Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-01-2021 Planning Commission MinutesFebruary I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes The Planning Commission met virtually Monday, February 1, 2021 at 5:00 PM at the City Municipal Complex, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers. Present: Lee Turner, Chairperson; Rebecca Bryant; Harry Kohler; John Worsham; Clarice Hall-Black; Hollie MacKellar; Jason Langley; Jimmy Conyers, Council Liaison; Buford King, Development Services Manager; Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager; Mike Jeffries, Planner; Samara Walley, Planner; Carla Davis, Planner; Emily Boyett, Secretary; and Chris Williams, City Attorney Absent: Art Dyas Chairman Turner called the meeting to order at 5:05 PM and explained the procedures of the meeting. Mr. Turner took a roll call of those present. SD 20.49 Public hearing to consider the request of George and Mary Jean Havranek for plat approval for Havranek Place, a 2-Iot minor subdivision, Seth Moore. The property is located at the southeast comer of the intersection of County Road 13 and County Road 24. Mr. Simmons gave the staff report saying the subject property is approximately 11.82 acres and the applicant desires to divide the property into two separate lots. The proposed Lot 2 is approximately 6.19 acres (269,636 square feet) with an existing residence and carport. The proposed Lot 3 is approximately 5.63 acres (245,242 square feet) with an existing residence and shed. The applicant has submitted a waiver request from the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations in relation to Article VI Section D. "Sidewalks" which states: "sidewalks shall be installed on all streets within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope". Historically, the planning commission has greatly emphasized sidewalk installation to facilitate future pedestrian connectivity and walkability of developments and has either required sidewalk installation, or in the case of county roads, required a pedestrian easement on private property along the margin of the property adjacent to the public ROW to allow future sidewalk installation, but not required sidewalks to be installed prior to minor subdivision plat approval. The proposed plat includes a 15' sidewalk, drainage, and utility easement along the margin of CR 1 and CR 24 onto which sidewalks may be installed at a future time. Staff does not object to the sidewalk waiver and will memorialize via condition of approval the 15' easement noted on the plat. Staff recommends APPROVAL of SD 20.49 with the following conditions: 1. Retention of the 15' sidewalk easement depicted on the plat along County Road 13 and County Road 24. 2. A fire hydrant shall be installed within 450' of each lot. If the existing water line cannot support a fire hydrant the water line must be upgraded to accommodate the fire hydrant. 3. Applicant shall have 180 days to install fire hydrant. 4. Plat will not be signed by staff until the fire hydrant is installed to the satisfaction of the water superintendent. Seth Moore was present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. Jimmy Conyers made a motion to accept the staff recommendation for APPROVAL of SD 20.49 with the following conditions: 1 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes 1. Retention of the 15' sidewalk easement depicted on the plat along County Road 13 and County Road 24. 2. A fire hydrant shall be installed within 450' of each lot. If the existing water line cannot support a fire hydrant the water line must be upgraded to accommodate the fire hydrant. 3. Applicant shall have 180 days to install fire hydrant. 4. Plat will not be signed by staff until the fire hydrant is installed to the satisfaction of the water superintendent. John Worsham 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE-John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley, and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. SD 20.51 Public hearing to consider the request of FST Linda Walker for plat approval of Walker Place, a 2-lot minor subdivision, Seth Moore. The property is located on the south side of Morphy Avenue between Bishop Road and County Road 13, at 8800 Morphy A venue. Mr. Simmons gave the staff report saying the subject property is approximately 7.9 acres and the applicant desires to divide the property into two separate lots. The proposed Lot 1 is approximately 3.10 acres (135,400 square feet) with an existing residence. The proposed Lot 2 is approximately 4.75 acres (207,100 square feet) with an existing residence and barn. The applicant has submitted a waiver request from the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations in relation to Article VI Section D. "Sidewalks" which states: "sidewalks shall be installed on all streets within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope". Historically, the planning commission has greatly emphasized sidewalk installation to facilitate future pedestrian connectivity and walkability of developments and has either required sidewalk installation, or in the case of county roads, required a pedestrian easement on private property along the margin of the property adjacent to the public ROW to allow future sidewalk installation, but not required sidewalks to be installed prior to minor subdivision plat approval. The proposed plat includes a 15' sidewalk, drainage, and utility easement along the margin of Morphy A venue onto which sidewalks may be installed at a future time. The sidewalk easement is not necessary because Morphy AVE is a City of Fairhope ROW and thus sidewalks would be installed in the ROW. Staff does not necessarily object to the sidewalk waiver because there are no existing sidewalks along Morphy A VE between Bishop Road and CR 13. At the time of plat approval, staff will memorialize via condition of approval an opportunity for the planning commission to rule on the sidewalk wavier. Staff recommends approval of SD 20.51 with the following conditions: 1. Retention of the 15' sidewalk easement depicted on the plat along Morphy A venue. 2. A fire hydrant shall be installed within 450' of each lot. If the existing water line cannot support a fire hydrant the water line must be upgraded to accommodate the fire hydrant. 3. Applicant shall have 180 days to install fire hydrant. 4. Plat will not be signed by staff until the fire hydrant is installed to the satisfaction of the water superintendent. Seth Moore was present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. 2 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes Jimmy Conyers made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE SD 20.51 with the following conditions: 1. Retention of the 15' sidewalk easement depicted on the plat along Morphy Avenue. 2. A fire hydrant shall be installed within 450' of each lot. If the existing water line cannot support a fire hydrant the water line must be upgraded to accommodate the fire hydrant. 3. Applicant shall have 180 days to install fire hydrant. 4. Plat will not be signed by staff until the fire hydrant is installed to the satisfaction of the water superintendent. John Worsham 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE-John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. SD 20.52 Public hearing to consider the request of the 68V Pay Dirt, LLC for Preliminary plat approval of Laurelbrooke Subdivision, a 100-Iot division, Justin Britt. Ms. Walley gave the staff report stating that the property is approximately 5 9. 72 acres and is located on the east side of State Highway 181 approximately ½ mile north of County Road 24. The village subdivision approval preceding preliminary plat approval was Case number SD 20.43 and was approved by the City of Fairhope Planning Commission on September 10, 2020. The subdivision approval includes 100 lots comprising 59.72 acres, resulting in an overall development density of 1.67 lots per acre. Staff recommends APPROVAL of case number SD. 20.52 Laurelbrooke Subdivision. The recommendation of approval includes the following assumptions and conditions: ASSUMPTIONS: 1. The village subdivision shall be limited to 100 single-family residential lots with a minimum lot size of 8,400 square feet. a. Setbacks shall comply with the Baldwin County Subdivision Regulations for unzoned property. 1. Side setbacks are now listed as 10.5'. Staff defers approval of setbacks to Baldwin County and this review assumes the setbacks that will be listed on the final plat will reflect approval by Baldwin County. b. Lot coverage shall be restricted to 40% of the principle structure and 25% of the required rear yard for accessory structures. i. Reflected in the preliminary plat. c. Maximum building height of principle and accessory structures shall be 30 feet. d. Accessory structures must maintain a minimum 1 0' separation from principle structures and must be located behind the rear building line of the principle structure. e. Accessory dwellings are prohibited. i. Reflected on preliminary plat in the form of a note. 2. Minimum greenspace shall be 15% of the entire property and shall otherwise comply with Article V Section "C" of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations. 3. Minimum undisturbed space shall be 30%. 3 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes 4. The lake shall be a minimum of 3.39 acres and shall not be counted toward greenspace calculations to emphasize the lake as a standalone amenity in addition to its use as a stormwater facility. 