Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-02-2022 Planning Commission MinutesMay 2, 2022 Planning Commission :'vlinutcs The Planning Commission met Monday, May 2, 2022, at 5:00 PM at the City Municipal Complex, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers. Present: Lee Turner, Chairman; Rebecca Bryant, Vice-Chair; Art Dyas; Harry Kohler; John Worsham; Clarice Hall-Black; Hollie MacKellar; Corey Martin, City Council Liaison; Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager; Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager; Casey Potts, City Planner; Allie Knutson, Secretary; and Chris Williams, City Attorney. Absent: Jason Langley. Water and Sewer Director. Chairman Turner called the meeting to order at 5:03 PM. Approval of the Minutes from April 4, 2022, Meeting: Corey Martin made a motion to accept the minutes with no further changes. John Worsham seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE: Rebecca Bryant. Art Dyas, Harry Kohler, John Worsham, Clarice Hall-Black, Hollie MacKellar, and Corey Martin. NAY: None. Abstain: Lee Turner. SD 22.04 Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, S.E. Civil, LLC, on behalf of the Owner, 68V BTR Holdings, LLC, for Preliminary Approval of The Gables on Lawrence, a 136-unit Multiple Occupancy Project. The property is approximately 19.92 acres and is located on the cast side of Lawrence Road, 0.5 miles south of Fairhope Avenue. PPIN #: 7618 Summary: Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager, presented the case summary. All streets and utilities arc proposed to be private and the responsibility of the Developer/Landowner. This project will also be reviewed by the Baldwin County Highway Departments and the Baldwin County Planning Department. A traffic study was completed and concluded with a recommendation for an eastbound right turn lane at the southwest intersection of County Road 48 and Lawrence Road and would need to be reviewed by the Baldwin County Highway Department. There are three drainage basins on the site: the first drains to the ROW ditch along the East side of Lawrence Road and discharges west under Lawrence Road to a UT to Cowpen Creek. The second drains to the site's southern property line, leaves the site, and enters an existing wet pond on the adjacent property owner's property which is discharged into a UT to Still Branch. The third drains to the site's eastern property line where it is picked up by a different UT to Still Branch. The two wet ponds provide 199,285 cubic feet of storage which is greater than the required 69,503 cubic feet required. According to the Engineer of Record. the flow rate of each basin is reduced due to their design. Street trees were add cd. but there is no landscape buffer as it is outside of the city limits, so the Tree Ordinance does not apply. The project has a net density of 8.27 units per acre which requires 25% May 2, 2022 Planning Commission \1111utcs greenspace (4.98 acres minimum). 5.21 acres is stated to be provided, 4.60 acres of"park" type and .61 acres counting 30% or the wet ponds. Staff does not feel that the proposed plans meet the greenspace requirements of the City"s Subdivision Regulations as "park" type describe a minimum of 3 acres of contiguous undeveloped natural area. Greenspace is shown as space between buildings and disjointed areas with the three areas for greenspace being connected only by sidewalks adjacent to the internal roads and traversing many driveways, do not count as a park. Holding basins can receive greenspace credit if they are clearly integrated into an open space/park site, the basins for this site are not integrated. The plans were revised since February to remove the access drive to create a loop without intersections. The nearest Village node lies 1.14 miles away from the centroid of the nearest Village. Staff reviewed the area within a ha! f'-111 i le of'the site, the adjacent properties are all Unzoned, with most properties being larger, rural lots that reflect single-family residential and rural patterns. As proposed, the Gables on Lawrence is not consistent with the scale and character of the surrounding area. Staff does not believe this project meets the goals and intensions of the Comprehensive Plan. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of Case SD 22.04, The Gables on Lawrence. Larry Smith, S.E. Civil. was present. Mr. Smith stated that regarding drainage, it was requested from staff that they provide a letter about downstream rights from an Attorney, it was not requested that they make revisions. There arc also only a few green space types they could have utilized as the others did not apply to the site. The best amenity that Mr. Smith's subdivision has is the pond, which does not have sidewalks around it and is smaller than both ponds proposed for the site. He disagrees with staff that the ponds are not being seen as amenities and that the development does have good connectivity. Mr. Smith feels that the Comprehensive Plan is not intended to dictate zoning in unzoned areas, and they met the density requirements per the Subdivision Regulations. Chairman Turner brought up Attorney Mark Ryan's letter that was sent to the Commissioners and asked Mr. Smith about water bypassing detention ponds