting a waiver to conduct the wetland delineation study at the time of construction/ development of the proposed Lot 1. Waiver Request: Article VI Section C.1.b.18 requirement in the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations states, “applicant shall provide site data and all applicable permits relative to items such as soils, wetlands, flooding, drainage, natural features and potential archaeological feature” The applicant has provided a letter stating the following regarding the request for a waiver at this time for a wetlands delineation: “On behalf of the Owner of the property, we are asking for a Variance of a Deferment of the Subdivision Regulations concerning the issue of locating Wetlands on the property. Mrs. Hagle does know that there are areas of concern of Lot 1 and currently does not have any plans to sell or develop this lot any further other than letting the farmer continue to farm the property. Mrs. Hagle does understand that Wetlands are important areas to protect, and that is one of the reasons that she is not doing any further development of Lot 1. We can place a large note on the plat stating that “any further development north of her 5 acre lot shall require a wetlands delineation by a certified delineator”. Wetlands Delineation are only good for a five year period after that they must be re-evaluated and approved. 3 SD 20.10 Guthrie Estates – March 2, 2020 A. WAIVER STANDARDS: (Staff response in purple) Waivers may be granted where the Planning Commission finds that the following conditions exist: 1. An extraordinary hardship may result from strict compliance with these regulations due to unusual topographic or other physical conditions of the land or surrounding area not generally applicable to other land areas. Article VI Section C.1.b.18: Though no hardship is presented, a wetlands delineation is required prior to development of the site; upon further development of Lot 1 a study must be conducted. As a wetland delineation is only valid for 5 years, if a study was required now by the time construction take place the study may have expired. 2. The condition is beyond the control of the sub-divider. Article VI Section C.1.b.18: Not applicable for this individual case. 3. The requested waiver will not have the effect of nullifying the purpose and intent of the regulations, the Zoning Ordinance, or the Comprehensive Plan. Article VI Section C.1.b.18: Staff finds that this waiver will not nullify the intent of the regulations because a wetlands delineation will be conduct prior future development. 4. The waiver is the minimum deviation from the required standard necessary to relieve the hardship; Article VI Section C.1.b.18: The applicant is not completely deviating from the required standard as a wetlands delineation will be conducted upon further development and or construction on Lot 1. 5. The waiver shall not have an adverse effect on adjacent landowners, or future landowners, or the public; Article VI Section C.1.b.18: No, the waiver shall not have adverse effects. 6. The waiver is necessary so that substantial justice is done. Article VI Section C.1.b.18: Staff is neutral on this standard. The subdivision regulations contain the following criteria in Article IV.B.2. Approval Standards: “2. Consistency with Plans, Regulations and Laws - The Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; • Not applicable b. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; • Not applicable c. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; • Meets d. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or • Meets e. The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” • Meets 4 SD 20.10 Guthrie Estates – March 2, 2020 Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of case # SD 20.01, Guthrie Estates Subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1) Revision of the plat to reflect the actual distance of 15 feet where the labeling of the 15 feet utility and drainage easements are located. 2) Planning Commission shall consider the applicant’s request for a waiver of Article VI Section C.1.b.18 of the subdivision regulations. a. The applicant proposes a note on the plat stating “any further development north of the 5 acre lot shall require a wetlands delineation by a certified delineator” in lieu of delineating wetlands and indicating them on the plat. Any further development of Lot 1 North of Lot 2 SHALL REQUIRE a Wetlands Delineation by a certified Delineator. Not to ScaleOWNER S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPT ANGE: STATE OF ALABAMA) COUNTY OF BALDWIN) This is to certify that, I the undersigned do hereby certify that I am the Owner of the within platted and described lands and that I have caused the same to be surveyed and subdivided as indicated hereon, for the uses and purposes herein set forth and do hereby acknowledge and adopt the same under the design and title heron indicated, and grant all easements and dedicate all Streets, to the public or private uses as noted on this plat. JOYCE G. HAGLE NOT ARY PUBLIC: STATE OF ALABAMA) BALDWIN COUNTY ) Date I, ---------~-----a Notary Public, in and for said State and County, do hereby certify that the above name/s signed to the within OWNERS ACCEPT ANGE and who are known to me, that they voluntarily executed said BALDWIN COUNTY HEAL TH DEPARTMENT APPROVAL The lots on this plat meet the allowed exem~tions to the Large-Flow Development as provided in 420-3-1-.17 (e) of the Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Regulation for the State of Alabama. The division of a parcel of land into lots or tracts 3 acres or greater in size. The signature affixed hereon does not imply an approval for any existing or future Onsite Sewage Treatment Systems. The herein plat is approved for recording only, this the day of 20~ By: --;,---,----,--::--,-------------------Environmentalist ' A BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE PLAN SHALL BE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT AND SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, BALDWIN COUNTY, AND ALABAMA DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENT AL MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS AS PER THE 2016 HANDBOOK (ADEM). THE FINISH FLOOR SHALL BE 16-INCHES ABOVE THE HIGHEST GRADE NEXT TO THE PROPOSED RESIDENCE. ,. I d 05-46-08-34-0-000-014.000 STREET, HAROLD J CA THY M 8980 CO RD 32 05-46-08-34-0-000-013.000 STREET, HAROLD J CATHY M 8980 CO RD 32 a:: I ol FAIRHOPE AL 36532 Farm Land FAIRHOPE AL y6532 Farm Land I ACCEPT ANGE on this date. Given under my hand and seal this the day of ______ _ 2020. ~1 _s 89° 46' 16" E 58.00' I I I I Notary Public -Baldwin County, Alabama My Commission Expires: TELEPHONE COMPANY CERTIFICATE: The undersigned, as authorized by ____________ hereby approves the within plat for the recording of same m the Office of the Judge of Probate, Baldwin County, Alabama, this the day of _______ 20 __ Authorized representative POWER COMPANY CERTIFICATE: The undersigned, as authorized by Baldwin County EMC, hereby approves the within plat for the recording of same in the Office of the Judge of Probate, Baldwin County, Alabama, this the ____ day of _______ 20 __ Authorized representative CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL OF UTILITIES BY CITY OF FAIRHOPE for GAS, & WATER: The undersigned, as authorized by The City of Fairhope, hereby approves the within plat for the recording of same in the Office of the Judge of Probate,Baldwin County, Alabama, this the __ _ day of Authorized Representative GAS Authorized Representative WATER CERTIFICATE OF THE BALDWIN COUNTY PLANNING DIRECTOR: 20_ The undersigned, as Director of the Baldwin County Planning and Zonning Department, hereby approves the within plat for the recording of same in the Judge of Probates Office, Baldwin County, Alabama, on this the ___ _ day of -------20 __ , Planning Director CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE PLANNING COMMISSION ---- ----- -O' 100' 200' Graphic Scale 1" = 100' BSL = Building Setback Line 300' SITE DA TA FOR Guthrie Estates: 1. 2. T otol Number of Lots 2, Project Size 32.14 Acres Smallest Lot 3.09+/-ACRES Largest Lot 29.05+/-Acres The Lots ore served by AT & T Communications (BELLSOUTH) City of Fairhope Woter, Gos Baldwin County EMC -Power -Telephone, 3. 4. Property lies Outside the City of Fairhope. Property is NOT Zoned. Building Setbacks FRONT 40 Feel REAR 35 Feet SIDE 20 Feet Unless Otherwise Noted Hereon. NO NEW Streets or Utility Lines this Project at this time. Easements ore as shown hereon. FLOOD CERTIFICATE: I also state that I have e)(amined the current FIA Official Flood Hazard Map, Community Number O 15000, Panel Number 0780 M, (01003C0780 M) and found referenced lot above lies in Flood Zones X, Map Dated April 19, 2019. 101 Drainage & Utility Easement along all front. rear and side lot lines. SEC 33 C") .-I ~ >-< ~ :::r:: c., ..... :::r:: >-E-< z ~ 0 u z ..... ~ ~ ,-..:i < r:I:i (D 0 OJ ,,, ,,, w co I") 0 0 0 z ,i 0 a:: 0 N -I I 0 11! cl I I I I I I I I I ( Set Re-bar & Cap / POINT OF BEGINNING SIP -ID ID C -V) u ID > □ (L ID -~ C □ > >, □ • I -0 I -~ "' I ii' 0 0 0 0 "! w 0 "' "' 0 0 0 z -C ., E " " 0 w >, --::::, ~ _J (/) m D ..,. SIP --20• Drainage Easement ...J (/) m 0 N 0 <O O'> -<O :;: "' -O'> 0 0 0 0 (/) SIP S 89° 46' 16" E I I N 89° 46' 17" W 333.27' C 0 0 'in 0 q > <O "' 0 -· o<C ": 'o 0) CJ) Q_ -..c 8-l! N <O f-"' I "' -omNtO w 0 I zr0 I"') ... _ -"'1>o...J N L I _Jo::<( "' 0 o:)<( ci []_ OOO1t:;:; ... cb uf., o ~ 0 0 ,,;;f-...J i.n IO: u I C.,I") _ ·oo 0 -LO <( ..--<( OJ 0 0 OI0H.L et:: 0 z z 1,271.69' Found Open Top Pipe I") L{) r---I") a:, _J w (/) LOT 1 m , ; st ... 0 0 29.05+ /-ACRES L{) I") I\ '<z N r--<(Z -.~ 1,265,418+/-Square Feet 0 0 I ol! z ...J (/) m D N f8 -CV ,> 0 0 0 0 8_J~N 0 I oil'1 0o::Ol0 (/] I <C -:o r.o .,. :i: "' l")~~_J I c::: >-<C 00 ~< 0 9~~~:;:; (C~r-.,0 :ii 'V<(r-,.~-o I o::.-_·oo l,{)0..1"'--<( ID 0(1).----Li._(l:'. Found Crimp Top Pipe t-i:il-----~--------o F ound Re-bar & Cap __!./'f 1.0 ~ (Poly) 0.2' West -I : 8 < rl'\en\-----.. i [ r-:,-t.ose,,· .... [ -w c ' o,~~ \ , 111· Qj' C \ I!~ gVlgN SIP I -l--~~~~~~·---=--~~-~--1-1 SIP 1;i~ I l")-0.l_J I ,L__ I :J ~<( 11 j~_.1,..._10,_ Drainage & Utility Easement7. ?~}(~~ t::'r ! 1• 35• BSL 1 1i r~5ii I io ~~~<COJ 1 , I ' o:r:.-LLO::: I 1' I , I <»---------0 , , [ ' Found Open Top Pipe ~~-N 89° 48' 38" ~1J-· I I ,,.~~. 124.94' , '"fi'"~ ~ 0~1--~~-' Focod Ro-bo, & Cop 11 '1 ..,.. I I ' (F AIRHaPE) ,-~, uJ '1' m ~I _ ~ m LOT 2 '1 ! 0 o, C O<( oi O 3.09+ /-ACRES I N "'I O ~~ g N _JI 3:i :~ Q!!:l 134,600+/-Square Feet ~I, ,1 I o I g§ L&J ~I (IJ 8(.) ;.... -01 '1 £ 0~ s::/ N .¼ a"'! ~ I LO N,[ ' ,.-. r~ .._ 01 3:NCO ~ ~J 0~~1"')"'1 I w co "'l 1';.._ Oo 0 0 oc.o Ost (/] §> QJ col ..... 1"100...J O II ' .. 5 I Z0:::<C o & $? o <n' a... ~<(aw-z l 11 OJ o "' [ □ 1 viua..:3 J.;f Ir-f /:' tDz o c 1 ~15' Drainage & Utility Easement~ [ , Ir-(~~~. , o stwr--:i: ~ i [ / I [ ~ _ _J ___ ~_"'lf ~1_J Z ~~~!! L~----'!~_BSL ____ t'-• , > S 89° 50' 15" W ~ c ~ ' / N 89° 44' 06" W I 2_17.45' _ _ ~ ~-~ 293.91' ' ,, .,.,.,,~ .. ..ac-O• 10' -:--= --/--Ed,.,e of Rood GREYTHORNE ESTATES Recorded on Slides 2330-A through 2330-D SURVEYORS NOTES: 1 All measurements were mode in accordance with U.S. Standards. 2 Description os furnished by Client. 3 There may be Recorded or Unrecorded Deeds, Easements, right-of-ways, or other instruments that could affect the Boundaries of said properties. 4 There was NO attempt to determine the existence, location or extent of any Sub-surface features such as Septic Tonks, Underground Utilities, Footings, etc. 5 Bearings and Distances shown hereon were "Computed" from actual field traverses. MAP 6 The Basis of Bearings for this Survey ore Based on Grid North as established by G. P. S. Real Time Network R. T. K., referenced to NAD 1983, Alabama West Zone. 7 There was NO attempt mode to locate any Environmental issues such as but not limited to Wet Lands, Fuel Tanks, etc . B Owner Must Verify Wetlands Location if Shown on Survey with the proper authorities before any construction is to be started. 9 Refer to Recorded Deeds, Plots, Restrictive Covenants for any additional Information. 10 Measurements of the Residence ore exterior dimensions and are not to be used for calculating square footage of Residence. 11 Flood Zones ore scaled from the current FEMA mops . 12 limits of proposed Residence to be staked are as per clients instructions. 13 Verify any Buildin'i} Setbacks and Building location with the proper authorities before any construction con begin. 14 This Plat or Mop is the property of Moore Surveying Inc. and Seth Moore. It is Solely for the use of the Client Named hereon and may not be used by o Third Porty. 