1. Appendix "A" of the Village Subdivision approval depicts a water feature of 3.39 acres; however, the preliminary plat proposes a pond of 2.14 acres. Staff will provide a condition of approval for the Planning Commission to rule on the deviation from the Village Subdivision approval. b. The lake shall be stocked with fish as is typical for the Baldwin County climate with species selected by the applicant. i. Stocking of the pond will be verified at the time of final plat approval request. c. Lake side slopes shall not exceed 4:1 as required by Ordinance 1444. 5. Layout of the village subdivision shall otherwise be in substantial conformance with the drawing hereinafter referred to as Appendix "A". a. Any statements on Appendix "A" to the effect of "need not be built" are null and void for the purposes of this approval. 1. For the applicant's information, this statement will be applicable to the preliminary plat and memorialized as a condition of approval and will also include the restriction of phrases such as "subject to change." 6. Amenities listed as items "A" through "Q" on the drawings referred to hereinafter as Appendix "B" and "C" shall be furnished and installed in Phase 1 of the development prior to final plat approval. Appendix "B" and "C" represents the minimum quantities of amenities to be furnished. The preliminary plat application for Phase 1 shall include for approval by the Planning Commission: a. Dimensioned and fully-detail drawings and color renderings of all signage and wayfinding. i. Dimensioned drawings and color renderings for amenities have been provided. b. Dimensioned and fully-detailed drawings and color renderings of the pier, shade structure, fitness stations, benches, fire pits, mail kiosk, treehouse, and "cut sheets" of all site lighting light fixtures outside the public ROW. i. Dimensioned drawings and color renderings for amenities have been provided. c. Light fixtures within the public ROW shall be limited to 15' tall. Submit a "cut sheet" for approval of the light fixtures and indicate the proposed color of the fixture. d. All street trees and sidewalks within each phase shall be installed prior to final plat application submission. i. For the applicant's information. This requirement will be reviewed at the time of final plat request. e. Any statements on Appendix "B" and "C" to the effect of"need not be built" are null and void for the purposes of this approval. 1. For the applicant's information, this statement will be applicable to the preliminary plat and memorialized as a condition of approval to the drawings within the preliminary plat that represent Appendix 4 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes "B" and "C" from the Village Subdivision approval and will also include the restriction of phrases such as "subject to change." 7. As a pre-requisite to preliminary plat submission, the tree preservation plan and street tree plan, hereinafter referred to as appendices D,E,F, and G shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Fairhope Horticulturalist and/or tree committee, as applicable, for compliance with Ordinance 1444. a. Any and all revisions to appendices D,E,F, and G will be included in the preliminary plat approval application to memorialize their approval. b. Any statements to the effect of"need not be built" on appendices D,E,F, and G are null and void for the purposes of this approval. 1. The revised drawings do not appear to contain this language however a condition of approval will also include the restriction of phrases such as "subject to change." c. Subject property lies within the Police Jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope and thus Tree Ordinance (number 1444) is applicable. 1. The revised Tree Preservation and Removal Plan, drawing TPl00, that was submitted 11/25/2020 removes three heritage trees and the "island" on which they were located that were shown as preserved on drawing TPl 00 submitted with the original preliminary plat package on 10/21/2020. The 10/21/2020 submittal appeared to be in substantial conformance with Appendix "D" of the Village Subdivision approval. Staff will provide a condition of approval to allow the Planning Commission to rule upon this deviation from the Village Subdivision approval. d. Coordinate the mail kiosk parking area and all amenities depicted on appendices A,B and C so that they are reflected on appendices D,E,F, and G. 8. For the applicant's information subject property is located within the City of Fairhope Police Jurisdiction and as such the signage ordinance (number 1537) is applicable. a. Coordinate signage permit requestions with Kim Burmeister, Code Enforcement Officer. 9. The 30' Emergency Fire Access shall be capable of being traversed by a 75,000 lb. GVWR vehicle. If this access is to be gated, emergency services access shall be reviewed and approved by the fire authority having jurisdiction during the preliminary plat process. a. Not addressed in the preliminary plat application. 10. Sidewalks are not depicted along AL HWY 181. The Planning Commission may wish to require sidewalks within a pedestrian easement on along the margin of Common Area 1 adjacent to the AL HWY 181 ROW. a. The Planning Commission did not address this item at the time of Village Subdivision approval. For the applicant's information the Planning Commission may require sidewalks along SR 181 as a condition of approval of Case number SD 20.52. CONDITIONS: 1) Per the Water and Sewer Superintendent, the property in which the lift station is located shall be conveyed as a lot of record to the City. 5 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes a. The lot shall be a minimum of20' x 30'. b. A 20' wide road extending from the station to the road shall be provided. 2) The Village Subdivision approval depicts a water feature of 3.39 acres; however, the preliminary plat proposes a pond of 2.14 acres. Further, the revised Tree Preservation and Removal Plan, drawing TP 100, that was submitted 11/25/2020 removes three heritage trees and the "island" on which they were located that were shown as preserved on drawing TPl 00 submitted with the original preliminary plat package on 10/21/2020. The 10/21/2020 submittal appeared to be in substantial conformance with Appendix "D" of the Village Subdivision approval. This is a deviation from the originally-approved Village Subdivision. Staff does not support this deviation from the original Village Subdivision. This condition approval is in place to allow the Planning Commission to rule on this department from the original Village Subdivision. 3) The Planning Commission did not address sidewalks at the time of Village Subdivision approval. The Planning Commission may wish to require sidewalks within a pedestrian easement on along the margin of Common Area 1 adjacent to the AL HWY 181 ROW. Justin Britt of Dewberry Engineers, Inc. addressed the Commission saying the island in the pond was removed to allow a 75" tree to be saved on the bank. He explained they are trying to keep the natural topography while creating the lake. Mrs. Bryant asked what size trees are being lot by removing the island and Mr. Britt responded 20" and 28" trees. Mr. Turner stated he wants to see a sidewalk along St. Hwy. 181. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. Hollie MacKellar made a motion to accept the staff recommendation for APPROVAL of case number SD. 20.52 Laurelbrooke Subdivision. The recommendation of approval includes the following assumptions and conditions: ASSUMPTIONS: 1) The village subdivision shall be limited to 100 single-family residential lots with a minimum lot size of 8,400 square feet. a. Setbacks shall comply with the Baldwin County Subdivision Regulations for unzoned property. 1. Side setbacks are now listed as 10.5'. Staff defers approval of setbacks to Baldwin County and this review assumes the setbacks that will be listed on the final plat will reflect approval by Baldwin County. b. Lot coverage shall be restricted to 40% of the principle structure and 25% of the required rear yard for accessory structures. i. Reflected in the preliminary plat. c. Maximum building height of principle and accessory structures shall be 30 feet. d. Accessory structures must maintain a minimum 1 O' separation from principle structures and must be located behind the rear building line of the principle structure. e. Accessory dwellings are prohibited. i. Reflected on preliminary plat in the form of a note. 6 February 1, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes 2) Minimum greenspace shall be 15% of the entire property and shall otherwise comply with Article V Section "C" of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations. 3) Minimum undisturbed space shall be 30%. 4) The lake shall be a minimum of 3.39 acres and shall not be counted toward greenspace calculations to emphasize the lake as a standalone amenity in addition to its use as a stormwater facility. 1. Appendix "A" of the Village Subdivision approval depicts a water feature of 3.39 acres; however, the preliminary plat proposes a pond of 2 .14 acres. Staff will provide a condition of approval for the Planning Commission to rule on the deviation from the Village Subdivision approval. b. The lake shall be stocked with fish as is typical for the Baldwin County climate with species selected by the applicant. i. Stocking of the pond will be verified at the time of final plat approval request. c. Lake side slopes shall not exceed 4:1 as required by Ordinance 1444. 5) Layout of the village subdivision shall otherwise be in substantial conformance with the drawing hereinafter referred to as Appendix "A". a. Any statements on Appendix "A" to the effect of "need not be built" are null and void for the purposes of this approval. 1. For the applicant's information, this statement will be applicable to the preliminary plat and memorialized as a condition of approval and will also include the restriction of phrases such as "subject to change." 