Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-02-1984 Regular MeetingI II III IV The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Fairhope met April 2, 1984 at 5:00 p.m. at the Municipal Complex 161 N. Section Street, Fairhope, Alabama Present: Chairman Roy White; members Robert Mason, Cecil Pitman, Jack Kirk, John Parker, Cindy McBrearty, Mary Doug Foreman. Don Pruitt South Ala. Regional Plan. Commission and Bob Lunsford Bldg Official The minutes of the March 5, 1984 meeting were approved as written on motion by Robert Mason, seconded by Cindy McBrearty and unanimously carried. The Public Hearing on the rezone request of M.J. Mastin for his property from B-4 to B-2 was held at this time. Mr. Mastin spoke on his behalf saying that he had been approached by a group wishing to buy the property in order to put a restaurant on it, but it would have to be rezoned in order to do this. Mr. Phillips spoke saying he was not notified of the meeting and was here to see what it is all about. That when they approved the comprehensive plan in 1975 it was decided that the B-4 would make a good buffer zone for this neighborhood. That he is not really pleased with what there now. John Parker went on to explain to Mr. Mastin the process that was followed when they developed the comprehensive plan in 1975 and why this was a B-4 area. That now if we zone it B-2 that the credibility of the Planning & Zoning Commission would be blown. That at the time the strip from the "then" A & W south to Morphy would be B-4 and consid- ered a suitable buffer for this neighborhood area. He further suggested that Mr. Mastin embrace the community's plan and pro- ceed to develop with this in mind. Further discussion led to a motion by Robert Mason to recommend to the City Council denial of this change in zone because it is not in keeping with the comprehensive plan. Cindy McBrearty seconded and motion carried unanimously. The resubdivision of a part of Rolling Oaks subdivision was not discussed as Bob reported to Commission that there were some problems with the water system and that the streets have not been accepted by the County Engineer. Lorena Gregorius came forth to discuss with the Commission an application for further resubdivision of Gregorius Subdivision No. 2. Bob's comments were noted: that it would create Lot 2 North and Lot 2 South. Both lots front on Oberg Rd and have Health Department approval. That a letter from FSTC provides for exchange of leasholds without further Commission approval. Mrs. Gregorius remarked that this had been before the FSTC and she had their approval w/letter of conditions mentioned above. Bob said they do comply with the regulations Cecil Pitman moved to grant approval for this resubdivision, Robert Mason seconded and motion carried unanimously. Mr. Parker asked Mr. Lunsford what the status of Art Fleming's project Lea -Brook subdivision was. Mr. Lunsford told him that Mr. Fleming had informed him that due to the prohibitive costs of installing the improvements on Fleming Road to meet County requirements that he has abandoned the project. Mr. Parker asked if it was made clear to Mr. Fleming that he could not transfer lots in this subdivision as long as the improvements - were not installed. Mr. Lunsford said he had informed Mr. Fleming. V VI VII VIII IX Mr. Curtis Gordon addressed the Commission on his proposed project Sans Souci. Mr. Parker asked if this was in fact being presented for preliminary approval of a subdivision or discussion. Bob told him that if the Commission wished to consider it today as an experimental subdivision with a"common drive" that he meets the requirements for granting preliminary approval. Sam Irby addressed the Commission stat- ing that he represented Mr. Jack Thomas an adjacent property owner who had not even seen the plans that Mr. Gordon was presenting tonight. Mr. White asked if Mr. Gordon wished to adjourn to the lobby with the property owners and give them a chance to look over what is planned. At this time the group adjourned to the lobby. Rae Jackson came forth representing the neighborhood group down by the Presbyterian Church. That they had settled the issue with the group representing the church, but she wanted to know if they will have to have planted areas when they do their construction of the new building. John Parker ex- plained that the building and area as it is now was "grand - fathered" in but when the new construction begins they will have to come under current ordinance and this would include having a green area. That these plans were discussed at length some time ago and that everything was worked out then but the church has not built up to now. That we still could not stop them from cutting every tree on the lot, but we could require some planting with the new construction. Mrs. Jackson thanked the Commission for explaining this to her. Matt Dial was present seeking final a roval of plat of Gayfer Terrace. Bob's comments were that heranted final approval subject to removal of the 60 foot right-of-way being removed from plat on lot 1 or fix financial responsibility for install• ation of future improvements( another plat was presented with this removed). Presentation of the original plat for recordin< by the City(this was presented tonight) and execution of all required approvals noted on the plat(this also presented to- night). Cindy McBrearty moved for approval, Cecil Pitman seconded and motion carried unanimously. John Parker brought up at this time the redevelopment of the comprehensive plan and the time schedule we were trying to follow. It was explained the delay in getting the funding. Discussion led to a request for Mr. White to go to the City Council and ask for a budget item of $25,000 for the 84-85 fiscal year for this project, and further moved that this be done, Mary Doug Foreman seconded and motion carried unan- imously. At this time Curtis Gordon and residents of the area came back into the meeting. Mr. White told Mr. Gordon that the Commission still needed to decide if they wanted to hear this as an "experimental subdivision". John Parker remarked that he could not see the wisdom of proceeding with another experimental subdivision until the year is up on Windmere which would be in August. Whether or not we want to pursue additional experiment or see thru one now and draw conclusions That subdivision control lies solely in Commission's hands. Curtis rema+d that this was significant in that they have come before instead of after seeking guidance, that they have high restrictions and are after maintaining the integrity of San Souci. Cecil Pitman remarked that he thought the density of 19 lots was a bit much for the property owners in the area. John Parker put in the form of a motion that the Commission not entertain another experimental subdivision until the experiment underway is concluded. Robert Mason seconded and motion carriE unanimously. Meeting was duly adjourned. � I