15 This Survey is Valid for 30 days from the dote of survey and it is NOT Transferable to a Third Porty and may NOT be used for any other purpose without prior written consent from Moore Surveyin$J Inc., or Seth Moore. 16. This Survey is based upon existing monumentation found as hereon states and does not purport to represent a retrocement of the Government Survey. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: COMMENCING at the Locally Accepted Southwest corner of the Southwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 6 South, Range 2 East, St. Stephens Meridian, Baldwin County, Alabama, thence run North 00 de9rees 13 minutes 18 seconds East, along the West Boundary of said Section 34, a distance of 1,339.06 feet to a point; thence run South 89 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 58.00 feet to an iron pin marker lying on the East Right-of-way line of Baldwin County Highway # 13 for the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue South 89 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 1,271.69 feet to an iron pin marker in concrete being the Southwest corner of Lot 34 of Greythorne Estates as recorded on Slides 2330-A through 2330-D; thence run South 00 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 837.53 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run South 00 degrees 07 minutes 38 seconds East, a distance of 460.01 feet to an iron pin marker in the base of on oak tree, lying on the North Right-of-woy line of Marlow Road (a. k. o. Baldwin County Highway #32}; thence run North 89 degrees 44 minutes 06 minutes West, along said North Right-of-way line a distance of 293.91 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run North 00 degrees 07 minutes 21 seconds East, a distance of 308.22 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run North 89 degrees 48 minutes 38 seconds West, a distance of 124.94 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run South 00 degrees 08 minutes 05 seconds West, a distance of 308.21 feet to an iron pin marker lying on said North Right-of-way line; thence run South 89 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds West, along said North Right-of-way line a distance of 217.45 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run North 44 degrees 48 minutes 00 seconds West, along said North Right-of-way line a distance of 14.14 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run North 89 degrees 48 minutes 00 seconds West, along said North Right-of-way line a distance of 21.88 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run North 00 degrees 04 minutes 52 seconds East, a distance of 619.43 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run North 89 degrees 46 minutes 17 seconds West. a distance of 333.27 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run South 00 degrees 09 minutes 13 seconds West. a distance of 619.60 feet to an iron pin marker lying on said North Right-of-way line; thence run North 89 degrees 48 minutes 00 seconds West, along said North Right-of-way line a distance of 224.05 feet to an iron pin marker; thence run North 44 degrees 47 minutes 17 seconds West, a distance of 70.70 feet to an iron pin marker lying on said East Right-of-way line; thence run North 00 degrees 13 minutes 30 seconds East, along said East Right-of-way line a distance of 1,200.00 feet to an iron pin marker: thence run North 02 degrees 38 minutes 15 seconds West, along said East Right-of-way line a distance of 39.30 feet to the POPINT OF BEGINNING. I, Seth W. Moore, a Licensed Professional Lond Surveyor, hereby state that all parts of this survey and drawing have been completed in accordance with the requirements by the Standards of Practice for Land Surveying in the State of Alabama to the best of my Knowledge, information and belief, this is a true and correct map. All according to my survey made this the __ _ day of ____ _ 2020. I --------------------------------------------------------------------------'------------I also state that this drawing and or certification does not reflect any title or easement research, other than what is visible on the ground or provided by the clients at time of survey. This plat has been submitted to and considered by the City of Fairhope Planning Commission and is hereby approved. Doted this the --~day of ______ _ Secretary or Authorized Representative COUNTY ENGINEER: The undersigned, as County Engineer of Baldwin County, Alabama, hereby approve the within plat for the recording of same in the Probate Office of Baldwin County, Alabama, this the _____ day of _______ 20_, County Engineer CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL BY THE BALDWIN COUNTY E-911 ADDRESSING SEC 4 The undersigned, as aurhorized by the Baldwin County E-911 Board, hereby approves the Road names as depicted on the within plat and hereby approves the within plat for the Recording of same in the Judge of Probates Office, Baldwin 'U' " SEC 3,~ ___________ 10_0'_R_.o._w. _ _:a:::_·~k~.a:::_:_· _.::::M~A.::..::R'..:.._L::::__::_O~W~ _ _:R:_::O:_:A_:D:_ ___ ~_I----=B=A=L=D....:.W:....:l=N-'----'C:....:O=-U=-.::...:Nc...::Tc....:Y=--=H=l::....:G::...:Ho=..,;,,;Wc...::A..::..Y=--#u...:=.3=2------8_0'_R_.o_.w. ___ _ Alabama, on this the ___ day of Authorized Representative Signature ~ County, c: 20_ THE "LOCALLY ACCEPTED" SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 2 EAST Owner / Developer 05-46-08-34-0-000-015.000 HAGLE, JOYCE GUTHRIE 9135 CO RD 32 FAIRHOPE AL 36532 MOORE SURVEYING, INC. PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYING 555 NORTH SECTION STREET, FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA 36532 PHONE (251) 928 -6777 Email mooresurveying@bellsouth.net P.P. = Power Pole CL = Centerline UG = Under round REC -Record CAL = Calculated FC = Fence Corner R -Radius ELEV = Elevation JOB NO. DATE FIELD WORK DATE DRAWN BY SCALE 2020 1/21/2020 1/17 SWM 1,, = 100' Seth W. Moore, P.L.S. Alo. Reg. No. 16671 ~F~R~B";jC=~~,oo~~,d~~•-~b•~•~•~c~o }-;~:;;;;;;;;;--j-------j J-FP -Found Iron Pin E REVISIONS SIP= s,t Ro-bo, & Co Property lies in the SW Quarter of Sec 34, T -6-S, R-2- 1 SD 20.11 Hill Top, Phase II – March 2, 2020 Planning Commission March 2, 2020 Subdivision Approval Case: SD 20.11 Hill Top Phase II Project Name: Hill Top Phase II Property Owner /Applicant: Two Hands Design & Development/Jade Consulting General Location: North side of Hill Top Phase I Project Type: Major Subdivision Number of lots: 8 Project Acreage: 4.7+/- Zoning District: Unzoned PPIN Number: 40591 Engineer of record: Jade Consulting, LLC School District: Fairhope Elementary, Intermediate, Middle, and High School Report prepared by: Mike Jeffries, QCI City Planner Recommendation: Approve with conditions Will Beech Rd ,103 n Subject Property N 2 SD 20.11 Hill Top, Phase II – March 2, 2020 Summary of Request: Public hearing to consider the request of Jade Consulting, LLC on behalf of Two Hands Design and Development, LLC owner and applicant for preliminary plat approval of Hill Top Phase II, an 8-lot major subdivision. The property is located on the north side of Hill Top Phase I. The subject property is 4.7+/- acres with the smallest lot 15,000 S.F. and largest lot 19,875 S.F. The average lot size is 16,692 S.F. This subdivision will be accessed from Petiole Drive located in the first phase of Hill Top which is currently under construction. Comments: The development will have 8 new single-family residential lots with new roads and infrastructure. And by definition of the City of Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations creating a major subdivision and must abide by the current regulations. - The sidewalks will be placed in a 6’ pedestrian easement along the front of the lots. - A waiver to build the sidewalks in an easement and not the ROW was submitted and is supported by staff. - Nine LID techniques are going to be utilized which will provide the required 80% or more TSS removal. All the storm water will end up going through a sand filter that provides 80% TSS removal. Most of the storm water will also be pretreated using one of the other nine techniques provided on site. - The sites post-development discharge is less than the pre-development out flow. - Greenspace accounts for 16.7% of this phase of development. 15% was required. SITE DATA CURR ENT ZON ING: LI NEAR FEET OF STREET S: NUMB ER OF LOTS: SMA LLE ST LOT SIZE: AVER AG E LOT SIZ E: CO MMON AR E AS: GR EE NSPAC E AR EA: TOTAL AR EA: U ZO ED B ALDWIN CO UN TY 992 LF 8 15,000 SF 16,692 SF 0.742 AC 0.511 AC 4.705 AC LOT UTILITY & DRAINAGE EASEMENTS (EXC EP T AS OTH ERWISE SHOWN) FRO NT & RE AR 15' SIDE: 15 · (7.5' EAC H SIDE) LOT SIDEWALK EASEMENT (EXC EP T AS OTH ERWISE SHOWN) FRO NT 6' REQUIRED SETBACKS (EXC EP T AS OTH ERWISE SHOWN) FRON T: 30' RE AR: 30' SIDE: 10' SIDE STREET : 20' UTILITIES WA TER , SEWER & GAS: FAIRHOP E PUB LI C UTILITIE S 555 SOU TH SECTI ON ST .. FA IRHOP E, A L 36532 J AY WHIT A N (251) 928-8003 ELE CTRICA L: RIVIERA UTILITIE S 4 13 E. LAUREL AVE, FO LE Y, AL 36536 SCO TT SLI GH (251) 943-500 1 TELE PHON E AT&T 2 155 OLD SHELL RO AD. MOB ILE . A L 36607 WAD E MITCHELL (251) 4 71 -836 1 3 SD 20.11 Hill Top, Phase II – March 2, 2020 - Common areas 9 & 10 have enhanced landscaping to be qualify as greenspace. - The landscape plan has been approved by Paul Merchant the City’s Horticulturalist. - There is a future ROW on the north between lots 33 & 34 that will provide for future connectivity. It will remain grassed with the required Future ROW Sign. The subdivision regulations contain the following criteria in Article IV.B.2. Approval Standards. “2. Consistency with Plans, Regulations and Laws - The Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; • NA (not zoned) b. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; • Meets c. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; • Meets d. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or • Meets e. The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” • Meets Recommendation: Staff recommends approval SD 20.11 Hill Top Subdivision Phase II with the following conditions: 1. Approval of sidewalk waiver to build the sidewalks in an easement and not the ROW. 2. Hill Top Subdivision Phase I receives Final Plat Approval ---- ___ ,,. c.oc-..c,,,r~,.:: ,,,,._,.. __ -T BEGINNING JADE , .... ,."~ .. ~~·--,-- CIJNU.-.~ .... ~::!-.. ::.:""-,~ I LEGEND D -GREEN SPACE AREA WITH STORMWATER INFRASTRUcnJRE (0.311 ACRES) GREEN SPACE AREA (0.511 ACRES) TOTAL ARCA : 4.705 AC TOTAL ROW AREA: 1.639 AC TOTAL LOT/CA AREA : 3.066 AC NET DENSITY: 8 LOTS / 3.066 AC: 2.6 UNITS / ACRE REQUIRED GREEN SPACE: 15% PROVIDED GREEN SPACE: 0.511 AC (16.7%) TABLE 4 1 GREEN SPACE TYPES (GREEN SPACE AREA): CA #7 • TRAIL, GREEN (0.156 AC) CA ~8 • GREEN (0.312 AC) CA #9 -GREEN (0.028 AC) CA, /: lO -GREEN (0.015 AC) HILL TOP PH 2 ~ ~ 1 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 Planning Commission March 2, 2020 Subdivision Approval Case: SD 20.12 Battles Trace Phase 6 Project Name: Battles Trace Phase 6 Site Data: Smallest Lot – 0.18 acres +/- Largest Lot – 0.44 acres +/- Project Type: Final Plat Jurisdiction: Fairhope Planning Jurisdiction Zoning District: Tourist Resort (TR) District PPIN Number: 20948 and 36104 General Location: West side of South Section Street Between Twin Beech Road and Battles Road Engineer: Goodwyn, Mills, and Cawood, Inc. Owner / Developer: Teacher’s Retirement System of Alabama School District: Fairhope Elementary, Middle and High Schools Recommendation: Approve with conditions Prepared by: Carla Davis / J. Buford King City of Fairhope Planning Staff Legend ........ _ S11bjeel:Paroel CITY OF FA IRHOPE ZONING R .A, R.eHlt!r,Ulll I A9naNIWI!" o.-~ R.I LDWD~aiy5-19l•.f ■PT1ty R I(■} Rl(t!I \ Rl(O R...J PGH Pe,t.a/Gan:len S111,gle Famty ~R-3 TH Tow,hDOSl!Srl9't!:f ■mty R.--" LaowD ■f\atyNu .f ■l"!l•,Y R-!= lilgll Dt11•ty Dl'.elVIO RH-:1t:Ml!l1 B-2 G~a1 S UainHI DIMJlct ~• Tot.11Ut Rit.tbl'l t..odgilnr, Cl$Ulld 8-30 Tcun• ~e.lOft Commaroal SlffVtce-O 9-C su.