6) Amenities listed as items "A" through "Q" on the drawings referred to hereinafter as Appendix "B" and "C" shall be furnished and installed in Phase 1 of the development prior to final plat approval. Appendix "B" and "C" represents the minimum quantities of amenities to be furnished. The preliminary plat application for Phase 1 shall include for approval by the Planning Commission: a. Dimensioned and fully-detail drawings and color renderings of all signage and wayfinding. i. Dimensioned drawings and color renderings for amenities have been provided. b. Dimensioned and fully-detailed drawings and color renderings of the pier, shade structure, fitness stations, benches, fire pits, mail kiosk, treehouse, and "cut sheets" of all site lighting light fixtures outside the public ROW. i. Dimensioned drawings and color renderings for amenities have been provided. c. Light fixtures within the public ROW shall be limited to 15' tall. Submit a "cut sheet" for approval of the light fixtures and indicate the proposed color of the fixture. d. All street trees and sidewalks within each phase shall be installed prior to final plat application submission. 1. For the applicant's information. This requirement will be reviewed at the time of final plat request. 7 February 1, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes e. Any statements on Appendix "B" and "C" to the effect of "need not be built" are null and void for the purposes of this approval. 1. For the applicant's information, this statement will be applicable to the preliminary plat and memorialized as a condition of approval to the drawings within the preliminary plat that represent Appendix "B" and "C" from the Village Subdivision approval and will also include the restriction of phrases such as "subject to change." 7) As a pre-requisite to preliminary plat submission, the tree preservation plan and street tree plan, hereinafter referred to as appendices D,E,F, and G shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Fairhope Horticulturalist and/or tree committee, as applicable, for compliance with Ordinance 1444. a. Any and all revisions to appendices D,E,F, and G will be included in the preliminary plat approval application to memorialize their approval. b. Any statements to the effect of "need not be built" on appendices D,E,F, and G are null and void for the purposes of this approval. 1. The revised drawings do not appear to contain this language however a condition of approval will also include the restriction of phrases such as "subject to change." c. Subject property lies within the Police Jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope and thus Tree Ordinance (number 1444) is applicable. 1. The revised Tree Preservation and Removal Plan, drawing TPIOO, that was submitted 11/25/2020 removes three heritage trees and the "island" on which they were located that were shown as preserved on drawing TPl 00 submitted with the original preliminary plat package on 10/21/2020. The 10/21/2020 submittal appeared to be in substantial conformance with Appendix "D" of the Village Subdivision approval. Staff will provide a condition of approval to allow the Planning Commission to rule upon this deviation from the Village Subdivision approval. d. Coordinate the mail kiosk parking area and all amenities depicted on appendices A,B and C so that they are reflected on appendices D,E,F, and G. 8) For the applicant's information -subject property is located within the City of Fairhope Police Jurisdiction and as such the signage ordinance (number 1537) is applicable. a. Coordinate signage permit requestions with Kim Burmeister, Code Enforcement Officer. 9) The 30' Emergency Fire Access shall be capable of being traversed by a 75,000 lb. GVWR vehicle. If this access is to be gated, emergency services access shall be reviewed and approved by the fire authority having jurisdiction during the preliminary plat process. a. Not addressed in the preliminary plat application. 10) Sidewalks are not depicted along AL HWY 181. The Planning Commission may wish to require sidewalks within a pedestrian easement on along the margin of Common Area 1 adjacent to the AL HWY 181 ROW. a. The Planning Commission did not address this item at the time of Village Subdivision approval. For the applicant's information the Planning 8 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes Commission may require sidewalks along SR 181 as a condition of approval of Case number SD 20.52. CONDITIONS: 1) Per the Water and Sewer Superintendent, the property in which the lift station is located shall be conveyed as a lot of record to the City. a. The lot shall be a minimum of 20' x 30'. b. A 20' wide road extending from the station to the road shall be provided. 2) The deviation from the originally-approved Village Subdivision to allow the water feature of 3.39 acres be reduced to a pond of 2.14 acres to preserve the 75" heritage tree located on the west side of the pond. 3) Sidewalks shall be built along State Highway 181. John Worsham 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. John Worsham stated he has a conflict of interest with the following cases SD 20.53 and SR 20.04 and recused himself. SD 20.53 Public hearing to consider the request of FST Magnolia/Church, LLC for preliminary approval of Magnolia & Church Mixed Use Development, a 10-unit multiple occupancy project, Larry Smith. The property is located at the northeast comer of the intersection of Magnolia Avenue and Church Street, at 301 Magnolia Avenue. Mr. Jeffries gave the staff report saying the property is zoned B-2 and located on the edge of the Central Business District (CBD). The proposed project is currently under Multiple Occupancy Project review and Site Plan review. The request is for a mixed-use development containing eight (7) residential units and two (3) commercial units. Staff recommends APPROVAL of case SD 20.53 contingent upon the following condition: 1. The approval of Site Plan Review case SR 20.04. Vance McCown was present and said the Multiple Occupancy Project meets the technical requirements of the regulations, but the Site Plan review process is more subjective, and staff does not support the design. Mr. Smith explained the site is on the fringe of the CBD and the design keeps residential use on Church Street and commercial on Magnolia A venue. He stated the Board of Adjustment approved 3 driveways backing onto Church previously. Mr. Turner stated the trees are important Downtown and need to be protected. He also noted he does not like the cars backing out on Church Street. Mr. Simmons stated the regulations require parking be located in the rear. Mr. McCown stated there is 22' between the edge of pavement and the property line. Mr. Simmons pointed out sidewalks do not have to be built in the right-of-way. Mr. McCown asked if the trees need to be saved or the sidewalks built because doing both is impossible. Mr. Smith said the trees can be saved if no sidewalk is required. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. Mr. Conyers said saving the trees are the priority and Mr. Turner and Mrs. Bryant agreed. Mr. Williams pointed out the Commission can only reduce the sidewalk to 6' and the Board of Adjustment would have to approve the removal of the sidewalk from the proposed design as well as the allowance for parking to be in the front. 9 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes Jimmy Conyers made a motion to accept the staff recommendation for APPROVAL contingent upon the following condition: 1. The approval of Site Plan Review case SR 20.04. Rebecca Bryant 2 nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE-Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall-Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. ABSTENSION -John Worsham. SR 20.04 Request of FST Magnolia/Church, LLC for Site Plan approval of Magnolia & Church Mixed Use Development, a 10-unit project, Larry Smith. The property is located at the northeast comer of the intersection of Magnolia A venue and Church Street, at 301 Magnolia Avenue. Mr. Jeffries gave the staff report saying the property is zoned B-2 and located on the edge of the Central Business District (CBD). The proposed project is currently under Multiple Occupancy Project review and Site Plan review. This application is for a Site Plan review pursuant to the procedure required by Fairhope's Zoning Ordinance Article II.C.2. The Planning Commission will review and make a recommendation to the City Council who will make the final approval decision. The request is for a mixed-use development containing eight (7) residential units and two (3) commercial units. Staff recommends this application be denied for the following reasons: 1. The proposed removal of three ROW trees by applicant or arborists report along Church St. and trimming of other ROW trees contradicts the City's efforts to protect the existing tree's left as stated in MEMO by Fairhope's Public Works Director. 2. The proposed parking adjacent to Church St. conflicts with the Fairhope's Zoning Ordinance and is a safety hazard. 3. By eliminating the parking, the removal of one ROW tree is not needed. Jimmy Conyers made a motion to APPROVE contingent upon the following conditions: 1. The Board of Adjustment granting a variance to the sidewalk requirements in the Central Business District along Church Street. 2. The Board of Adjustment granting a variance to the parking requirements in the Central Business District along Church Street. 