and going on to neighboring properties and how that issue is addressed in the plans and if the waterflow will be increased in those areas. Mr. Smith replied that the bypass areas have ditches and topographic lines are carrying it to the existing place where runoff is discharged. All those areas were accounted for in the overall runoff and the downstream analysis runoff. The rate of runoff would be reduced as the amount of impervious surface would not equate to the same amount of undeveloped area that is currently discharging to those areas. Rebecca Bryant stated that she took issue with a statement that was in the letter written by Attorney, Casey Pipes in which Mr. Pipes stated that, " ... it is impossible to reduce the volume of stormwater generated on a parcel or property when its being developed from raw land to something else." Mr. Smith said the only way to reduce is to infiltrate, collect, and reuse, but it is difficult to collect and reuse for a development of this size. Mr. Smith agreed with Mr. Pipes' statement and said that unless you have a soil that highly able to be infiltrated then you cannot reduce the volume and most of the soils in Baldwin County arc not. Only one project he can think of had the ability to reduce the volume and there is not the ability to infiltrate on this site. 2 May 2, 2022 Planning Commission \forntcs Chairman Turner stated that this may not be the right location for this type of project because the site is not able to be infiltrated. Mr. Smith replied that about 95% of sites in Baldwin County are not able to be infiltrated due to the soils. Councilman Martin asked Mr. Smith if they are not concerned with the volume that would be displaced on to other people ·s property. Mr. Smith replied that they are concerned, that is why they do the downstream analysis and found that the volumes are mitigated over time to not cause downstream adverse effects. Councilman Martin asked if they had plans for mitigation as it is shown that the flowrates are decreased, but that the volume is increased. Mr. Smith stated that the only thing they have is time to reduce the volume over time, so they do not increase it all at once. Chairman Turner opened the Public Hearing. Mark Ryan, 14314 Cougill Ave. Magnolia Springs, AL 36555, stated that he directly represents three of the adjacent property owners, one of them to the east have a direct risk of damage and flooding to their property. Attorney Pipes never answered the question in the letter he wrote on if there is a law regarding discharging on to other properties. There is a law in place that says an upland development cannot redirect/channel storm water to a lower property owner where the rate of flow is an unreasonable burden. The developer docs not have a legal right to make lower property owners receive the discharge. There is no reason to build this project other than the developers want to put a high-density development in a place that may not be suited for it. The first time it was submitted, Ken Underwood noted the outfall, and a figure was used downstream to make the numbers look like they met the Subdivision Regulations. The bypass areas also were not counted in the final numbers and the report does not capture post- development runoff Ken Underwood, 14 71 5 Oak Street, Magnolia Springs, AL 36555, stated that he was hired to look at the proposed drainage. I le took the numbers that were provided in the drainage report and created his own table as he could not verify how they got their numbers on the table they had provided. Discharge to the west would be reduced. but discharge to the south would be increased with every rainfall event. Bypass areas need to be included in calculations. Art Dyas asked what his opinion was on the receiving drainage area to the south regarding the retention pond and the soi I. I le also asked about the creek. Ken Underwood stated that he had concerns about the discharge from the pond. It would be discharging from a discrete point and cannot handle extra concentrated flow. There will be erosion to the pond to the south, it will become a sailing pond. It is likely that erosion would occur. Art Dyas stated that erosion effects water quality and there is an equilibrium with sediment ponds. 3 May 2, 2022 Planning Cornn1issio11 \lt!lLltcs Gerald Moore. 19905 Lawrence Road, Mechanical Engineer, stated that the owners of the property to the north asked the developers to change the name, but they would not. Now, the name, "The Gables on Lawrence" belongs to him and he will not let the developer use it. He also mentioned that the traffic study was not updated and is not accurate. Regarding sewer, double of the amount of sewage will be flowing to River Mill cllld the lines will need to be upgraded from a 10" pipe to a 14" pipe. This would cost about $423k to upgrade. Mr. Moore stated that the City is already involved in lawsuits with ADEM for lift stations being out or compliance and the River Mill lift station is not on the list to be upgraded. Lastly, the residents or Lawrence Road, have spent around $20k of their own money on legal and engineering support and asked that five of the Commissioners vote to deny this project. Jen Glies, 496 Dover Street, spoke on behalf of the children as classrooms are already