-11u. ■rid Proll:U:ON:IDl.!inct M-1 UQhll~t1D11tnd Pl.ID Pi.11ned UJ'l i Dew1Dp1neni 2 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 Summary of Request: Public hearing to consider the request of Goodwyn, Mills, and Cawood, Inc. (GMC) on behalf of the Teacher’s Retirement Systems of Alabama for a request for approval of the final plat of the Battles Trace Phase 6, a forty-five (45) lot major subdivision. Subject property is located on the west side of S. Section Street South of Twin Beech Road. Subject property consists of approximately 25.97 total acres, with the new lot sizes as indicated on the staff report cover page. Mr. Tim Lawley, PE of GMC serves as the engineer of record (EOR) for subject development. Comments: MAJOR SUBDIVISON CRITERIA The following item are excerpts from the various checklists utilized by staff to evaluate subject application’s compliance with the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance, City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations and other relevant ordinances and are included here to provide relevant background and rationale behind staff’s recommendation. Any items remaining in red italic text will be cured by conditions of approval, or in the case of a recommendation for denial of an application, provide rationale for the recommendation of denial. Any items initially marked “revise and resubmit” have been cured by the notations in blue text, which may include conditions of approval. Article IV, Section.D.1.a. Maintenance Bond a. Either a financial guaranty (in the form of a maintenance bond) in an amount and form acceptable to the City Council as a guarantee for the installation of required improvements or the determination of the City's General Superintendent that all required improvements have been installed to the City's requirements. ☒N/A with comments ☐Accepted ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Subject development is “self-bonded” by the Retirement Systems of Alabama. A maintenance and guaranty agreement that normally accompanies a maintenance bond has been submitted and will be executed by the mayor of the City of Fairhope when utilities are dedicated to the City of Fairhope via resolution by the Fairhope City Council. Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(7) Final Plat and Final Plans showing all information required by and meeting requirements of Article IV., Section C.1. and the following additional information: (7) Delineation on plans or plat of clear sight triangles as required by Article V., Section D.5.b.(5). ☒N/A with comments ☐Accepted ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Cross Reference: Article V., Section D.5.b.(5). Comments: Subject development is located within the Tourist Resort (TR) district for which there are no streets to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope. Such provision is allowable in the TR district as contemplated by Article V, Section G.7. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance and Article IV Section “G” of the City of Fairhope Subdivision regulations. Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(8) Final Plat and Final Plans showing all information required by and meeting requirements of Article IV., Section C.1. and the following additional information: (8) Owner and Lien-Holders Certificates of Dedications for Streets or other public use. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: The “Certificate of Ownership” includes language granting the required utility easements for the development. No streets are to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope. Such provision is allowable in the TR district as contemplated by Article V, Section G.7. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance and Article IV Section “G” of the City of Fairhope Subdivision regulations. Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(9) Final Plat and Final Plans showing all information required by and meeting requirements of Article IV., Section C.1. and the following additional information: (9) Where streets stubs are provided, said stubs shall provide access to abutting properties. The applicant shall include a note on the plat providing notice that said stub shall provide future access to abutting properties. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Stub streets indicated on the plat and plans do not connect to adjacent properties – such provision is allowable in the TR district as contemplated by Article V, Section G.7. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance and Article IV Section G.3. of the City of Fairhope Subdivision regulations. I I I I I I I I 3 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(11) Final Plat and Final Plans showing all information required by and meeting requirements of Article IV., Section C.1. and the following additional information: (11) Surveyor’s Certificate on Plat, Engineer’s Seal and Certificate on Plans. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: As a condition of approval please include the engineer’s stamp adjacent to the engineer’s certificate prior to recording the plat. Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(16) Final Plat and Final Plans showing all information required by and meeting requirements of Article IV., Section C.1. and the following additional information: (16) Digital or video image(s) with date and time stamp of storm drains to ensure drainage structures are undamaged and free of debris and sediment. ☒N/A ☐Accepted ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Subject development is located within the Tourist Resort (TR) district for which there are no streets to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope. Such provision is allowable in the TR district as contemplated by Article V, Section G.7. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance. As a result, the storm drainage system is not to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope and sewer inspection videos are not required. Should the streets and drainage system be requested to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope at some time in the future, this review assumes a standalone review will be conducted at that time prior to dedication and acceptance. Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(17) Final Plat and Final Plans showing all information required by and meeting requirements of Article IV., Section C.1. and the following additional information: (17) Maintenance Plan for maintenance of detention facilities during development and documents providing for continued maintenance after completion of development and sale of all lots. Such documents running as a covenant with the lands. Note the five (5) year inspection cycle in lieu of three (3) years. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(17) (Continued) Cross Reference: Article V, Section F.3.a.(3) Comments: This review assumes the drainage system for Phase 6 will be incorporated into the existing O&M agreement for the phases completed thus far. As a condition of approval, copy of the updated O&M agreement, with recording stamp affixed, will be furnished with the final plat prior to application of signatures on the plat. Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(18) Final Plat and Final Plans showing all information required by and meeting requirements of Article IV., Section C.1. and the following additional information: (18)The engineer shall perform the supervision of construction; the final plat shall have the following engineer’s certification: “ENGINEER’S CERTIFICATE” “I, the undersigned, a Registered Engineer in the State of Alabama holding Certificate Number ______, hereby certify that I have designed the within improvements in conformity with applicable codes and laws and with the principals of good engineering practice. I further certify that I have observed the construction of the within improvements, that the same conforms to my design, that the within is a true and accurate representation of improvements as installed and that said improvements are hereby recommended for acceptance by the City of Fairhope, Alabama. ____________________ Project Engineer ____________________ Date ____________________ Name of Project to which the Certificate Applies Plans which are certified consist of Page _____ thru _____, each of which bears by seal and signature.” ☐N/A ☐Accepted ☒Revise and Resubmit per comments I I I I I I I I 4 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 Comments: This review assumes the drainage system for Phase 6 will be incorporated into the existing O&M agreement for the phases completed thus far. As a condition of approval, a copy of the updated O&M agreement, with recording stamp affixed and the engineer’s certificate above included on the cover, will be furnished with the final plat prior to application of signatures on the plat. Article IV, Section D.4. Final Inspections 4. Final Inspections – Applicants shall submit a letter of verification prepared by the Applicant’s engineer certifying that all punch list items from the final inspections have been satisfactorily completed. A fee of $1,000.00 will be charged for all re-inspections caused by incomplete punch lists. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: For the applicant’s information Article IV, Section D.7. Recording 7. Recording – Applicant is responsible for recording of Plat and approval shall be null and void if the Plat is not recorded within sixty days after the date of final approval; provided, however, that the Commission may, on finding of good cause, extend that sixty day period. The applicant shall provide a copy of the recorded plat; failure to do so shall result in the denial of the issuance of the building permits within the subdivision. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: For the applicant’s information. Article V, Section D.3.e. Street Standards – Street Layout a. Access to Adjacent Property - Street connections to abutting properties shall be provided at least at intervals not to exceed the maximum block length specified in Section D.4., by extension of a paved street that meets City construction requirements to the boundary of the abutting property. A temporary turnaround shall be provided for those streets subject to the following: (1) A circular turnaround with a diameter of 30 to 42 feet. If a center island is provided in the turnaround, the outside diameter shall be 45 feet with a 20 to 24-foot lane maintained at all times. Circular turnarounds may be designed to incorporate a future traffic circle or roundabout, as provided in Article V., Section D.5.h., when future streets will intersect at that point. (2) For extensions serving 5 lots or more, a cul-de-sac shall be required. Permanent dead-end streets shall not exceed 1,320 feet (1/4 mile) in length. Permanent dead-end streets with a pavement width of 20 feet or less shall be provided with a turnaround having a roadway diameter of at least 70 feet and a right-of-way diameter of at least 100 feet. Permanent dead-end streets with a pavement width of more than 20 feet shall be provided with a turnaround having a roadway diameter of at least 80 feet and a right-of-way diameter of at least 100 feet. At non-permanent dead-end street, provide a temporary turn-around with at least a 70’ diameter constructed with an all-weather surface. (3) For street extensions serving four or fewer lots, no temporary turnaround is required. (4) All access streets to adjacent property that are not connected at the time of the improvements shall be posted with a stop sign blank reading "Future Through Street.” The sign shall be posted by the Subdivider. ☒N/A with comments ☐Accepted ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Stub streets indicated on the plat and plans do not connect to adjacent properties – such provision is allowable in the TR district as contemplated by Article V, Section G.7. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance. Article V, Section D.3.f. Street Standards – Street Layout a. Streetlights - Street lights are to be paid for or installed by the developer at the time of development. Streetlights shall be approved by the Planning director and/or his/her authorized agent and the Electrical Superintendent. Pole height shall be no more than 15 feet from finished grade. The type and style of lights and poles will be determined and agreed upon by the developer and the utility provider. All other approvals, including the design layout of streetlights, will be granted by the electrical superintendent. The utility provider shall be responsible for the installation and maintenance of the streetlights. Outside the City of Fairhope, the homeowner’s association will be responsible for the maintenance, if applicable, and energy costs of the lights and this responsibility shall be noted on the plat. I I I I I I 5 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐ Revise and Resubmit Cross Reference: Article IV, Section C.1.b.(12) Street lighting plan Comments: As a condition of approval, provide a copy of the paid invoice for the aid-to-construction cost of the streetlights from Riviera Utilities. Article V, Section D.5.a.