3. Tree mitigation shall be required for removal of trees within the right-of-way. Hollie MacKellar 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall-Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. ABS TENSION -John Worsham. John Worsham rejoined the meeting. SD 21.03 Public hearing to consider the request of 68V Pay Dirt, LLC on behalf of FST Matthew D. Malone, for Preliminary approval of Carmel Park Flats, a 242-unit multiple occupancy project, Larry Smith. The property is approximately 20.24 acres and is located at the southwest comer of the intersection of County Road 44 (a.k.a. Twin Beech Road) and Thompson Hall Road, to be known as Carmel Park Flats. Mr. Jeffries gave the staff report saying the property is unzoned and but within the City's Planning Jurisdiction. Staff has received numerous letters in opposition, and they are included at 10 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes the end of this report. Two traffic studies were conducted. The first study did not recommend any improvements. Staff requested a revised study to confirm the traffic impacts. The study included major intersections along CR 44 from SR 181 to SR 98. Also incorporated were known future developments and known future improvements to CR 44. The results of the study recommended a left turn lane and a four way stop at the intersection of CR 44 and Boothe Road. In addition to these improvements the applicant is proposing to also install a right tum lane. At time of construction all applicable permits will be required from Baldwin County Highway Department. Sewer inside the development will remain private. The individual units will gravity feed to a lift station on the south side of the property then be forced to CR 44 to connect to Fairhope's Sewer system using a gravity line installed by the developer and utilizing the existing lift station in Woodlawn. In addition, the developer will pay an aid to construction to go towards purchasing and installing a generator for the existing lift station. Drainage has been reviewed and approved by City ofFairhope's Public Works Director, Richard Johnson, P.E. Water will be collected in a series of inlets and underground drainage. The underground drainage will discharge into two (2) proposed ponds on the property. Pond 1 will be a wet retention pond that will discharge into Pond 2. Pond 2 will be a dry detention pond that discharges into the existing wooded wetland channel on the southwest comer of the property. 25% greenspace is required resulting in 5acres+/-. 7.85 acres is being provided as shown on the site data table. The proposed buildings comply with the 35' maximum height. The entrance is located on CR 44 and is a split entry/exit. The entrance and internal road widths meet fire code. Staff recommendation to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. A letter confirming all onsite sewer is to remain privately maintained and is not the responsibility of the City of Fairhope or Baldwin County signed by the development owner. 2. A note added on the recorded site plan "All sewer infrastructure within the property boundary is to remain private and is not the responsibility of the City of Fairhope nor Baldwin County." 3. All traffic improvements shall be installed before application for Final MOP approval. 4. A replat combining the two lots. 5. Sidewalks added along property along CR 44. Mr. Smith addressed the Commission saying this project is providing more parking than bedrooms, preserving mature trees, adds buffers around the perimeter of the site, and has numerous amenities. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Morgan Ashurst of Ashurst Niemeyer Real Estate -He said he is representing the sellers and they were excited to have a local and proven developer doing this project. He noted there is a demand for apartments and this site was suitable due to being unzoned. Richard Johnson of Phelps Dunbar, LLP -He said he is representing Fairhope Quality of Life, LLC and requested case be tabled for further traffic analysis. He stated the submitted traffic studies are not adequate and misleading. He also noted concerns with the sewer infrastructure and capacity. Richard Davis of27180 Pollard Road He stated he is representing the applicant and questioned the Commission's authority to hear this case. John Avant with TerraCore addressed concerns regarding the traffic study. 11 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes Bob Visser of 18887 Summer Oaks -He stated concerns with traffic and speeding on Twin Beech Road. Jim Laura of 574 Theakston Street-He questioned the completeness of the submitted traffic study. Danny Calhoun -He stated there is a petition with over 1,200 signatures in opposition to this request. He noted concerns with density, incompatibility with surrounding properties, traffic, noise, and lighting. Clay Calhoun of 18850 Summer Oaks He stated concerns with traffic and sewer capacity. Chad Yarbrough of 19117 Fairfield Drive-He stated concerns with traffic. James Jewell of 822 Summer Lake Street -He stated concerns with traffic and sewer capacity. Tim Lazaris of 740 Cheswick A venue -He stated concerns with traffic, safety and sewer capacity. Richard Moore of 9150 Twin Beech Road He requested the application be tabled for a new traffic study to accurately reflect the traffic situation. Michael Regan, Summer Oaks property owner -He stated concerns with aesthetics. Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing. Mr. Langley noted the lift station failure was due to Hurricane Sally and stated that all 80 lift stations lost power and similar issues happened all over town. Mr. Smith addressed concerns to the traffic study saying the first study met the County and ALDOT requirements but the City asked to extend it and the applicant did. He noted the study included the Thompson Hall intersection, incorporated all County and State improvements, and due to Covid a higher growth rate was used. He said the dates for the study was exam week at the high school and students were in class. Mr. Smith said all issues were addressed and Mr. Johnson, Public Works Director, agreed with the recommendations. He noted the petition mentioned only has 541 Fairhope resident signatures. He also stated the sewer will be gravity and the applicant is adding a generator which will help the existing system. Mrs. MacKellar asked how the community involvement meeting was and Mr. Smith said it was outside with decent turnout but only one person followed up with him. Mrs. Hall-Black suggested an additional traffic study to address the times and appease the concerns. She said the Commission can't control what they want to do with their property. Mr. Williams said the Commission can table the request for 30 days. Mr. Johnson, Public Works Director, explained the legal procurement process saying it will be costly to have a new study done, will require City Council approval, and will take at least 60 days to begin. Mr. Smith stated the study says it covers school traffic and Mr. Conyers noted the break downs start at 8:30AM to 9:00AM and again at 2:30PM to 3:00PM. Mrs. MacKellar stated seniors did not have to go to school for exams. Mr. Conyers asked if the sewer capacity is okay with the proposed upgrades and Mr. Langley responded yes. Mr. Turner asked if the current study could be expanded or reviewed. Mr. Simmons said the Mayor may be able to approve if the cost is under $15,000. Mr. Williams said the Commission can require more information or expand the parameters. Mr. Turner asked if the motion could include a specific date and times for the traffic to be studied and Mr. Williams responded it is within the discretion of the Commission. Mr. Smith requested the Commission vote on the application. 12 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes Clarice Hall-Black made a motion to TABLE the request until the next meeting to allow the traffic study be reviewed or a new traffic study to be conducted during peak school hours with the City approving the traffic engineer to do the study or review. Hollie MacKellar 2 nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. The Commission took a five minute recess. ZC 21.01 Public hearing to consider the request of 68V Pay Dirt, LLC on behalf of Roberta U. Harris, Stephen J. Urbanek, II, and Margaret U. Dunnam, to establish an initial zoning of PUD (Planned Unit Development) conditional upon annexation into the City of Fairhope, David Diehl. The property is approximately 30. 7 acres and is located at the southeast comer of the intersection of County Road 48 and Blueberry Lane, to be known as Overland. Ms. Davis gave the staff report saying the applicant describes the project as a "age-targeted community" for citizens 55 years of age and older; however, they do not plan to restrict buyers under the age of 55. The project consists of 61 Single-Family lots and 16 Townhome Apartments. As proposed, the single-family portion will be accessed by standard streets that will be dedicated to The City of Fairhope. The applicant is proposing 7 different housing layouts with maximum lot coverage of the principal structure not to exceed 45%. The maximum building height will be 30 feet. The minimum house size will be 1,600 square feet with the smallest lot being 6,500 square feet. The 16-unit townhomes will be a minimum of 1,200 square feet each. The maximum building height will be 35 feet. The proposed density for this project is roughly 2.51 units per acre. Most of the lots will be 6,500 square feet, with the largest lot being 11,388 square feet. As proposed, lots will be roughly 50' wide and 130' in length. The average lot is 7, 087 square feet with 25' front and rear yard setbacks, and 5' side yard setback except where there is a comer lot which will be a 20' side street setback. The development will utilize City of Fairhope water, sewer and gas services; Baldwin EMC for electrical service; and AT &T for the telephone service. A preliminary utility plan has also been submitted for review. An unsigned copy of the Declaration of Covenants is included within the Master Development Plan. The covenants state all sidewalks are to be built by each owner on their lot. Sidewalks are shown within the ROW. Subdivision regulations require sidewalks and street trees to be installed prior to applying for Final Plat approval. Covenants do not override zoning code or subdivision requirements, but in an effort to avoid confusion, staff is memorializing when sidewalks and street shall be installed via a condition of approval. Staff recommends Case # ZC 21.01 Overland PUD amendment for PPIN 43640 be APPROVED with the following condition: 1. All sidewalks and street trees shall be installed prior to submission of Final Plat Approval, including sidewalk along Fairhope Avenue. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. Mr. Conyers noted this project is a good example of a PUD with the greenspace and common area. Jimmy Conyers made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to be APPROVED with the following condition: 13 February 1, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes 1. All sidewalks and street trees shall be installed prior to submission of Final Plat Approval, including sidewalk along Fairhope A venue. John Worsham 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. SD 21.09 Public hearing to consider the request of RW Battles, LLC for Preliminary approval of Publix at Point Clear, a 17-unit multiple occupancy project, Trey Jinright. The project is approximately 15.85 acres and is located at the northwest comer of the intersection of S. Greeno Road and Battles Road. Mr. King gave the staff report saying the subject property is within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope in unzoned Baldwin County, within County Planning District 17. A pending re- plat that will re-configure the existing lots ofrecord that comprise the development. No new lots of record will be created by the re-plat. The MOP request is primarily related to lots 5 and 7, with improvements that allow future development oflots 1-4 and lot 9. Lots 6 and 8 are reconfigured by the re-plat, but once the replat occurs lots 6 and 8 will receive no development activities. The specific MOP request include the following unit breakdown for lot 5: one (1) anchor grocery unit, 10 inline units adjacent to the anchor, 2 units in the out-building in front of the inline retail, and the potential for 3 more future units on the southeast comer of Lot 5. If, at any time in the future, Lots 1-4 or Lot 9 are to be developed with more than one unit per lot, a separate MOP application will be submitted at that time as applicable. Staff recommends preliminary APPROVAL of case number SD. 21.09 Publix at Point Clear Multiple Occupancy Project. The recommendation of approval includes the following assumptions and conditions: ASSUMPTIONS 1) Though subject application is an MOP and not a traditional subdivision, a final approval process similar to that of a traditional subdivision final "plat" approval shall be required for any improvements to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope. a. All utilities to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City of Fairhope Water and Sewer Superintendent, and a maintenance bond shall be submitted at the time of final plat application. b. As-built drawings, recorded stormwater O&M Plan and Agreement, inspection videos, and all testing requirements of the subdivision regulations shall be submitted with the final approval request. c. Copies of the recorded off site drainage and utility easements as well as a copy of the recorded re-plat of the various lots/units shall be submitted with the request for final approval. 2) Vertical construction of buildings may occur concurrently with installation of improvements; however, the City of Fairhope Horticulturalist may preclude final certificate of occupancy (CO) of any buildings pending completion of all landscape and greenspace elements included in the landscape plans dated January 12, 2021. 3) All sidewalks on or within lot 5, lot 7, and lot 9 as well as interior sidewalks on or within lots 2, 3, and 4 shall be installed prior to final CO of the anchor store included on lot 5. The pending replat of the various lots within the development includes a 10' wide sidewalk easement along the margin of the ROW for lots 1-4, 6, and 8 for future sidewalk installation. 14 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes 4) Installation of the roadway improvements along US HWY 98 (Greeno Road) and CR34 (Old Battles Road) shall be complete prior to final CO of the anchor store unit within Lot 5. 5) The proposed stormwater drainage system includes the following features: a. Downstream adverse effects are not expected. b. The drainage system complies with the 10% rule. c. A wet pond with littoral shelf is the LID technique for this development, which provides 80% total suspended solid (TSS) removal. d. Post-development flows are less than or equal to pre-development flows and the drainage system is designed for 2,5,10,25,50 and 100 year storm events. e. The retention pond outlet structure includes an energy-dissipating headwall. f. Staff memorializes the hold harmless provisions of Article VI, Section E.1-2. 6) Subject property lies within the Police Jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope and thus The City of Fairhope Sign Ordinance approval process shall be followed as required by Ordinance number 1537 for any signage to be installed by the development. 7) Subject property lies within the Police Jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope and thus The City of Fairhope Tree Ordinance approval process is applicable. The City of Fairhope Horticulturalist has reviewed and approved the landscape plans dated 1/12/2021. 8) An NPDES permit shall be obtained from ADEM prior to any land disturbing activities. A copy of the NPDES permit shall be included in the final approval application. a. The NDPES permit process was initiated at the time of MOP submission and a copy of the application was included in the MOP request. 9) The streets within the development are not proposed for dedication to the City of Fairhope or Baldwin County. 10) Memorialize greenspace for the entire development is reflected upon lot "5" in three greenspace areas: (1) west oflot 9, (2) the 30% allowance for a wet basin, and (3) the southern portion oflot 5 between lots 6 and 8. 11) Additional MOP applications will be required for any development of three or more units on lots 1-4, 7, and 9, and any additional units above and beyond the 16 units on lot 5 contemplated by subject application. Future development intentions of lots 6 and 8 is unknown. 12) No waivers from the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations have been requested. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) Memorialize the aid-to-construction cost for this project payable to the City of Fairhope is $92,451.34 or as amended by the Fairhope Public Utilities Superintendent of Utilities. Mr. Turner asked if sidewalks will be along US Hwy. 98 and Old Battles Road and Mr. King answered easements will be placed on both roads but sidewalks only appear on Lot 5 at this time. Mr. Jinright addressed the Commission saying the outparcels were designed with the parking in the rear. Mrs. MacKellar asked if the only traffic signal will be at Old Battles and Mr. Jinright confirmed. He said the middle entrance will be right-in/right-out only. Mrs. Hall-Black question the total number ofretail units and Mr. Jinright stated there will be a maximum of 16 units. 15 February 1, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. Mrs. MacKellar asked if the parking for the lots along US Hwy. 98 will be required to be in the rear and Mr. Jinright said it is not required but designed to be in the rear and the landscaping will be installed at time of construction to try to encourage it. Jimmy Conyers made a motion to accept the staff recommendation for preliminary APPROVAL of case number SD. 21.09 Publix at Point Clear Multiple Occupancy Project. The recommendation of approval includes the following assumptions and conditions: ASSUMPTIONS 1) Though subject application is an MOP and not a traditional subdivision, a final approval process similar to that of a traditional subdivision final "plat" approval shall be required for any improvements to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope. a. All utilities to be dedicated to the City of Fairhope shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City of Fairhope Water and Sewer Superintendent, and a maintenance bond shall be submitted at the time of final plat application. b. As-built drawings, recorded stormwater O&M Plan and Agreement, inspection videos, and all testing requirements of the subdivision regulations shall be submitted with the final approval request. c. Copies of the recorded off site drainage and utility easements as well as a copy of the recorded re-plat of the various lots/units shall be submitted with the request for final approval. 2) Vertical construction of buildings may occur concurrently with installation of improvements; however, the City of Fairhope Horticulturalist may preclude final certificate of occupancy (CO) of any buildings pending completion of all landscape and greenspace elements included in the landscape plans dated January 12, 2021. 3) All sidewalks on or within lot 5, lot 7, and lot 9 as well as interior sidewalks on or within lots 2, 3, and 4 shall be installed prior to final CO of the anchor store included on lot 5. The pending replat of the various lots within the development includes a 10' wide sidewalk easement along the margin of the ROW for lots 1-4, 6, and 8 for future sidewalk installation. 