overfilled and there is only one high school in Fairhope. The traffic traveling to and from schools is bad and kids play in the streets which is a safety concern. There also are not enough bus drivers and busses are already crowded. Tonya Halterman, 19818 Lawrence Road, stated that she lived in Daphne, but worked in Fairhope for 12 years because she could not afford to live in Fairhope. She owns horses and a horse-riding business, and her property is the lowest point on both sides. She is concerned about safety and runoff. Gloria Frisbee, J 9846 [ _awrcnce Road, her driveway is between her pond and the developer's pond. The driveway is used to access the back of her property and her daughter's property, she is concerned with the possible water runoff. She also asked if the development would be gated. Mr. Simmons stated that there are no plans for a gate. Elizabeth Gable Wilson. 11982 Lawrence Road, gave a history of the "Gable" name and Gable Farms and had asked the developer to change the name. She also stated that thirteen members of her family live on the property to the north of the proposed development. Penny Chavers, 1997'> Lawrence Road, stated that one of the entrances to the development would be in the middle of her dri\ e\\ ay and that she had a concern for safety as well as the renters of the units being respectful. Chairman Turner closed the Public Hearing. Art Dyas stated that he did not agree with this project's traffic study and that it is similar to the project's last month (Skyline Village. MOP). It is difficult for vehicles traveling west turning in or out of Lawrence Road. What makes him unsure about the traffic study is that an eastbound tum-lane on Fairhope Avenue was proposed to turn on to Lawrence Road, but there was not one proposed for westbound Fairhope /\venue and does not consider other projects that are being developed. A traffic device would also be needed to turn off Lawrence Road. Chairm:111 Turner also stated that he did not agree with the traffic study and that perhaps it was done on a Sunday morning with less traffic. 4 May 2, 2022 Plann111g Commissio11 \ 11 :1utcs Mr. Smith stated that traffic studies are not conducted on Sundays that they have certain days of the week and times that they must conduct them per Baldwin County. The Traffic Engineer who did the study was not present. Art Dyas stated that the Fairhope Avenue/Lawrence Road intersection is already at a Level of Service of "C" not considering the other developments being built. He also did not agree with the greens pace, children need a place that is big enough for them to go in these types of developments. He likes the ponds if they have\\ atcr in them. Mr. Smith stated th:it a watershed would fill the ponds and if they dry out, the bentonite cracks. An irrigation system wi 11 Ii 11 them in periods of drought. Rebecca Bryant clarified that the ponds are lined and asked what would happen if they were not lined. Mr. Smith stated that i r they were not lined, the problem would be that the ponds would never fully dry up and would become mosquito breeding areas. Art Dyas stated that he also has a problem with the drainage, especially regarding the property to the south that has the existing pond that the site's drainage will flow into. Mr. Smith stated that !\1r. Underwood's report missed a key fact about hydrology, you do not add the peaks for different h,1sins because the peaks are all time dependent. As far as the rate of runoff, the calculations that he prnvidcd arc accurate and were also verified by a third-party engineer and discussed with Richard Johnson. Public Works Director. The rate of runoff is reduced overall to each of the basins while the downstream analysis is ensuring that the ponds will be sufficient for the volume of runoff. Art Dyas stated that the velocity would be higher and the opportunity for erosion and impacts further downstream would be substantially higher. Mr. Smith stated along the length of the discharge contours, they have created a stilling basin. Councilman Martin stated that he likes the idea of affordable homes but does not like the idea of adverse effects per the Subcli, ision Regulations to the people downstream. Motion: Corey Martin made a motion to deny Case SD 22.04, the Gables on Lawrence, due to adverse effects of stormwater and drainage as set forth in the Subdivision Regulations (Art. V.F.3.b), failure to meet the green space requirements, not aligning with the Comprehensive Plan, and due to traffic concerns. Hollie MacKellar secunded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE: Lee Turner, Rebecca Bryant, Art Dyas, Harry Kohler, John Worsham, Clarice Hall- Black, Hollie .v1acKellar, and Corey Martin. NAY: None. A brief intermission was taken. 