(8) Street Standards – Street Design – General Requirements – Street Trees Street trees shall be planted on center in all planting strips according to the following: (a) All trees shall be at least 15 gallons and/or 1.5” to 2.5” in diameter when planted. (b) Trees shall be planted at least every 25 feet from intersections. A tree shall be planted one per lot or at least every 50 feet, but no closer than 10 feet. (c) Tree species and tree placement shall be approved by the City Horticulturist. (d) All trees shall be pruned so that no foliage, limbs or other obstructions exist between 2½ and 10 feet from the adjacent street grade. (e) In areas where planting strips are optional and not provided, sidewalks ten feet or greater shall provide 4’ x 4’ tree wells along the curb so that trees may be planted in conformance with these requirements. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Subject development is located within the Tourist Resort (TR) district for which there are no streets to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope and thus no street trees within the ROW to be dedicated to the City. Such provision is allowable in the TR district as contemplated by Article V, Section G.7. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance. Article VI, Section C. Construction Standards-Curbs and Gutters Curbs and gutters shall be installed on all streets within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope, except on those streets which are eligible for the rural design standard expressed in Table 5.3, Appendix A of these regulations. On streets requiring curb and gutter, either valley type or barrier type concrete curb and gutter which meets the City's standards and specifications expressed in Chapter 19 of the Code of Ordinances, as amended shall be installed. Curbs and gutters shall be designed and installed in accordance with good engineering practice. Face of curbs shall be not less than six inches in height. Backfill behind curbs shall slope to the back of the curb for drainage. Markings shall be added to the curb to indicate the location of water and sewer laterals. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Cross Reference: Table 5.3, Appendix “A” City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations Comments: Subject development is located within the Tourist Resort (TR) district for which there are no streets to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope. Such provision is allowable in the TR district as contemplated by Article V, Section G.7. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance. As a result, the storm drainage system, including curbs and gutters is not to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope. Should the streets and drainage system be requested to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope at some time in the future, this review assumes a standalone review will be conducted at that time prior to dedication and acceptance. Sewer and water markings appear to be in place for all sewer and water laterals. Article VI, Section E.6. – 8. Construction Standards-Storm Water 6. Warranty after Completion - All facilities subject to acceptance for maintenance by the public shall be warranted for a period of two years after date of acceptance by the developer. A surety bond guaranteeing such maintenance shall be a condition precedent to acceptance for maintenance by the governing body. 7. Applicability of General Law and Regulations - All plans and the Work shall fully conform to all rules, regulations, codes, laws, and ordinances which may reasonably apply thereto. In the event of conflict between provisions, the most restrictive provision shall apply. 8. As-Built Drawings – A copy of the construction as-built drawings stamped by the engineer shall be submitted to the Commission as verification that the project has been built in accordance with his or her design. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Cross Reference: City Code Section 19-2(f) Maintenance Bond Comments: Subject development is located within the Tourist Resort (TR) district for which there are no streets to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope and thus no storm water infrastructure to be dedicated to the city. Such provision is allowable in the TR district as contemplated by Article V, Section G.7. of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance. The Retirement Systems of Alabama is “self-bonded” and thus a maintenance bond is not included. I I I I I I I I I 6 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 The Maintenance Guaranty and Agreement to be executed by the mayor at the time of dedication of utilities to the City is included in the request for final plat. Article VI, Section G. Construction Standards-Fire Hydrants Fire Hydrants shall be installed along each street at a maximum interval of four hundred fifty (450) feet, or at the ends and center of each block, or as otherwise required by the fire authority having jurisdiction. Water supply and pressure shall be adequate to provide fire protection and for the future needs of the development. Blue reflective markers shall be installed at the street line of streets to indicate the location of fire hydrants. ☐N/A ☐Accepted with comments ☒Punch List Item Comments: As a punch list item, note that blue reflectors have not been installed at fire hydrant locations at the time of field inspection. A condition of approval will reflect the completion of all punch list items prior to the application of final plat signatures. Article VI, Section H. Construction Standards-Sanitary Sewerage 1. All subdivisions shall have sanitary sewer service. The sewer service shall be provided by either the Fairhope Public Utilities or an approved sewer service. 2. All sanitary sewer systems constructed within a subdivision and all sanitary sewer systems constructed outside of a subdivision but servicing a subdivision shall be constructed in accordance with those certain “Standard Specifications for Constructing Sanitary Sewer Facilities and Water Facilities” which is on file at the City of Fairhope Water & Sewer Department. 3. Individual septic tank type systems that have been approved by the Baldwin County Health Department and the Fairhope Public Utilities Sewer Department may be utilized. ☐N/A ☐Accepted with comments ☒Punch List Items Cross Reference: Standard Specifications for Constructing Sanitary Sewer Facilities and Water Facilities Comments: A condition of approval will reflect the completion of all punch list items prior to the application of final plat signatures. Article VI, Section L. Construction Standards-Requirement to Complete Improvements Sub-divider shall be responsible for providing all required minimum improvements in the subdivision. This may be accomplished either by (1) full installation of such improvements before the Final Plat is submitted to the Planning Commission for approval or (2) after 90% substantial completion of the total cost of the infrastructure the sub-divider may provide to the City a financial guarantee of performance in the form of either a performance bond or a Letter of Credit. Any such performance bond shall be in form and substance acceptable to the Planning Commission, with oblige riders in favor of the City in the event the bond issued in the name of the sub-divider’s contractor and shall be issued by a surety that is licensed to do business in the State of Alabama and having a Best rating of A- or better. In the event that the subdivision lies within the extra-territorial jurisdiction, such guaranty shall be made jointly payable to the City of Fairhope and Baldwin County, Alabama. The surety and the form and amount of such financial guaranty shall be subject to approval of the City and/or County. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: No performance bonds were submitted for subject application for street trees or sidewalks. Sidewalks are not required in the TR district as contemplated by Article IV, Section G.3.n. Further, street trees are not required in the TR district as contemplated by Article IV, Section G.3.g. The subdivision regulations contain the following criteria in Article IV.B.2. “Approval Standards”. Each of these criteria is addressed below with either a “meets” or “does not meet” comment. If any of the criteria is not met, a denial will be recommended. Consistency with Plans, Regulations and Laws - The Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable. • meets I I I I I I I 7 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 b. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program. • meets c. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations. • meets d. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or • meets e. The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” • meets Site Photos: Looking west along Geranium Drive near Hyacinth Street Looking west along Geranium Drive toward intersection of Lobelia Avenue 8 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 Enlarged Aerial Map: Enlarged Zoning Map: Logend -·-Subj!d ParoeJ CITY OF FA IRHOPE ZONIN G ,_ TR TOOl!tl RQOti R,.C.. Au1d•nt.ilAg111QHwrl!'Di11.ltd R-1 uwc-,,a-,.5"'~•..f•mty mnn • "') L --j Rl(b\ Al (c. A..J PGtt P6!.1ClilGe~rtSl\01lthf'l\fy R-~ High IJltfl&tyDMllfl9 Rf:s.::ltl'IW1 A-IS lifoOi~HOIMP'lll'\Ollltw::I 9 SD 20.12 Battles Trace, Phase 6 – March 2, 2020 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of case # SD 20.12, Battles Trace Phase 6 Final Plat contingent upon satisfaction of the following conditions preceding application of signatures to the final plat: 1) Include the engineer’s stamp adjacent to the engineer’s certificate on the plat to be recorded. 2) Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(18) Submit a copy of the updated stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan and Agreement (with recording stamp affixed) with the engineer’s certificate included on the cover when submitting the final plat for signatures. a. The drainage system for Phase 6 will be integrated into the existing phases and thus integrated into the existing O&M Plan and Agreement. As a result, the O&M Plan and Agreement must be revised and re-recorded to reflect the inclusion of the Phase 6 stormwater system. 3) Article V, Section D.3.f. Provide a copy of the paid invoice to Riviera Utilities for the aid-to- construction cost of the streetlights in Phase 6. 4) Article VI, Section G. and H: Completion of any and all punch list items identified by staff prior to the application of final plat signatures. E N G I N E E R S U R V E Y O R SS PROFESSIONAL No. 27403 N DESECILAMABALA SURV E Y ORS T UART L S MITH. · · · · TAX PARCEL NO. «l-09-30-0-000-037 .003 BWFF SPRINGS LAND COMPANY, L.LC 759 DOWNTOWNER LOOP WEST MOBILE, AL. 36609 UN-ZONED "' z TAX PARCEL NO. «l-09-30-0-000-043.000 BWFF SPRINGS LAND COMPANY, L.LC 759 DOWNTOWNER LOOP WEST MOBILE, AL. 36609 UN-ZONED S 89°55'58" E 11.97' "' z 8 g "' z • i -------~ 0 I b I O LOT 148 BATTLES TRACE AT I THE COLONY PHASE 5 z Ill /8~ CRF {LS20364} "' • Fl ... z "' 3' • "' i Ill CUR\IE TABLE CUR\IE # RADIUS ARC LENG'lfi CHORD Cl 68.07' 45.32' SB3'43'2B"W C2 2S.14' 28.19' N32i1'2S"E C3 25.00' 39.28' N44'56'23"W C4 25.00' 39.26' N45"03'37"E cs 2S.OO' 39.26' S44'55'25"E C6 25.00' 39.32' N45'01 '39"E C7 120.00' 189.94' N4518'50"E CB 120.00' 187.81' N44"51'59'"W C9 80.00' 26.92' SB0'03' 45"E C10 25.00' 41.73' S22"36'08"E NO. OWNER/DEVELOPER THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA THE EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA 201 SOUTH UNION STREET MONTGOMERY, AL, 36104 SURVEYOR STUART L SMITH AL. LICENSE NO. ENGINEER 27403 TIMOTHY D. LAWLEY, P.E. AL. LICENSE NO. 30859 SITE DATA TAX PARCEL NO. 05-46-09-30-0-000-041.000 05-46-09-30-0-000-D42.000 TOTAL SITE AREA -25.97 ACRES± (1,131,471 S.F.±) TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS -45 SMALLEST LOT -0.18 ACRES± (7,816 S.F.±) LARGEST LOT -0.44 ACRES± (19,218 S.F.±) TOTAL COMMON AREA -3.02 ACRES± (131,014 S.F.±) GREENSPACE -2.43 ACRES± (105,945 S.F.