4) Installation of the roadway improvements along US HWY 98 (Greeno Road) and CR34 (Old Battles Road) shall be complete prior to final CO of the anchor store unit within Lot 5. 5) The proposed stormwater drainage system includes the following features: a. Downstream adverse effects are not expected. b. The drainage system complies with the 10% rule. c. A wet pond with littoral shelf is the LID technique for this development, which provides 80% total suspended solid (TSS) removal. d. Post-development flows are less than or equal to pre-development flows and the drainage system is designed for 2,5,10,25,50 and 100 year storm events. e. The retention pond outlet structure includes an energy-dissipating headwall. f. Staff memorializes the hold harmless provisions of Article VI, Section E.1-2. 6) Subject property lies within the Police Jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope and thus The City of Fairhope Sign Ordinance approval process shall be followed as required by Ordinance number 1537 for any signage to be installed by the development. 16 February 1, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes 7) Subject property lies within the Police Jurisdiction of the City of Fairhope and thus The City of Fairhope Tree Ordinance approval process is applicable. The City of Fairhope Horticulturalist has reviewed and approved the landscape plans dated 1/12/2021. 8) An NPDES permit shall be obtained from ADEM prior to any land disturbing activities. A copy of the NPDES permit shall be included in the final approval application. a. The NDPES permit process was initiated at the time of MOP submission and a copy of the application was included in the MOP request. 9) The streets within the development are not proposed for dedication to the City of Fairhope or Baldwin County. 10) Memorialize greenspace for the entire development is reflected upon lot "5" in three greenspace areas: (1) west oflot 9, (2) the 30% allowance for a wet basin, and (3) the southern portion oflot 5 between lots 6 and 8. 11) Additional MOP applications will be required for any development of three or more units on lots 1-4, 7, and 9, and any additional units above and beyond the 16 units on lot 5 contemplated by subject application. Future development intentions of lots 6 and 8 is unknown. 12) No waivers from the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations have been requested. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) Memorialize the aid-to-construction cost for this project payable to the City of Fairhope is $92,451.34 or as amended by the Fairhope Public Utilities Superintendent of Utilities. Rebecca Bryant 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. SD 21.07 Public hearing to consider the request of Leonard and Sharon Smart; TH Fairhope Falls 2018, LLC; and Fairhope Falls Owners Association, Inc. for Preliminary plat approval of Fairhope Falls West, Phase 4, a 37-lot subdivision, John Avent. The property is approximately 30.98 acres and is located on the east side of Langford Road across from Bridalwood Lane. Mr. Jeffries gave the staff report saying the property is unzoned in Baldwin County but within the City of Fairhope Planning Jurisdiction. Drainage has been reviewed and approved by City ofFairhope's Public Works Director, Richard Johnson, P.E. The drainage is handled on site and directed to existing ponds that outfall to each other located on the east side of the property. The water then eventually enters the wetlands to the south and off site. A small portion of water runoff will sheet flow to the open ditch in the ROW on the east side of Langford Road. The ponds as wet basins achieve the required 80% TSS removal. The applicant has received the proper wetland permits to combine a small non- jurisdictional wetland to a larger wetland pond. Wetland buffer signs must be in place prior to any land disturbance activities. The proposed lot sizes and layout are consistent with the approved Village Subdivision and with minimum lot size of 10,673 SF. A traffic study was provided for that included the remaining phases 4-9 encompassing 391 lots. The study recommended improvements for the intersection of Langford Road and SR 104 be widened to accommodate northbound left tum lane, an eastbound right tum 17 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes lane, and a westbound left tum lane. These improvements shall be installed before application for Final Plat. Staff recommendation is to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. A replat satisfying condition 1 of approval for SD 20.47 Fairhope Falls West Village Subdivision. 2. Recommended traffic improvements as stated in staff report are installed prior to acceptance of application for final plat. Any deviation will require reapproval from the Planning Commission. 3. Pool amenity is installed prior to acceptance of application for final plat. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Ken Ankrom of 21503-A Langford Road -He submitted a letter of concerns which included traffic, drainage, jurisdiction, lighting, and safety. Melanie Johnson of 117443 Alabaster Drive She stated concerns with traffic, drainage, street improvements, and aesthetics. Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing. Mr. A vent addressed the public comments saying the drainage ditch along Langford Road will be improved and tum lanes will be added on Langford Road and St. Hwy. 104. He noted lots were originally designed to front on Langford Road but there was opposition to the design during the community meeting. He said a fence and greenspace has been added along Langford Road. Mrs. MacKellar stated her appreciation for listening to the citizens during the community meeting. John Worsham made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. A replat satisfying condition 1 of approval for SD 20.47 Fairhope Falls West Village Subdivision. 2. Recommended traffic improvements as stated in staff report are installed prior to acceptance of application for final plat. Any deviation will require reapproval from the Planning Commission. 3. Pool amenity is installed prior to acceptance of application for final plat. Harry Kohler 2 nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE-John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall-Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. SD 21.08 Public hearing to consider the request of Leonard and Sharon Smart; TH Fairhope Falls 2018, LLC; and Fairhope Falls Owners Association, Inc. for Preliminary plat approval of Fairhope Falls, Phase 5, a 68-lot subdivision, John Avent. The property is approximately 25.75 acres and is located on the east side of Langford Road just north ofBridalwood Lane. Mr. Jeffries gave the staff report saying Drainage has been reviewed and approved by City ofFairhope's Public Works Director, Richard Johnson, P.E. The drainage is handled on site and directed to existing ponds that outfall to each other located on the east side of the property. The water then eventually enters the wetlands to the south and off site. A small portion of water runoff will sheet flow to the open ditch in the ROW on the east side of Langford Road. The ponds as wet basins achieve the required 80% TSS removal. The applicant has received the proper wetland permits to combine a small non-jurisdictional wetland to a larger wetland pond. Wetland buffer signs must be in place prior to any land disturbance activities. 18 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes The proposed lot sizes and layout are consistent with the approved Village Subdivision and with minimum lot size of 7,800 SF. A part of the green space plan for phase 5 and shown on the approved Village Plan is an open space park with benches. Landscape plans also show a buffer along Langford Road consisting of a 6' high wooden privacy fence and evergreen hedge. A traffic study was provided for that included the remaining phases 4-9 encompassing 391 lots. The study recommended improvements for the intersection of Langford Road and SR 104 be widened to accommodate northbound left tum lane, an eastbound right tum lane, and a westbound left tum lane. These improvements shall be installed before application for Final Plat. Staff recommendation is to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. A replat satisfying condition 1 of approval for SD 20.47 Fairhope Falls West Village Subdivision. 2. Recommended traffic improvements as stated in staff report are installed prior to acceptance of application for final plat. Any deviation will require reapproval from the Planning Commission. 3. Open space park is installed as designed prior to acceptance of application for final plat. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Ken Ankrom of21503-A Langford Road-He submitted a letter of concerns which included traffic, drainage, jurisdiction, lighting, and safety. He also noted sidewalks, street trees and aesthetics. Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing. Mr. Conyers asked ifthere were 9 phases in the Village Subdivision and Mr. Jeffries outlined the history of the project. Mr. Turner asked if sidewalks, street trees, and traffic calming devices will be installed and Mr. A vent answered yes. John Worsham made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1. A replat satisfying condition 1 of approval for SD 20.4 7 Fairhope Falls West Village Subdivision. 2. Recommended traffic improvements as stated in staff report are installed prior to acceptance of application for final plat. Any deviation will require reapproval from the Planning Commission. 