5 May 2,2022 Planning Commissio" \-l111utcs SD 22.14 Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, S.E. Civil, LLC, on behalf of the Owner, Lafayette Acres, LLC, for Plat Approval of a 3-lot resubdivision of lots 25 and 26 in the Colonial Acres Subdivision. The property is approximately 1.36 acres and is located south of City Highway 104, between Hancock Road and US-Highway 98. PPIN #: 71837, 41871 Summary: Casey Potts, City PLmner. presented the case summary and stated that one letter from an adjacent property owner was 1·L:ceivcd. The original application was for a 4-lot minor subdivision. Due to the location of the wetlands, the original design was reduced to three lots. Sidewalks are required to be built along Hancock Road and Lafayette Drive and the Plat shall not be signed until sidewalk is completed and inspected by Building Department. A I 5" public access easement shall be provided from Hancock Road to City Highway 104 to provide the capacity ror pedestrian connectivity in the future. The applicant agreed to implement a 35' landscape bufkr. matching the rear property setback, which shall remain undisturbed, apart from new planting materials to fill in the visual landscape screen along the City Highway 104 and Greeno Road ROW's. The buffer shall remain undisturbed and maintained by the POA. The applicant is also preserving the historic landscape buffer adjacent to Lafayette Drive, which shall also remain undisturbed in perpetuity. Recommendation: Staff recommends conditional approval of case SD 22.14 with the following conditions: I. Jn the General Notes. add a note specifying maintenance of the planting strip. Add a note that "Lots 1-3 shall only be :1ccessed via Hancock Road and Lafayette Drive. Access is restricted via City Hwy 104 and Greeno l<\l,td ... 2. Rename of City ! h, y I 04, subject to approval by City Council. 3. Acceptance of'suixlivision name and lot numbering by Baldwin County Revenue Department. 4. Provide Covemmts and Restrictions to Planning Staff prior to plat recordation. 5. Jnspection and approval of completed sidewalks along Hancock Rd. and Lafayette Rd. by City of Fairhope Building Department. 6. The buffers sho" 11 on the plans, shall remain natural, except for the allowance of plant materials to be installed where ~1 visual buffer does not exist and a potential pedestrian path within the proposed pedestrian access c,1se111cnt. 7. Where a visual bu ffcr docs not exist within buffer areas shown on the plan, or required by a condition or approvaL plant materials shall be installed to provide a visual barrier. Corey Martin bro~1ght up the citizen letter regarding driveways on Lafayette Drive. Hunter Simmons. Ph11111ing and Zoning Manager, stated that the letter requests that Lot l's driveway be placed on Hancock Road while Lots 2 and 3 are placed on Lafayette Drive to ensure that all three driveways are not on I .arayctte Drive. Staff cannot dictate where the driveways are placed, but that Lot 3's access is limited Crceno Road due to the buffer and will have to be on Lafayette Drive. Chairman Turner opc11,x1 the Public Hearing. Having no one present to speak, Chairman Turner closed the Public Hearing. Jared Landry with S.L Civil was present but had no further comments to add. 6 May 2, 2022 Planning Com1i;1"1,·1 \l Rebecca Bryant mack a comment about a sidewalk being created in the public access easement to enable connectivity to the l ):, as Triangle in the future. Mr. Simmons agrc,'d hut stated that there are no plans for the city to do so at this time. Motion: Art Dyas made a motion to approve Case SD 22.14, subject to staff recommendations. Corey Martin seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE: Lee Turner. Rd,eeca Bryant, Art Dyas, Harry Kohler, John Worsham, Clarice Hall- Black, I lol!il-\LtL·Kellar, and Corey Martin. NAY:None. Old/New Business SD 20.52-Laurcl rookc Subdivision Hunter Simmo11s. /ll,ul!ling and Zoning Manager, stated that a large oak tree that was central to the design of the Laurclhrnoke Subdivision, was accidentally cut down. Jason Estes, [),_'\\ Engineering, stated that there had been a miscommunication between the engineers and co11tr:1c1ors. and that cutting down the tree was not intentional and has not benefited them in any way. Th 1.') h;td met with staff and the Tree Committee seeking advice on how to remedy the situation. They :\re pmposing to plant one 30-foot, IO-inch oak tree along with twenty-five smaller oak trees. Mr. Estes \\a111,_d to address the mistake before they were to apply for final plat approval. Rebecca Bryam ask1.·d i I' there had been a Tree Preservation Plan. Mr. Estes said that it had been included in the Landscap\_· l'i,1 . Rebecca Bryant suggested the Tree Preservation Plan into the Grading Plan. Art Dyas asked 1\h:n kind of oaks they would be planting and who was doing it. He also suggested planting them durin,i. the winter. Mr. Estes stated the large one would be a live oak. They have not decided who would t1l' doing the transplant and that they were also going to look at the other trees on site to potentially iliu\ L' as they have saved many trees on site. Hollie MacKelL1:· .,11c,~csted doing an artificial tree that could be part of a playground facility if their plan to plant the (d,,, lei I through. Mr. Estes asked i (' t could postpone the treehouse and tree until Phase 2. Chairman Turner stated that if staff agrees, the11 it is reasonable. Adjournment Corey Martin mack 11 111\ltion to adjourn, and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: A YE: Lee Turnc1· l<,Jiccca Bryant, Art Dyas, Harry Kohler, John Worsham, Clarice Hall- Black. I lullic· \l;icKellar, and Corey Martin. NAY: None. 7 May 2_ 2022 Planning Corn" "'"'' \ 1 "C:lc', Adjourned at 7: 12 p 111- (JiO_igJ!:~ Lee Turner, ( Allie Knutson, Secretary 8