±) TOTAL LINEAR FEET OF STREET -3,094 FEET GROSS DENSITY -1.73 UNITS PER AC ZONING TR-TOURIST RESORT ZONING REQUIREMENTS 1 O' FRONT SETBACK 5' REAR SETBACK NO SIDE SETBACK 1'1QIE: AS PER THE HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION SETBACK ENABLING LEGISLATION FOR BALDWIN COUNTY, AL, ACT NO. 94-572, THE MINIMUM SETIBACK REQUIREMENT MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS 100' ALONG BALDWIN COUNTY ROAD NO. 3. DEDICATED EASEMENTS 1 O' UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG ALL ROAD SIDE LOT LINES UTILITIES POWER SEWER WATER TELEPHONE GAS -RIVIERA UTILITIES FAIRHOPE WATER FAIRHOPE WATER -AT&T FAIRHOPE GAS & SEWER & SEWER CUR\IE TABLE DISTANCE CUR\IE I RADIUS ARC LENG'lfi CHORD 44.49' C11 640.00' 19.07' N24'21'53"E 26.73' C12 180.00' 209.82' SS6'54'16"W 35.36' C13 220.00' 4.15' NB9"45'2B"E 35.35' C14 220.00' 256.44' S56"54'16"W 35.35' C15 600.00' 207.31' N33'24'34"E 35.39' C16 120.00' 90.77' s21•35'18"W 170.72' C17 80.00' 60.51' s21·35'18"W 169.22' C18 80.00' 126.63' N4518'50'"E 26.79' C19 80.00' 12S.20' N44'51'59"W 37.05' C20 120.00' 52.81' S77'05'38"E REVISION DATE DISTANCE 19.07' 198.14' 4.15' 242.17' 206.28' 88.62' 59.08' 113.82' 112.81' 52.39' ENGR. REMNANT PARCEL 10.76 ACRES± 46B,4B9 S.F.± "'FUTURE DEVELOPMEN~ CUR\IE # RADIUS C21 25.00' C22 640.00' C24 25.00' C2S 25.00' C26 80.00' C27 180.00' C2B 180.00' C29 180.00' C30 120.00' C31 120.00' 60 CUR\IE TABLE ARC LENGlH CHORD 3S.99' S7416'01'"W 114.92' N38'09'49"E 38.97' s44•41'1o"E 39.2B' S45'04'35"W 0.96' SB9'41'1 O"E 66.72' S78"25'52"W 139.18' S45"39'41"W 3.92' SB9"40'27"W 33.63' SB1'40'26"E 52.23' S61"10'36"E HMR TAX PARCEL NO. 46-09-30-0-000-040.000 ROBINSON, JENNIFER (1/16 INT) ETAI.. ROBIN 3617 W CHAPMAN LANE INGLEWOOO, CA, 90305 UN-ZONED GRAPHIC SCALE 0 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 60 00 It. CUR\IE TABLE DISTANCE CUR\IE # RADIUS ARC LENG'lfi CHORD 32.97' C32 120.00' 58.09' S34'50'20"E 114.76' C33 120.00' 43.86' S10'30'03"E 35.14' C34 120.00' 50.00' s11 •54'2o"w 35.36' C35 120.00' 51.75' S3611'47"W 0.96' C36 120.00' 51.75' S60'54'15"W 66.34' C37 120.00' 36.44' SB1"57'30"W 135.73' C38 80.00' 3.05' S88"36'33"E 3.92' C39 120.00' 13.50' NB6"28'45"W 33.52' C40 2S.OO' 6.66' S40'38'53"W 51.82' DISTANCE 57.53' 43.61' 49.64' 51.35' SUS' .36.30' 3.05' 13.49' 6.64' I / I I I I Magnolia Tier1d1 s-::: VICINITY POINT OF COMMENCEMENT POINT OF BEGINNING ACTUAL RECORD DEED I ,-. 11 1,c.; ctool ~ta 'I 'Ill 'Q IJ I Churcl~ I ~ / 1"~',ce,• -""',1~~~_.._-fL"•,,L4 p, "'=>O~~ M A P µ~ Good Sarnarit.a7 Church LEGEND ll!l I J I TELEPHONE BOX (VAULT) WATER METER SANITARY SEWER VALVE WATER VALVE TAX PARCEL NO, 46-09-29-0-000-051.000 EBERLEIN, MATIHEW T ETUX CAROL M 1 B606 SECTION STREET FAIRHOPE, AL, 36532 UN-ZONED P.O.C. P.O.B. (A) (R) (P) (C) OTIF IPF CTIF CRF RBF CRS CMF CMS LS# CA# PLAT OF RECORD COMPUTED OPEN TOP IRON PIPE FOUND IRON PIN FOUND CRIMP TOP IRON PIPE FOUND CAPPED REBAR FOUND ll!l ,'.( ~ ~ ~ GAS VALVE TRANSFORMER BOX LIGHT POLE CABLE 1V BOX ELECTRIC BOX ELECTRIC PANEL TAX PARCEL NO. 46-09-29-0-000-052.001 (DIST) (REF) (UNR) INST # SECT. T- R- -0- E--- R/w R.O.W. 0 ..ef ~ l1!j) @ tRil EL./ELEV INV D m 1/2" REBAR FOUND 1/2" CAPPED REBAR SET STAMPED CAff604 CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT SET LICENSED PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR'S NUMBER CERTIFICATE OF ALI™ORl2ATION NUMBER DISTURBED REFERENCE CORNER SIT ON UNREADABLE INSTRUMENT NUMBER SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE POWER POLE GUY WIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY RIGHT-OF-WAY FlRE HYDRANT SIGN TELEPHONE PEDESTAL ELECTRIC MITER BOX AIR CONDITIONER JUNCTION BOX (VAULT) ELEVATION INVERT ASPHALT CONCRETE LINE : @ (i) @ Ell § ll,,__ © & £ £ (EX.) -FO- -OE- -BE- -OT- -s- -w- -G- IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STORM DRAIN MANHOLE TELEPHONE MANHOLE SEWER CLEANOUT SEWER GRINDER PUMP GREASE TRAP FLAG POLE GAS LINE SIGN MARKER TELEPHONE SIGN MARKER WATERLINE MARKER FIBER OPTIC LINE MARKER EXCEPTION UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC LINE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC BURIED ELECTRIC LINE UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE LINE UNDERGROUND SEWER LINE UNDERGROUND WATERLINE UNDERGROUND GAS LINE -TV-UNDERGROUND TELEVISION rill. 1-##' SPOT GRADE ELEVATIONS --a--a-WOOD FENCE _ _,_ CHAIN LINK FENCE -•--BARBED WIRE FENCE 8 WETLANDS JONES, JONATHON SCOTT ETAL JONES, DENISE 1 B51 B SECTION STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1, THE COLONY AT THE GRAND SUBDIVSION REPLAT, AS SHOWN ON PLAT THEREOF RECORDED ON SLIDE 2453-A IN PROBATE RECORDS, BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA; THENCE RUN NORTH 89'54'51" WEST A DISTANCE OF 630.85 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00'04'02" WEST A DISTANCE OF 112.38 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN WESTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAV1NG A RADIUS OF 68.07 FEET, AN ARC UENGTH OF 45.32 FEET, A CHORD BEARING SOUTH 83'43'28" WEST, AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 44.49 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.25 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 28.17 FEET, A CHORD BEARING NORTH 32'11'25" EAST, AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 26.73 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN NORTH 00'04'02" EAST A DISTANCE OF 194.66 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 39.28 FEET, A CHORD BEARING NORTH 44'56'23" WEST, AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 35.36 FEET TO A POINT: THENCE RUN NORTH 89'56'47" WEST A DISTANCE OF 4.98 FEET TO A POINT: THENCE RUN NORTH 00'03'13" EAST A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET TO A POINT: THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE UEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET, AN ARC UENGTH OF 39.26 FEET, A CHORD BEARING NORTH 45'03'37" EAST, AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 35.35 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN NORTH 00'04'02" EAST A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'55'58" EAST A DISTANCE OF 11.97 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN NORTH 00'17'22" EAST A DISTANCE OF 365.49 FEET TO A 5/8" IRON REBAR (LS#20364); THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 00'17'22" EAST A DISTANCE OF 218.67 FEET TO A 1" CRIMPED TOP IRON PIPE; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'42'07" EAST A DISTANCE OF 1284.74 FEET TO A 1/2" IRON REBAR (LS#20359) ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF BALDWIN COUNTY ROAD NO. 3 (80' R.O.W.); THENCE RUN SOUTH 00'01'51" EAST ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY A DISTANCE OF 875.73 FEET TO A 1/2" OPEN TOP IRON PIPE; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH 89'20'29" WEST A DISTANCE OF 634.65 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINING 25.97 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. FAIRHOPE, AL, 365J2 UN-ZONED GENERAL SURVEYOR'S NOTES 1. 2. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. SOURCES OF INFORMATION USED TO FACILITATE THIS SURVEY WERE PREVIOUS SURVEYS BY THIS AND OTHER FIRMS, THE RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT, AND/OR OTHER RECORDED DOCUMENTS SHOWN HEREON. NO TITLE SEARCH, TITLE OPINION OR ABSTRACT WAS PERFORMED BY THIS F1RM. THERE MAY BE DEEDS OF RECORD, UNRECORDED DEEDS, EASEMENTS, RIGHT-OF-WAYS, OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD WHICH COULD AFFECT THE BOUNDARIES OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WERE NOT FURNISHED AT TIME OF SURVEY. FIELD WORK FOR THIS SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON 09/2018. ALL BEARINGS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1983, ALABAMA WEST ZONE; STATE PLANE GRID NORTH; DERIVED BY GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM OBSERVATION; ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE GROUND DISTANCES. ALL MEASUREMENTS WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH U.S. STANDARD FEET. THE SURVEYED PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN AREA HAVING A ZONE DESIGNATION OF ''X" BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA), AS SCALED FROM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP NO. 01003C0757L, WITH A REVISED DATE OF IDENTIFICATION OF JULY 17, 2007, IN BALDWIN COUNTY, STATE OF ALABAMA. ALABAMA ONE CALL WAS CONTACTED TO HAVE THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES MARKED FOR LOCATION ON 08/29/2018 (TICKET #182411015). ANY EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOT SHOWN HEREON WERE NOT MARKED AT THE TIME OF THIS SURVEY. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL SUCH UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED, BUT THE UTILITIES ARE SHOWN AS THEY WERE MARKED IN THE FIELD. THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY COSTS OF ANY STREET LIGHTS. THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF ALL COMMON AREAS. THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE ROADWAY. THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF ALL DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE. ALL LOTS SHOWN HEREON ARE SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE BATTLES TRACE AT THE COLONY DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS TO BE RECORDED IN BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA (THE "DECLARATION"), INCLUDING THE VARIOUS EASEMENTS, USE RESTRICTIONS AND THE CREATION OF LIENS FOR THE PAYMENT OF ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE DECLARATION. A MINIMUM 12 FOOT SEPARATION SHALL BE ESTABLISHED BETWEEN ALL STRUCTURES TO MEET ISO REQUIREMENTS. THE SURVEYED PROPERTY LIES WITHIN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 2 EAST. THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR FIREWALLS, FIRE RATING OF EAVES, SOFFITS, & LIMITATION OF OPENINGS WILL BE ENFORCED BASED ON BUILDING PROXIMITY TO THE PROPERTY LINE. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION I HEREBY STATE THAT AUL PARTS OF THIS SURVEY AND DRAWING HAVE BEEN COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE STANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR LAND SURVEYING IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND BELIEF. STUART L. SMITH, PLS DATE ALABAMA LICENSE NUMBER 27403 'DRAWING IS INVALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE & SEAL OF A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR HUTCHINSON, MOORE & RAUCH, LLC ~~ FINAL PLAT ...I 0 o. '-BATTLES TRACE PHASE 6 I IXl m nl------------------------------------------------1 2039 MAIN STREET DAPHNE, ALABAMA 36526 • TEL (251) 626-2626 FAX (251) 626-6934 daphne@hmrengineers.com 1[ ~ CLIENT RETIRMENT SYSTEMS OF ALABAMA ~ m1-----------.-----------,.-------.-------.-----------1 I"") ,..... SCALE r--n -.t-~ 1"=60' DATE FEBRUARY 2019 DRAWN BY TBS CHECKED BY SLS SHEET 1 OF 2 E N G I N E E R S U R V E Y O R S S PROFESSIONAL No. 27403 N DESECILAMABALA SURV E Y ORS T UART L S MITH. NO. REVISION DATE CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP STATE OF ALABAMA COUNTY OF BALDWIN THIS IS TO CERTIFY TI,AT TI,E TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA IS THE OWNER OF TI,E LAND SHOWN AND DESCRIBED IN THE PLAT, AND TI,AT I HAVE CAUSED THE SAME TO BE SURVEYED AND SUBDIVIDED AS INDICATED HEREIN, FOR TI,E USES AND PURPOSE HEREIN SET FORTI, AND DO HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE AND ADOPT TI,E SAME UNDER TI,E DESIGN AND TITLE HEREON INDICATED: AND GRANT ALL EASEMENTS FOR UTILITY USE AS NOTED TOGETI,ER WITI, SUCH RESTRICTIONS AND COVENANTS NOTED BELOW OR ATTACHED IN A SEPARATE LEGAL DOCUMENT. DATED THIS THE ___ u,AY OF ___ 20 THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA NOTARY FOR TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA STATE OF ALABAMA COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY I, =~==~~=~==~==~~~THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, A NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY IN SAID STATE, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT DAVID G. BRONNER, WHOSE NAME AS SECRETARY-TREASURER OF TI,E TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA, AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA, IS SIGNED TO THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT, AND WHO IS KNOWN TO ME, ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME ON THIS DAY THAT. BEING INFORMED OF THE CONTENTS OF SAID INSTRUMENT, HE, AS SUCH SECRETARY-TREASURER AND WITH FULL AUTHORITY, EXECUTED THE SAME VOLUNTARILY FOR AND AS THE ACT OF SAID PUBLIC CORPORATION. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS THE 2D NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: ____ _ CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP STATE OF ALABAMA COUNTY OF BALDWIN DAY OF----~ TI,IS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA IS TI,E OWNER OF THE LAND SHOWN AND DESCRIBED IN THE PLAT, AND TI,AT I HAVE CAUSED THE SAME TO BE SURVEYED AND SUBDIVIDED AS INDICATED HEREIN, FOR THE USES AND PURPOSE HEREIN SET FORTH AND DO HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE AND ADOPT THE SAME UNDER TI,E DESIGN AND TITLE HEREON INDICATED; AND GRANT ALL EASEMENTS FOR UTILITY USE AS NOTED TOGETHER WITH SUCH RESTRICTIONS AND COVENANTS NOTED BELOW OR ATTACHED IN A SEPARATE LEGAL DOCUMENT. DATED THIS THE --~AY OF ___ 20 TI,E EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA NOTARY FOR EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA STATE OF ALABAMA COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY I, _______________ THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, A NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY IN SAID STATE, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT DAVID G. BRONNER, WHOSE NAME AS SECRETARY-TREASURER OF THE EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ALABAMA, AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA, IS SIGNED TO THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT, AND WHO IS KNOWN TO ME, ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME ON THIS DAY THAT, BEING INFORMED OF THE CONTENTS OF SAID INSTRUMENT, HE, AS SUCH SECRETARY-TREASURER AND WITH FULL AUTHORITY, EXECUTED THE SAME VOLUNTARILY FOR AND AS THE ACT OF SAID PUBLIC CORPORATION. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS THE ___ u,AY OF ------20 NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: _____ _ CERTIFICATION OF ENGINEER STATE OF ALABAMA COUNTY OF BALDWIN I, TIMOTI,Y D. LAWLEY, A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN TI,E STATE OF ALABAMA FOR HUTCHINSON, MOORE AND RAUCH, LLC, HOLDING CERTIFICATE NUMBER 30859, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE DESIGN HEREIN WHICH WAS DONE UNDER MY DIRECT CONTROL AND SUPERVISION AND TI,AT, TO THE BEST OF MY PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND TO THE BEST OF MY BELIEF, CONFORMS TO TI,E REQUIREMENTS OF TI,E FAIRHOPE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND TO ALL OTI,ER RULES, REGULATIONS, LAWS AND ORDINANCES APPLICABLIE TO MY DESIGN. DATED TI,IS THE ___ DAY OF ________ 20 TIMOTHY D. LAWLEY, P.E. ALA. REG. NO. 30859 CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL BY AT&:T THE UNDERSIGNED, AS AUTHORIZED BY AT&T HEREBY APPROVES THE WITHIN PLAT FOR THE RECORDING OF SAME IN THE PROBATE OFFICE OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA, THIS THE ____ DAY OF ------~ 2D AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL BY FAIRHOPE WATER AND SEWER THE UNDERSIGNED, AS AUTHORIZED BY FAIRHOPE WATER & SEWER, HEREBY APPROVES THE WITHIN PLAT FOR THE RECORDING OF SAME IN THE PROBATE OFFICE OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA. THIS THE ___ DAY OF ______ 20 AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL BY FAIRHOPE GAS THE UNDERSIGNED, AS AUTHORIZED BY FAIRHOPE GAS, HEREBY APPROVES THE WITHIN PLAT FOR THE RECORDING OF SAME IN THE PROBATE OFFICE OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA. THIS THE ___ DAY OF ______ 20 AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL BY THE RIVIERA UTILITIES THE UNDERSIGNED, AS AUTHORIZED BY THE RIVIERA UTILITIES, HEREBY APPROVES THE WITHIN PLAT FOR THE RECORDING OF SAME IN THE PROBATE OFFICE OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA. THIS THE DAY OF 20 AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE PLANNING COMMISSION THE WITHIN PLAT OF BATTLES TRACE AT THE COLONY, PHASE 6, BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA, IS HEREBY APPROVED BY FAIRHOPE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. THIS THE ___ DAY OF _______ 20 SECRETARY HMR HUTCHINSON, MOORE & RAUCH, LLC ENGR. 2039 MAIN STREET DAPHNE, ALABAMA 36526 • TEL (251) 626-2626 FAX (251) 626-6934 daphne@hmrengineers.com ~ ~ FINAL PLAT ...I 0 °i ~ BATTLES TRACE PHASE 6 m nl---------------------------------------------1 il=-t CLIENT RETIRMENT SYSTEMS OF ALABAMA ~ m1-----------.-----------,.--------,.-------.-----------1 n~ r--n -.f'~ SCALE DATE N/A FEBRUARY 2019 DRAWN BY TBS CHECKED BY SLS SHEET 2 OF 2 1 SD 20.13 Highlands at Fairhope Village Subdivision, Phase 1 - March 2, 2020 Planning Commission March 2, 2020 Subdivision Approval Case: SD 20.13 The Highlands at Fairhope Village Subdivision, Phase 1 Project Name: Highlands at Fairhope Village Subdivision, Phase 1 Site Data: Typical Unit – 0.029 acres +/- Total Site – 7.34 acres +/- Project Type: Subdivision Jurisdiction: Fairhope Planning Jurisdiction Zoning District: PUD Ordinance # 1572 PPIN Number: 369509 General Location: East of the Publix Store on North Greeno Road (US HWY 98) Surveyor of Record: Dewberry Engineers, Inc. Owner / Developer: Highlands at Fairhope Village, LLC Stewart Speed and Warren Speed School District: Fairhope Elementary, Intermediate, Middle, and High Schools Recommendation: Approval with conditions Prepared by: J. Buford King Development Services Manager t f>ARTMENT.S (UNDER CONSTRUCTION 2 SD 20.13 Highlands at Fairhope Village Subdivision, Phase 1 - March 2, 2020 Summary of Request: Public hearing to consider the request of Dewberry Engineers, Inc. on behalf of Stewart Speed and Warren Speed (Highlands at Fairhope Village, LLC) for the approval of a Resubdivision of lot 6E of Phase 2 of Fairhope Village. The purposes of the subdivision is to create three (3) phases, and twenty two (22) lots within phase 1 of the existing lot 6E reflected on slide number 2574-F. The 22 lots will function as lots of record for the 22 townhouse units within the previously-approved Highlands at Fairhope Village Multiple Occupancy Project (MOP) that was approved by the City of Fairhope Planning Commission on January 7, 2019 via case number SD 19.03. Subject property is located at the eastern terminus of Parker Road, approximately ¼ mile east of Greeno Road (U.S. HWY 98). Lot 6E includes 7.34 acres. For reference Lot 6B contains the 240-unit Retreat at Fairhope Village apartment complex currently under construction. As requested during the approval of case number SD 19.03, utility access easements are reflected on the proposed plat. Mr. Victor Germain and Mr. Steve Pumphrey of Dewberry Engineers serve as the surveyor of record and project manager for subject application. All utility infrastructure and improvements were submitted and reviewed as a component of the MOP case number SD 19.03. As a result, the staff recommendation will reflect concurrent preliminary and final plat approval as subject application proposes no construction activities, utilities installation, or other improvements. Comments: The following item are excerpts from the various checklists utilized by staff to evaluate subject application’s compliance with the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance, City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations and other relevant ordinances and are included here to provide relevant background and rationale behind staff’s recommendation. Items marked in blue text are accepted with comments. All Article, Section, and Paragraph numbers identified are references to the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations unless otherwise identified. Subject application has been submitted as a follow-up condominium declaration to Case # SD 18.08 as described previously, and a great majority of the documents required for submission of subject case are duplicates of SD 18.08’s documents and are referenced below as applicable. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(3) Names and addresses of the following: • Owner, designer, applicant, and all associated investors • record owners of lands immediately adjacent to subdivision. ☐N/A ☒Accepted ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Please furnish the names and addresses of all associated investors. Comments: Article IV, Section C.1.b.(8) Plan and profiles of all proposed utilities with connections (8) Plan and profiles of all proposed utility with connections to existing utility system and all proposed improvements. Approval of private utility connections for water and sewer shall be subject to the standards of Article VIII, Sections E. and G., respectively of the Fairhope Subdivision Regulations, and Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fairhope. The applicant shall submit one copy of utility letters stating availability of service. Utility letters and layout must be submitted from electric, water, sewer, phone, trash provider, and gas (if applicable), stating the property may be adequately served by such utility. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Cross Reference: Approval of private utility connections for water and sewer shall be subject to the standards of Article VIII, Sections E. and G., respectively of the Fairhope Subdivision Regulations, and Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fairhope. Comments: Furnished with case # SD 19.03 MOP. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(11) Flow model data submitted to the standards of the COF Water Department. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Furnished with case # SD 19.03 MOP. I I I I I I 3 SD 20.13 Highlands at Fairhope Village Subdivision, Phase 1 - March 2, 2020 Article IV, Section C.1.b.(14) Minimum finished floor elevations for every lot. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Each townhouse building FFE is reflected on drawing C3B included within the construction plans included with case # SD 19.03 MOP. As a condition of approval, please reflect the FFEs on the plat – FFEs may be included in a chart if sufficient space does not exist within each unit for the additional text. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(16) Pedestrian circulation plan ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: Furnished with case # SD 19.03 MOP. Article IV, Section C.1.b.(17) Site data box including but not limited to: • Total acreage of site • Acreage of common area(s) • Total number of lots • Square footage of each lot • Site Density • Number of units proposed ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: As a condition of approval, please include the acreage of common areas and site density on the plat. The site density may reflect the phase on which lots are requested by this application. Article IV, Section C.1.e. Engineering Plans: all engineering plans shall be signed and stamped by the registered professional engineer of record. ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: The surveyor of record stamped the proposed plat. Article IV, Section C.1.h. Traffic Data and Traffic Study ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: The traffic improvements recommended by the Neel-Schaffer traffic study dated April 2016, as originally submitted with case # SD 17.24 “Retreat at Fairhope Village”, includes various improvements. The median opening on US HWY 98 at Fly Creek Avenue to be reconstructed to channelize the southbound left turn lane movement and further restrict the westbound movement to a true right out only, are either complete or in- progress by ALDOT as of this writing. The afore-mentioned traffic study and its highway improvements were included as a supporting document with previously-approved case # SD 17.24 related to the 240-unit apartment complex under construction on lot 6B. The traffic study encompasses the 240-units on Lot 6B, subject application, as well as a future development of 500 single family units potentially utilizing Parker Road for access. Article IV, Section.D.1 Final Plat Application Checklist ☐N/A ☒Accepted with comments ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: As stated previously case # SD 19.03 has been previously-approved by the Planning Commission and all improvements to be installed were reviewed as a function of that case review. As a result, subject application functions similar to a minor subdivision in that preliminary and final approval are requested concurrently. Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(15) Final Plat and Final Plans showing all information required by and meeting requirements of Article IV., Section C.1. and the following additional information: (15) Site data table box including but not limited to: • Total acreage of site • Acreage of common area(s) • Total number of lots • Gross Floor Area of Buildings • Site Density I I I I I I I I I I I I 4 SD 20.13 Highlands at Fairhope Village Subdivision, Phase 1 - March 2, 2020 • Number of units proposed. ☐N/A ☒Accepted ☐Revise and Resubmit per comments Comments: As a condition of approval, please include the acreage of common areas and site density on the plat. The site density may reflect the phase on which lots are requested by this application. The subdivision regulations contain the following criteria in Article IV.B.2. “Approval Standards”. Each of these criteria is addressed below with either a “meets” or “does not meet” comment. If any of the criteria is not met, a denial will be recommended. 