3. Open space park is installed as designed prior to acceptance of application for final plat. Jimmy Conyers 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. SD 21.10 Public hearing to consider the request of FST Wise Properties-TN, LLC for Preliminary approval of Magnolia Mixed Use, a 18-unit multiple occupancy project, Larry Smith. The project is approximately .31 acres and is located on the north side of Magnolia A venue just east of Church Street. Mr. Simmons gave the staff report saying the subject property is zoned B-2 General Business District and approximately .31 acres (13,288 square feet). The property is located on the north side of Magnolia Avenue just east of Church Street. A MOP case was submitted simultaneously with this Site Plan application. Consequently, staff report for the MOP and the Site Plan Review will be similar. The applicant proposes a 3-story mixed-use building. As proposed, the ground 19 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes floor consist of two office spaces and a parking garage with 16 parking spaces (6 of which are compact spaces). One commercial unit is 525 sf and the other unit is 2080 sf, thus providing 23.3% commercial space on the ground floor. Use for the two commercial spaces was not provided but will be available for future rental space. The second and third floor plans are identical, consisting of 8 residential units and 1 common commercial space on each floor for a total of 16 residential units and 2 commercial units. Each of the commercial units are 1850 sf. Along with the commercial space on the ground floor, there is a total of 6,350 sf commercial space proposed. Twelve of the residential units are lBR and 4 are 2BR. The applicant stated all units will be long-term rentals and will not be short-term rentals. The applicant proposes the building built to the front and rear property lines and will provide an 8' sidewalk within the ROW that includes two tree wells planted with Chinese Pastiche trees. There are currently four parallel parking spaces within the ROW. Two of those space will need to be removed to allow ingress/egress, leaving to spaces per applicant comments. There is approximately 5' between either side of the building and the side property lines. Drainage, as well as most utilities are provided within the 5' spaces. Balconies are proposed that project over City sidewalks. A hold-harmless agreement is provided as required by the City. Garbage will be collected in 10 individual garbage bins stored within the parking garage. The property owner has a management team that will be responsible for taking out the trash cans and returning them. While the proposed project does not provide 50% of the ground floor as commercial space, they have made significant efforts to meet the spirit of the requirement. With a total of 11,160 sf on the ground floor, a 50% requirement would result in 5,580 sf commercial space needed. The proposed project provides 2,650 sf commercial on the ground floor and 1,850 sf on the second and third floors for a total of 6,304 sf. The site will be serviced by Fairhope Utilities for electric, gas, water, and sewer. AT&T will be the telephone provider. Drainage is connecting to an existing stormwater conveyance system. It should be noted, an administrative replat will be required prior to issuance of a building permit to combine the two lots into one. Staff recommends APPROVAL of case SD 21.10 with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the Site Plan review case (SR 21.01) by City Council. 2. Sidewalks, curbing, and striping shall be coordinated with Public Works prior to installation. Mrs. Bryant questioned the parking requirements and Mr. Simmons stated the code doesn't differentiate between regular spaces and handicap spaces. Mr. Smith addressed the Commission saying there have been multiple changes to this plan. He said it was reduced from 26 to 18 residential units and the commercial space was increased. Mr. Turner said commercial is recommended on the ground floor to protect the Downtown. Mrs. Bryant stated concerns with the residences looking at a brick wall 5' away and where the trash cans will be located. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Michael Shipper of 52 N. Church Street-He noted concerns with density, greenspace, and cohesiveness with surrounding area. He requested the case be tabled for further review. Mike Dobson of 311 Magnolia A venue -He stated concerns with traffic, aesthetics, parking, and the inconsistency of the plans. Doug Kennedy of 308 Magnolia A venue -He stated concerns with traffic, parking, and the concept in general. 20 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes Blake Barnes of 522 Equality A venue -He asked for further information regarding the Live/Work units and traffic study. He noted concerns with the lack of amenities for residents, parking, and actual use of units. Having no one else present to speak, Mr. Turner closed the public hearing. Mr. Turner addressed the public comments stating the regulations do not require a traffic study for this project. Mr. Turner noted on-street parking will be lost with this proposal and asked if this is good for the City. Mr. Smith responded there was more parking but it was reduced to increase the commercial space. Mrs. MacKellar asked what the exterior of the building will look like and Mr. Smith said it will have a commercial look. Rebecca Bryant made a motion to TABLE the request to allow the applicant to respond to concerns regarding traffic, parking, live/work unit definitions, and garbage collection. Hollie MacKellar 2nd the motion. John Wise addressed the Commission saying it is difficult to design to the current criteria and he is open to any suggestion for the exterior look of the building. He said he would like to reduce the amount of commercial square footage and allow for more parking. Mr. Turner stated the B-2 zoning district does not allow multi-family and developers are using the multiple occupancy projects with minimal commercial to get residential units. Mr. Wise said the project meets the requirements but he will redesign the exterior. The motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE-John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall-Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. SR 21.01 Request ofFST Wisc Properties-TN, LLC for Site Plan approval of Magnolia Mixed Use, a 26-unit project, Larry Smith. The project is approximately .31 acres and is located on the north side of Magnolia A venue just east of Church Street. Mr. Simmons gave the staff report saying The subject property is zoned B-2 General Business District and approximately .31 acres (13,288 square feet). The property is located on the north side of Magnolia Avenue just east of Church Street. A MOP case was submitted simultaneously with this Site Plan application. Consequently, staff report for the MOP and the Site Plan Review will be similar. The applicant proposes a 3-story mixed-use building. As proposed, the ground floor consist of two office spaces and a parking garage with 16 parking spaces (6 of which are compact spaces). One commercial unit is 525 sf and the other unit is 2080 sf, thus providing 23.3% commercial space on the ground floor. Use for the two commercial spaces was not provided but will be available for future rental space. The second and third floor plans are identical, consisting of 8 residential units and 1 common commercial space on each floor for a total of 16 residential units and 2 commercial units. Each of the commercial units are 1850 sf. Along with the commercial space on the ground floor, there is a total of 6,350 sf commercial space proposed. Twelve of the residential units are lBR and 4 are 2BR. The applicant stated all units will be long-term rentals and will not be short-term rentals. Materials primarily consist of brick and stucco. Materials are illustrated on included elevations. Plans also illustrate a building height, including parapet wall, of 40' and appear to be measured from the from the midpoint of the front fa9ade to the top of the roof. The applicant proposes the building built to the front and rear property lines and will provide an 8' sidewalk within the ROW that includes two tree wells planted with Chinese Pastiche trees. There are currently four parallel parking spaces within the ROW. Two of those space will need to be removed to allow ingress/egress, leaving to spaces per 21 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes applicant comments. There is approximately 5' between either side of the building and the side property lines. Drainage, as well as most utilities are provided within the 5' spaces. Balconies are proposed that project over City sidewalks. A hold-harmless agreement is provided as required by the City. Garbage will be collected in 10 individual garbage bins stored within the parking garage. The property owner has a management team that will be responsible for taking out the trash cans and returning them. While the proposed project does not provide 50% of the ground floor as commercial space, they have made significant efforts to meet the spirit of the requirement. With a total of 11,160 sf on the ground floor, a 50% requirement would result in 5,580 sf commercial space needed. The proposed project provides 2,650 sf commercial on the ground floor and 1,850 sf on the second and third floors for a total of 6,304 sf. The site will be serviced by Fairhope Utilities for electric, gas, water, and sewer. AT&T will be the telephone provider. Drainage is connecting to an existing stormwater conveyance system. It should be noted, an administrative replat will be required prior to issuance of a building permit to combine the two lots into one. Finally, staff briefly discussed an alternative curbing option other than currently proposed but was unable to continue discussions due to matters beyond our control. The ultimate solution should not greatly impact the proposed development so staff recommends a conditional of approval that all sidewalks, curbing, and striping located in the City ROW be approve by the City of Fairhope Public Works. Staff recommends APPROVAL of case SR 21.01 with the following conditions: 1. In lieu of the applicant providing over 5,580 sf of commercial space, parking in a ground-floor garage, and not behind the building as required by Article V, Section B of the Zoning Ordinance shall be acceptable. 2. The hold harmless agreement for balconies over sidewalks will be provided to the building department with permit application. 3. Sidewalks, curbing, and striping shall be coordinated with Public Works prior to installation. Rebecca Bryant made a motion to TABLE the request to allow the applicant to respond to concerns regarding traffic, parking, live/work unit definitions, and garbage collection. John Worsham 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -John Worsham, Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -none. ZC 21.04 Public hearing to consider the request of FST Wise Properties-TN, LLC to rezone property from B-4 Business and Professional District to B-2 General Business District, Larry Smith. The property is approximately .25 acres and is located at the northeast comer of the intersection ofN. Bancroft Street and Pine Avenue. Mr. Simmons gave the staff report saying The property is approximately .25 acres and is located at the northeast comer of the intersection ofN. Bancroft Street and Pine Avenue. The subject property is a lot created in 2020 by the subdivision of parcel 05-46-03-37-0- 007-069.504. As a point of clarification, the application incorrectly requests re-zoning for parcel 05-46-03-37-0-007-069.504, but the subject property has been assigned a new parcel number; 05-46-03-37-0-007-069.507. The latter parcel number, which is also PPIN 386620, is the correct parcel. The applicant's maps correctly reference the correct parcel within the application. The subject property, like it's parent parcel, is currently zoned B-4. The applicant would like to re-zone the property to B-2 and construct a mixed-use development. The subject property is located within the Central Business 22 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes District (CBD). Generally, B-4 is located on the perimeter of the CBD where properties are next to residential neighborhoods. As seen in the illustration below, the subject property is bordered by B-4 to the north and east. Other properties at the intersection of Bancroft and Pine are currently zoned B-2. Due to the location of the property, and the character of adjacent property, the proposed zoning change does not appear to conflict with the vision and goals of the City's comprehensive plan. However, the Planning Commission recently recommended a zoning text amendment that, to summarize, would require 50% of the ground floor of buildings in the CBD to be commercial. The City Council will soon consider the proposed amendment. Article V, Section B.3 of the City's Zoning Code reads: Uses -All uses permitted in the underlying zoning district are allowed in the CBD Overlay, provided that uses of property shall meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and Section E. l of this Article. Any future rezoning in the CBD overlay may be conditioned so that the goals and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and Article V, Section B.l. of the Zoning Ordinance are achieved Because the proposed text amendment is 'in progress' and the Zoning Ordinance states "Residential and office is encouraged on the upper floors of buildings; lower floors are encouraged to be retail or restaurants" staff recommends adding a condition that mimics the intent of the proposed zoning text change amendment. Staff recommends Case: ZC 21.04 Bancroft & Pine B-4 to B-2 be APPROVED with the following condition: I. A minimum of 50 percent of the gross floor area on the ground floor of any building on subject property shall be dedicated to commercial uses. For the purposes of this calculation, gross floor area is defined as the total floor area contained on the ground floor within a building measured to the external face of external walls and shall include, but not be limited to, internal service areas, internal parking, internal stairwells, and internal common spaces. Retail and restaurants are encouraged on the ground floor adjacent to public streets. Mr. Turner stated this parcel is surrounded by the cemetary, gully, and the Art Center. Mr. Smith adddressed the Commission saying B-4 does not allow a O' lot line in the rear and he requested the application be approved without the condition of 50% of commercial on the ground floor. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. Mr. Conyers stated everything on the block is B-4. Mrs. Bryant asked if the block could be restricted by uses such as no restaurants or bars. Jimmy Conyers made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE with the following condition: I. A minimum of 50 percent of the gross floor area on the ground floor of any building on subject property shall be dedicated to commercial uses. For the purposes of this calculation, gross floor area is defined as the total floor area contained on the ground floor within a building measured to the external face of external walls and shall include, but not be limited to, internal service areas, internal parking, internal stairwells, and internal common spaces. Retail and restaurants are encouraged on the ground floor adjacent to public streets. John Worsham 2nd the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: A YE- Harry Kohler, John Worsham, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley, and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -Rebecca Bryant. ABSTENSION -Clarice Hall-Black. 23 February I, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes SD 21.05 Public hearing to consider the request of the City of Fairhope Planning and Zoning Department to accept Resolution 2021-01 for a proposed amendment to Article V., Section F.4.i to establish specifications for buffer signage, Buford King. Mr. King gave the staff report saying the wording was amended from last month to read as follows: i. Stream boundaries including each buffer zone must be clearly delineated on all grading plans, subdivision plats, site plans and any other development plans. (1) The outside limit of the buffer must be clearly marked on-site with permanent signs placed every 100 feet, or at least one (I) sign installed per lot.for lots less than JOO.feet ·wide, prior to any land disturbing activities, or in the case c?fminor subdivisfons, prior lo approval qfthe minor subdivision plat. J11e Planning Commission reserves the right to require an alternative signage spacing distance to accommodate irregular-shaped lots and/or irregular-shaped wetland boundaries. Stream and buffer limits must also be specified on all surveys and recorded plats and noted on individual deeds. Buffer requirements must be referenced in property owner's association documents and shall be labeled on the plat. (a) For major subdivisions. permanent wetland buffer signage shall be a minimum I·_()" vFide x I '-6'' tall 0.080'' aluminum signface, vFith black text over a white background reading "WETLAND BUFFER BOUNDARY'' with text scaled to fit the sign.face. Signpost shall be a 2" x 2 ,, x 0.188" galvani::ed steel tube or galvani::ed u-channel. Signpost shall be embedded in concrete a minimum c?l2 '-0 '' deep and I '-0 '' in diameter with signpost centered in the concrete. Top <~[sign when attached to signpost shall be a minimum 6 '-0" above grade. Sign shall be a/lached to signpost with a minimum (?f two, 3/8'' cadmium plated bolts ·with cadmium plated nuts and washers. (b) For minor subdivisions. temporary wetland bit/fer signage shall he a minimum I • -6 '' ivide x I' -0 '' tall 4mm thick plastic corrugated sign Ji.tee. with black text over a white background reading "WETLAND BUFFER BOUNDARY'' with text scaled to/it the sign face and applied to both sign.faces. Signpost shall be 9 gauge wire 6. 7'' ·wide x I 7. 7" tall double "H" sign stakes installed as typical. The planning commission reserves the right to require permanent wetland buffer signage for minor subdivisions if the intensitv o(!he development mav affect wetlands during or after development. Staff recommends to be APPROVED as presented. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, he closed the public hearing. John Worsham made a motion to accept the staff recommendation to APPROVE as presented. Hollie MacKellar 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE-Harry Kohler, John Worsham, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley, and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -Rebecca Bryant. ABSTENSION -Clarice Hall- Black. 24 February 1, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes Old/New Business SD 19.06 Riverhorse Subdivision, Mike Jeffries -Request of Dewberry Engineers, LLC for 1-year extension of the Preliminary plat approval for construction of this phase. Jimmy Conyers made a motion to approve a I-year extension of the Preliminary plat approval for construction of this phase. John Worsham 2nd the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE -Rebecca Bryant, Harry Kohler, Lee Turner, Hollie MacKellar, Jason Langley and Jimmy Conyers. NAY -Clarice Hall-Black. Having no further business, Jimmy Conyers made a motion to adjourn. John Worsham 2nd the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 10:55PM. Q£~ behalf of Emily Boyett 25