2. Consistency with Plans, Regulations and Laws - The Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; • meets b. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; • meets c. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; • meets d. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or • meets e. The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” • meets Site Photos: Looking east along Dry Falls Way (private road) Looking north along Bascom Way (private road) 5 SD 20.13 Highlands at Fairhope Village Subdivision, Phase 1 - March 2, 2020 Recommendation: Staff recommends concurrent preliminary and final plat APPROVAL of Case number SD 20.13, Highlands at Fairhope Village Townhouse lots, subject to the following conditions: 1) Article IV, Section C.1.b.(14) Reflect the Finished Floor Elevations (FFEs) on the plat – FFEs may be included in a chart if sufficient space does not exist within each unit for the additional text. Please cross-reference drawing C3B within the construction plans included with case # SD 19.03 (MOP). 2) Article IV, Section C.1.b.(17) and Article IV, Section.D.1.b.(15) Include the acreage of common areas and site density on the plat. The site density may reflect the phase on which lots are requested by this application. Looking southeast from Bascom Way Toward Retreat at Fairhope Village Looking northwest from Bascom Way Toward Publix store on Lot 1 PHASE 3 --~ 2.23ACRES ' b,,~ .-," . ~'1, 1," ":i . 'o'l,· -u, m ...., .... N9o·oo'oo"w - 249.7 6' - N9 D'OO 'OO"W z PHASE 2 0 2.38 ACRES COMMON AREA N9o·oo·oo"E 29.76 ' 25.76' 29.76' q COMMON AREA 0 1.48 AC 0 29.76 ' 25.76' 29.76' 1.48 AC 0 0 =f --z r--- 0 oi -q r- 0 -0 N9o·oo·oo"w N9o·oo·oo ·E z z .z w 0 a, 0 D 0 D ' m 22 .7 1' 22.71' 22.71' 22.71 ' 9 20 9 21 9 22 0 N --.J --.J --.J p (0 0 (0 0 (0 0 ~ --.J 0 --.J 0 --.J 0 D 0 0 -D -D b -0 2372 SF . 0 2053 SF -0 2372 sr 0 LINE BEARING DIS TA NCE ~ U) VI ~ ::; ::; ::; z S88"38'41 "E z 0 0 0 0 . (0 9 (0 9 0 . 17.95 ' N-"' 3: ,w p p "' ,w 3:" Ul • D ' r---15 w 0 16 (0 0 17 r---D ' . .... 9 0 0 0 -..J 0 --.J 0 0 9 0 0 MINIMUM m (,.j CD soo·oo·oo"E 15.00' '-" 13 0 ~ 14 0 0 0 a, --ci 0 a, u, D 0 0 D MIN IMUM MINIMUM u, a, 0 a, u, u, • D a 0 ... b -D . 0 b 0 18 0 ... 19 a ... FFE=86.25 FFE=86.25 FF E=86.25 . N .... D 0 "' 0 "' D M M 0 ... 0 0 "' 0 "' a, 0 ci b "' b "' <I) 2967 SF 2569 SF 2967 SF <I) 0 ci b "' b "' :.f. 0 0 (?) M 1258 SF D 1258 SF 0 ' 0 0 N89'2 4 '57"E • \ ,s'\.-soo-oo·oo"E 36 .18 ' z V) r'l 1258 SF VJ 1258 SF z 10.83' :r i"o MINIMUM MIN IMUM MIN IMUM MINIMUM ""'o i 42 .0 1' FFE=87.50 FFE=87 .50 MINIMUM MIN IMUM MINIMUM FFE=86.00 FFE=86.00 29.76' 25.76 ' 29 .76' \ ;i1 ,\ Q) SOO'OO'OO"E 19.03' FFE=86.66 FFE =86.66 FFE=B6 .66 • N90'00'00"E S89'5d'23"E I 22.7 1' 22.71' 22.71' 22.71 ' ' © I ! Noo ·oo·oo"W 18.33' I I i N9 0'00'00"E i N9o·oo 'oo"w ! PHASE 1 -' i -~ a I ! ;.,,_ ® Noo·oo·oo"w 36 .18 ' D "' ! N90"00'00 "W ! I {o ,.:, p N "' 2 .73 ACRES "' I 29,76' 25.76 ' 29 ,76' I ! 0 I i j 0'. / 0 N I ® b ... i i ' cl ~ ~--~-soo·oo ·o o "E 45.45' 0 I z I i I r -~ '&> I ·:0 Q) DRY FALLS WAY (PRIVATE) l® !® -~ , --1,_ 0 NOO'OO'oo"w 18.33' 29.5' I 60 .6 ' 100.s · I I --------'i 53. 1' i --r 0 -C'I ' ,--- ---- -----·o - _J 23. 1' I 100.6' I 126.3' 3.38.02' ,,, i @! i N90'00'00"W 'f) f---!CD !0 L lLI z w ~ I 30' INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT ' 0 w I I I ~ Cf) ,..--.._ 29.76' 25.76' 29.76' c;'-j ' w 29.76' 25 .76' 25 .76' 29 .76' 29.76' 25.76' 25 .76' 25.76' 29.76 ' I-1 N9 □-oo ·oo"w Cf) O, N90'0 ·oo·w Cf) <( N90'00'0 0"E w > COMMON cc AREA <..'.) £ w w I 0::: (PROPOSED AM ENITY) ' ------ Q_ ,..... Cf) n ,..... Cf) ...__, 1.48 AC N w m n cc 0 ~ b ,..... <..'.) I -z -~-0 --z_. z ~ _. I 0 I <.D, n "' _, '?,, ~ D ~ ";=' w ~ w 'b ~ q ' ' _;;: ~ w w ~ ~ -;,= ~ w _;;: ~ "' a ;,. 0 ;,. D ;,. 0 ;,. ' • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·o . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 -0 . a . 0 . 0 . ·o . 0 . '<.0 '-" 0 a 0 1 0 2 ·o 0 3 0 0 -4 0 -5 .o -· 6 .0 -7 0 -0 -8 0 -9 0 -10 .0 _, 11 0 -12 0 -6', 0\ 0 0 ... u "' "' "' "' r--r--r--r---r---r---,-... r---r---r---r--... _ 0 0 a 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 D 0 "';<. 0 b 0 b 0 b 0 b 0 0 ,,; 0 "' 0 ,,; 0 "' 0 "' 0 "' D ,,; 0 "' 0 "' 0 "' 0 ,,; r-.-f U1 ----b "' b en b a, b "' b a, b "' b "' b en b a, b a, b O"> 0 D 0 0 I <( z 3067 SF <f) 2654 SF z 3067 SF <f) 0 2967 SF 0 ?569 SF 0 2569 SF 0 2967 SF 0 0 2967 SF 0 2569 SF 0 2569 SF 0 25(;i9 SF 0 2967 SF 0 z z VJ "' z z z z OJ) z z m 20 ' 10 ' 0 20 ' 40' ' ' MINIMUM MINIMUM MINIMUM MIN IMUM MINIMUM MINIMUM MI NIMUM MINIMUM MINI MUM MINIMUM MINIM UM MINIMUM ffE=87,25 FFL=B7.25 FFE=87,25 FFE=86 .50 FFE=86.50 Fff=86.50 FFE=B6 ,50 FFE=SS.50 FFE=B5,50 FfE=SS .50 FFE=85,50 FFEc=85,50 GRAPHIC SCALE • 3q.o · ' /) N90'00'00"E N 9 □-0l ·oo "E N90"00 '0D"W I 29.76' 25 .76' 29.76' 29.76' 25 .76' 25.76' 29.76' 29.76 ' 25.76' 25.76' 25.76' 29 .76 ' I S89' 38'56"E 10' ~ COMMON AR EA 190 .00' ~ 79· 21 ' 5 \ "E 11 .56' S89'38'56"E --S85"J8'16"E 47, 17' 1"21 ,32' 149. 70' - HIG HLANDS AT FAIRH OPE VIL LAGE SUB DMSION PHASE 1 (A RESUBDMSION OF LOT 6E OF THE RESUBDM SION OF LOT 6, PHAS E 2 OF FAIRHOP E VILLAG E, A PUD) BOUNDARY SURVEY AND PIAT OF SUBDIVISION DES IGN t.1.S.P. DRAWN LJA .D. CHKD . t.l.S.P . ENG A./'!.8. SURVEYOR V.L.G. PROJ MGR A.N.8 ' SCALE 1 "=20' Dewberry· PRO J . NO . 50125187 25353 Friendship Rd Daphne, AL 36526 FILE - 251.990.9950 fax 251.929-9815 SHEET 2 OF 2 1 SR 20.01 Pier Street Marketplace – March 2, 2020 Planning Commission March 2, 2020 Site Plan Approval Case: SR 20.01 Pier Street Marketplace Project Name: Pier Street Marketplace Property Owner / Applicant: Wise Properties, LLC General Location: 369 S Mobile St Project Type: Site Plan review of Multiple Occupancy Project (3 Units) Project Acreage: 0.20 acres +/- Zoning District: B-3b Tourist Resort Commercial Service District PPIN: 16630 Engineer of record: S.E. Civil Engineering Architect of record: Mack McKinney Report prepared by: Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager Recommendation: Approval with conditions 2 SR 20.01 Pier Street Marketplace – March 2, 2020 For reference, the triggers for Site Plan review requirements are listed below. Article II. Section 2. Site Plan a. Initiation – Review of (preliminary) site plans accompanying a zoning map amendment shall be reviewed according to the zoning amendment procedures. (Final) site plans that do not accompany a zoning map amendment shall be reviewed according to this section. Site plan approval is required when any commercial building(s) located in a business-zoning district (industrial zoning excluded) or in the CBD overlay: (1) Has a gross floor area of 10,000 square feet or greater; or, (2) More than 30% of the lot (excluding the building) is impervious; or Subject property is contains approximately (3) All applications for zoning map amendments to rezone property to any of the Village Districts in Article procedures in Article VI, Section D. for review of the rezoning application and site plans associated with a village development. (4) A mandatory site plan review application for all mixed-use projects electing to build to 35 feet height with 33% residential, regardless of whether or not it triggers site plan review approval, must make application to the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. • Subject development is electing to build higher than the otherwise allowable 30 feet (to 35 feet) and contains 33% residential. Summary of Request: Public hearing to consider the request of S.E. Civil, LLC on behalf of property owner Wise Properties (Sandy Wise) for Site Plan approval of the Pier Street Marketplace, a Multiple Occupancy Project (MOP). The Planning Commission previously reviewed a complimentary MOP for this project (Case SD 19.09). Case SD 19.09 was approved by the Planning Commission with 6 conditions of approval. The six conditions are below, followed by the staff comments (in red) and applicant comments (in blue): 1. First condition of approval from PC was a sidewalk along Pier Ave connecting to Mobile St. It appears this condition has been met but we would like to see crosswalk across Mobile St. Crosswalk has been added. 2. Second condition of approval from PC required a revised landscape plan. Please submit revised plans. Plans submitted with application were completed prior to MOP review, which do not contemplate recent additions, such as new sidewalk or space between parallel parking spaces. Revised plans will be reviewed by City Arborists. Revised Plans are included. 3. Third condition of approval was procedural referencing close-out documents. No response needed. 4. Fourth condition was a reduction to the number of proposed parallel parking spaces from 3 to 2, with landscaping installed between the space and 5 bicycle spaces added to site in lieu of one parking space. This condition is met within plans. 5. Fifth condition of approval was procedural referencing revisions or additions to plans in response to various Fairhope Public Utilities. No response needed. 6. Sixth condition of approval was to reduce building height from 45’ to 30’ or 35’, as applicable. Height in table is 35+/_, please change to 35’. This has been corrected. 3 SR 20.01 Pier Street Marketplace – March 2, 2020 In addition to those conditions of approval listed above, the following items were also reviewed as part of the Site Plan Review Process. 1. Article IV, Section Article IV, Section B.2 Screening requirements. (b) requires a screen or buffer where commercial abuts residential uses. R-2 residential abuts subject property to the east. Please show wall/fence on plans, as well as an architectural detail. Fence was shown on landscape plans. A detail has been added. 2. In regard to parking spaces in the ROW: Parking spaces in the ROW shall be available to the public, without restrictive signage. 3. Article II, Section C.d.(8) Overall benefit to the community. Provide a solution for safely crossing Mobile St. We have added crosswalks and signage. 4. Article II, Section C.d.(14) Data to show percentage of lot covered with existing and proposed buildings. Revise Land Usage table to include all percentages. Only one item is missing. This has been updated. 5. Article II, Section C.d.(15) Elevations indicating exterior materials. Current landscape plan illustrates paved area in front of a large, blank stucco wall on north end of Mobile St façade. This made sense, because previous architectural plans contemplated drive-through parking, which has been relocated. Now plans are disjointed. Elevations show garage doors that exit into landscape, and blank walls with nothing but paving. Revised landscape plans should clarify. I have spoken with the Architect and Client about this. They are trying to determine structurally if they can put a garage door there. As for the other two “garage doors”. They are not operable. They are just for the architectural look they are going for. They may even end up being windows that look like a garage door. 6. Article II, Section C.d.(25) Location and sizes of all signage. Mr. Wise mentioned he wants to use existing signage, which is a nonconforming sign and would not be allowed under the City’s current Sign Ordinance. However, it can be approved through Site Plan Review. Please submit plans that illustrate the proposed use of existing signage, as well as new signage. The client would like to utilize the existing sign. Currently there is not a “business or logo” to depict, but the size and height of the existing signage will remain as is. The only other signage would be any allowed and permitted wall mounted signage. Wall mounted signage would be permitted separately. 4 SR 20.01 Pier Street Marketplace – March 2, 2020 Site Photos: Subject property looking south from S Mobile St. Tree being preserve south of proposed building near Pier Ave. Existing Signage. I I 5 SR 20.01 Pier Street Marketplace – March 2, 2020 Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Case SR 20.01 with the following conditions: 1. Revised plat that illustrates a sidewalk easement for those parts of the sidewalk extending onto private property. Appends: Site plans and architectural elevations. 4005 10 20 10 SCALE SHEETC01 20180424 TLSDRAWN DATE SCALE JOB No.2/21/20 1"=10'SEALAFFIXREVISIONDATESITE PLANCONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL RELOCATIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED ALL CURBED OR STRIPED RADII ARE TO BE 4' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ARE TO BE ABANDONED, REMOVED OR RELOCATED AS NECESSARY. ALL COST SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE BASE BID. TO ALL UTILITIES, STORM DRAINAGE, SIGNS, TRAFFIC SIGNALS & POLES, ETC. AS REQUIREDFOR SITE WORK. ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNING AUTHORITIES THE DRAWINGS. CONCRETE FOR CURBING SHALL BE 3000 PSI. REFER TO THE LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR PLANTING LOCATIONS AND ISLAND DETAILS. PAINTED STRIPING SHALL BE BRIGHT AND CLEAR. STRIPES SHALL BE PER PLAN AND PAINTED CURBING SHALL BE FORMED AND POURED CONCRETE UNLESS OTHERWISE DETAILED WITHIN HANDICAP RAMPS AND PARKING STALLS SHALL BE PER ADA REQUIREMENTS AND LOCAL ALL DIMENSIONS AND RADII ARE TO THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. CONDITIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED TO BE TRUE AND ACCURATE PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. THE SURVEY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS IS SHOWN WITHIN THESE PLANS. ALL EXISTING ON CLEAN ASPHALT OR CONCRETE. THIS SITE IS ZONED B-3b. ALL ISLANDS SHALL BE LANDSCAPED. NOTIFY CITY OF FAIRHOPE INSPECTIONS 24 HOURS BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF EVERYPHASE OF CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED GOVERNMENTAL A COPY OF THE APPROVED LAND DISTURBANCE PLAN AND PERMIT SHALL BE PRESENT ON SITE WHENEVER LAND DISTURBANCE ACTIVITY IS IN PROGRESS. CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT BE PARKED IN REQUIRED R.O.W. AND MUST BE STORED WITHIN THE SITE. DURING CONSTRUCTION, ACCESS ROADWAYS CONSTRUCTED OF AN ALL WEATHER SURFACE CAPABLE OF SUPPORTING 80,000 POUNDS GROSS WEIGHT SHALL BE PROVIDED. THE WIDTH OF THE ACCESS ROADWAY, DURING CONSTRUCTION, SHALL BE 20 FT PER STANDARD FIREPREVENTION CODE, LATEST EDITION. ALL NON-HANDICAP PARKING SPACE LINES WILL BE WHITE. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS AND MARKINGS USED ON THE SITE WILL CONFORM WITH THEMANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD), FHWA, LATEST EDITION. REFERENCE THE SIGN CODES CONTAINED IN THE MUTCD FOR ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS. NOTE THE COLOR AND SIZE OF ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS, REFERENCING DETAILS IN ALDOT'SROADWAY AND TRAFFIC DESIGN STANDARDS WHERE APPLICABLE. NO "PROTECTED TREES" WILL BE REMOVED, DESTRUCTIVELY DAMAGED, MUTILATED,RELOCATED, DISFIGURED, DESTROYED, CUT DOWN, OR EXCESSIVELY PRUNED DURING SITE PLAN NOTES AND CODES AS WELL AS O.S.H.A. AND ALDOT STANDARDS. ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE REGULATIONS FIRE LANES AND SIGNAGE TO MEET REQUIREMENTS OF NFPA 1 CHAPTER 18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH ALL OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AT THE SITE; INCLUDING UTILITIES, SURFACES, ETC. AND SHALL BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES THEY CAUSE TO NEW AND EXISTING CONSTRUCTION, PROPERTY AND ANYUNAUTHORIZED DISRUPTION TO UTILITIES ON SITE AND TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, EXISTING UTILITIES AT PROPOSED CONNECTIONS AND CROSSINGSSHALL BE FIELD EXCAVATED TO VERIFY LOCATIONS, ELEVATION AND SIZE. NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY WITH ANY DEVIATIONS OR CONFLICTS. TOTAL SITE ACREAGE = ±0.20 ACRES. REGULATIONS. INSPECTIONS. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. SPECIFICATIONS AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY SUCH. ALL COST SHALL BE INCLUDED IN BASE BID. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. PROPOSEDEXISTING SITE PLAN LEGEND TRAFFIC CONTROL ARROW EDGE OF PAVEMENT STANDARD PARKING QUANTITY LIGHT-DUTY ASPHALT PAVING X" SYSL - X" WIDE SINGLE YELLOW SOLID LINE X" DYSL - X" WIDE DOUBLE YELLOW SOLID LINE X" SWSL - X" WIDE SINGLE WHITE SOLID LINE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE CONCRETE PAVING ALL SIGNAGE SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE SIGN ORDINANCE. 26. ALL SITE LIGHTING SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE ZONING ORDINANCE. SITE LIGHTING SHALL BE ARRANGED AS TO NOT NEGATIVELY EFFECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES. OFFICE (1,200 SF) PARKING DATA 4 SPACES FOR 400 SF+ TOTAL REQUIRED = PARKING REQUIREMENT SPACES 8 PROPOSED PARKING = 8* 1 SPACE/400 SF TO 5000 SF+ 1 SPACES/200 SF OVER 5000 SF 0 2 4 BUILDING (UNDER ROOF) SITE ANALYSIS 2,534 SF SITE ACREAGE (PROPOSED) ±0.20 AC (8,799 SF) BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT YARD: SIDE YARD: SIDE YARD (ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL): MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 20 FT 0 FT 10 FT 35' BUILDING HEIGHT 35 FT PROPOSED PARKING 8 SPACES* REQUIRED PARKING 8 SPACES MAX. BUILDING SITE COVERAGE:---- JURISDICTION CITY OF FAIRHOPE PERVIOUS AREA 4,658 SF (52.9%) IMPERVIOUS AREA 4,141 SF (47.1%) REQUIRED: PROPERTY AREA LAND USAGE --8,799 SF = 0.202 ACRES PROPOSED BUILDING AREA 28.8%2,534 SF = 0.058 ACRES SITE AREA EXCLUSIVE OF BLDG 6,265 SF = 0.144 ACRES IMPERVIOUS PAVING EXCLUSIVE OF BLDG 1,607 SF = 0.037 ACRES DESCRIPTION % OF PROPERTY AREAAREA -- 18.3% ZONING B-3b PERVIOUS PAVING Pier Street MarketplaceDeveloper:Wise Properties LLC1 N Bancroft St. Suite A1Fairhope, AL 36532251-583-8968Contact: Sandy WiseROLL CURB X DIMENSIONS OF EXIT PORCHES, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS. 27. THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF BUILDING UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN.28. REQUIRED TO LAYOUT THE BUILDING WITHIN THE FOUNDATIONS. REFER TO THE STRUCTURAL PLANS FOR THE COLUMN GRID LAYOUT AND INFORMATION29. NO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. 30. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR STAIR DETAILS.31. REAR YARD: 20 FT RESIDENTIAL (2 UNITS, MIXED USE) 1 SPACE/UNIT 2 GRASSED/LANDSCAPED AREA 2,004 SF = 0.046 ACRES 22.7% PERVIOUS PAVING AREA 2,654 SF = 0.061 ACRES 30.2% PROPOSED UNITS 3 UNITS *PROPOSED PARKING IS CALCULATED AS 3 SPACES ON SITE. PIER STREET - CREDIT FOR 1 FULL SPACE (300 SF OF PARKING IS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY) THE REMAINDER (THREE SPACES) IS GIVEN CREDIT AT 1 SPACE PER 2 SPACES EQUATING TO 2 SPACES. ON MOBILE ST THE TWO SPACES ARE GIVEN CREDIT AT 1 SPACE PER 2 SPACES EQUATING TO 1 SPACE. TO SUMMARIZE: SITE - 3 SPACES PIER STREET - 3 SPACES MOBILE STREET - 1 SPACES BIKE PARKING CREDIT - 1 SPACE TOTAL PROVIDED - 8 SPACES (251) 990-6566880 Holcomb Blvd, Ste 2FFairhope, AL 36532EngineeringCivil & SurveyingSITE DENSITY 15 UNITS/ACRE NO RED SOILS OR CLAY SHALL BE USED ONSITE WITHIN 100' OF CRITICAL AREA AS REQUIRED 32. BY THE RED SOIL & CLAY ORDINANCE NUMBER 1423. SQUARE FOOTAGE Ground Floor 308 s.f. 999 s.f. 962 s.f. 298 s.f. 70 s.f. Second Floor 175 s.f. 2,534 s.f. 426 s.f. 70 s.f. Third Floor 175 s.f. 1,660 s.f. 1,482 s.f. 70 s.f. Total 658 s.f. 999 s.f. 962 s.f. 2,534 s.f. 1,660 s.f. 2,206 s.f. 210 s.f. Conditioned Common Area Office Garage Unit A Unit B Deck/Porch ELEV./TRASH/MECH. EXISTING BUILDING/CANOPY AREA (REMOVED)19.6%1,729 SF = 0.040 ACRES AVERAGE NATURAL ELEVATION 11 FEET* *THE SITE FRONTAGE IS ALONG PIER STREET. ON THE WEST PART OF THE FRONTAGE, THE NATURAL ELEVATION IS TEN (10) FEET. ON THE EAST PART OF THE FRONTAGE THE NATURAL ELEVATION IS TWELVE (12) FEET. THEREFORE WE HAVE DETERMINED THE AVERAGE NATURAL ELEVATION TO BE 11 FEET. PEDESTRIAN GROS) SING ~ SIGN (SEE DETAIL I I I I I I I 16"0AK ?\ K ) ,,,-l2o"OAK ,,, .. r:l ) \ '< 0 f! K I I I BLOCK2 LOT1 1======---- r J ,t====---- N 0 ~ C=:::J C=:::J C=:::J 0 ~ c:::::::::::::: ~ C=:::J O H P OHP N5 8 ° 0 0 ' 0 0 " W 87' P L A T 125 . 0 0 ' P L A T & M S D S 5 8 ° 0 4 ' 2 6 " E 1 0 0 . 2 1 ' M S D S 5 8 ° 0 4 ' 2 6 " E 3 3 . 2 2 ' M S D S 20° 23' 56" W 149.47' MSDBA S I S O F B E A RIN AL O N G T H E N O R T H R I G H T - O F- WS 41° 12' 24" W 148.26' MSDP.P. P.P.P.P.WO O D F E N C E NO R T H O F L I N E GU Y W I R E S SIGN POLEXXXXXXXXXREMNANTS OF WIRE FENCEVALLEY GUTTEROVERHEAD PO W E R L I N E S OVERHEAD POWER LINESS 2710 X X X X X X OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHPOHP OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPO9 910 101011111211 1211 1210 CRS CRFWW W WW W WWW W WWW W SSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS S CRF CRS SSSSSTOR.UPMECH.TRASHELEV.UPSTOR.FOYERUPF. O . S . PROPOSED BUILDING (REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL) PIE R A V E . Refer to Civil for ALL grading, drainage, hardscape, & utilities. All areas disturbed by construction shall be sodded, or heavily mulched as noted. Refer to Civil for All Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, & Site Stabilization Other than shown on landscape plan. (Typ.)SOUTH MOBILE ST.Refer to Civil for ALL grading, drainage, hardscape, & utilities. 1 1 Treesave Fencing (Typ.) See Detail #1 / L-1.1 Treesave Fencing (Typ.) See Detail #1 / L-1.1 HAND EXCAVATION ONLY AROUND EX. TREES. NO RUBBER TIRE MACHINERY OR VEHICLES SHALL PARK OR DRIVE IN DRIPLINE LIMITS. LIGHT WEIGHT TRACK EQUIP. ONLY 4" Depth of Hardwood Mulch Entire planting strip along East side. Ex. Tree to Remain. Refer to City Tree Protection Ordinance and detail for protection during construction. Consult Certified Arborist prior to beginning construction to advise best management practices to ensure tree survivability. Ex. Tree to Remain. Refer to City Tree Protection Ordinance and detail for protection during construction. Consult Certified Arborist prior to beginning construction to advise best management practices to ensure tree survivability. PROPOSED BUILDING (REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL) Golden Globe Ginkgo 2.5" Cal. 1 Sweet Viburnum 7 gal 7 Spicata Liriope 1 gal 85 Slender Silhouette Sweet Gum 30 gal 1 Platinum Beauty Breeze Grass 3 gal 2 3 30 gal TF Dahoon Holly 11 1 gal Creeping Fig Spicata Liriope 1 gal 57 Sweet Viburnum 7 gal 7 Blue Pacific Juniper 3 gal 78 Platinum Beauty Breeze Grass 3 gal 5 Golden Globe Ginkgo 2.5" Cal. 1 Slender Silhouette Sweet Gum 30 gal 3 Platinum Beauty Breeze Grass 3 gal 6 Platinum Beauty Breeze Grass 3 gal 3 Geo Zoysia sod 264 sf Spicata Liriope 1 gal 19 Slender Silhouette Sweet Gum 30 gal 3 All beds shall receive a 4" Depth of Hardwood Mulch. (typ.) All beds shall receive a 4" Depth of Hardwood Mulch. (typ.) 1 Geo Zoysia sod 304 sf Spicata Liriope 1 gal 35 Geo Zoysia sod 66 sf FAIRHOPE, ALPIER STREET MARKETPLACEKnow what's below. before you dig.Call R LANDSCAPE L-1.1 JOSEPH HENRY COMER IV NUMBER539REGIS T E RED LANDSC A P E ARCHITECTSTATE O F ALABA M A SEALNOT VALIDU N L ESSSIGNEDES P A L I E R ,LLC. NORTH NOTES: 1. BASE SURVEY PROVIDED BY S.E. CIVIL. 2. LOCATION OF STRUCTURES, HARDSCAPE, AND EXISTING VEGETATION SHALL BE FIELD VERIFIED. 3. VERIFY ALL LAYOUT AND DIMENSIONS IN FIELD. 4. PLANT COUNTS ARE FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY. FIELD VERIFY ACCORDINGLY. 5. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING POSITIVE DRAINAGE. 6. CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS. 7. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DISCREPANCIES IN DRAWINGS OR FIELD CONDITIONS. 8. REFER TO ARCH. / CIVIL FOR ALL DEMOLITION, TREE SAVE/REMOVAL, UTILITIES, GRADING, DRAINAGE, & HARDSCAPE. TREE PROTECTION DETAIL Tree protection fencing shall be installed 20' from trunks of trees larger than 20" DBH and 10' from trunks of trees under 20" DBH.4'-0"Maintain existing grade with the tree protection fence unless otherwise indicated on the plans. Notes: 1- See city tree protection ordinance sec. 20.5-6 for required tree protection measures. 2- No pruning shall be performed except by approved arborist. 3- No equipment shall operate inside the protective fencing including during fence installation and removal. 4- Tree protection fence shall be installed prior to any landscape disturbance. 5- No entry, storage, or temporary parking shall be allowed inside fence. SECTION VIEW 8.5" x 11" sign laminated in plastic spaced every 50' along the fence. Tree Protection fence: Chain link fence 1 DRAFT - FOR REVIEW ONLYPLAN 0 SCALE: feet81624 1/8" = 1'-0" SEE SHEETS L-1.2 FOR LANDSCAPE DETAILS. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL & CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR ALL HARDSCAPE AND STRUCTURES. 0 NOT TO SCALE / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /; /; I/ I 1...,- 0 .. I /- / I' I. - I l ,· •..•. • .. , ... · ... ._.-·: _.-.• I I I I "'-./ \ ) I I '•,,, / / / ,.,,-'i / ) // i / I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \--...._/ \ I I I I I '-- I I I /--...._ I ~ I @ I ij V I I t ;~ /(3 ~ ESPALIER landscape architecture Espalier, LLC P.O. Box 1247 Alabama 36533 Fairh~p;s 1.454.3500 espalierdesign.com ISSUED/REVISED DESIGN[DBY .x; .x; PlnJECTNO. 11!66 ~~ 12/17/18 FlLEN.wE PIERSTMRK