Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-04-1986 Regular MeetingThe Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Fairhope met 4 August 1986 at 5:00 p.m. at the City A&ninistration Building, 161 North Section Street. Present: Chairman Maxwell Killoch; members Cecil Pitman, Cindy McBrearty, Mary Doug Foreman, William (Jack) Lucey, Barney Shull, and Richard Sanderson. Tim Kant and Mayor Jim Nix were absent. Minutes of the 7 July 1986 meeting were approved as written on motion by Barney Shull, seconded by Richard Sanderson. On a motion by Mr. Shull, seconded by Mrs. McBrearty, the Commission approved the rescheduling of the next meeting to Tuesday, September 9th, same time and place. On a motion by Mr. Shull, seconded by Mr. Lucey, the Commission approved having a public hearing on September 9th on Craig Dyas' rezoning request on the Arthur Dyas Triangle property presently zoned Rl, R4 to be changed to B2, B4. On a motion by Mrs. McBrearty, seconded by Mrs. Foreman, the Commission approved having a public hearing on September 9th on Julio Corte's rezoning request on his property at Greeno Road and Edwards Avenue presently zoned R5, R2 to be changed to B1. 10n a motion by Mr. Lucey, seconded by Mr. Shull, the Commission approved having la public hearing on September 9th on some 13 rezoning requests by residents on :Green Road on property presently zoned Rl, R4 to be changed to B4, B3b. Mr. Mike Arnold and Mrs. Annie B. Williams appeared before the Commission to advise that they were not aware that dividing one of Mrs. Williams' lots on South Ingleside Street constituted a sub -division. They now requested prelim- inary and final approval. Mr. Lunsford, City Building Official, recommended approval. So moved by Mr. Sanderson. Seconded by Mr. Shull, motion ;passed unanimously. iSeth Moore requested final approval on East Gate Unit III Subdivision, 15 lots located behind the Plaza Shopping Center off Fairhope Avenue. Mr. Lunsford Irecommended approval subject to the endorsement of FSTC. So moved by Mr. Sanderson. Seconded by Mrs. McBrearty, motion passed unanimously. (Chairman Killoch said the Shore Village discussion could wait until later on lin the meeting since it would probably be lengthy. !Chairman Killoch then advised that the old Attorney General Opinion that a lsingle plot cut out from a larger plot did not constitute a sub -division is aapparently still valid. ,Being next on the Agenda, Mr. Matt Dial addressed the Commission to say the City's Sub -Division regulations, #201.32, should be adjusted to agree with the Baldwin County regulations. (The County says 3 acres and the City says 5 acres.) Mr. Killoch said they would study the matter and advise Mr. Dial of itheir decision, perhaps in September. IMr. Lunsford (apparently going back to the Attorney General Opinion above) said he thought each case of property division should be brought before the Commis- sion for a determination as to whether or not the matter should be subjected to Sub -Division Regulation approval. Mr. Glen Ingersoll then addressed the Commission from the floor and said if the old ruling is valid is it OK for him Ito transfer his leasehold interest in a part of his property that goes through from Greeno Road to Ingleside Street without sub -division regulation approval? ,Mr. Lucey moved for approval (it is OK). Seconded by Mr. Shull, motion passed iunanimously. Mr. Mike Arnold then readdressed the Commission from the floor ;and asked "Which is it? Are you going to operate under the AGO or not?" lChairman Killoch said they would again take the matter under advisement. Planning & Zoning - 4 August 1986 Page 2 .. .... . .. . The Commission then began consideration of final approval on the Shore Village Sub -Division. Mr. Ack Moore gave a lengthy report on the drainage plan. Mr. Malcolm Babb, a consulting engineer hired by the Commission to give an opinion on this drainage plan, gave his lengthy report to support his opinion I that Engineer Moore's drainage plan was not adequate. Mr. Babb's recommendation, was for non -approval. A very lengthy discussion ensued between members of the Commission and concerned property owners in the audience. It was brought out that drainage in the proposed sub -division area was a County prob Ilem. At one point Mrs. McBrearty said she would like to recommend that the Commission, the City Council, and the County Commissioners develop and execute a drainage plan so developers could develop and we could all stop wasting time. Mr. Sanderson said he would like to formalize Mrs. McBrearty's recommendation Tinto a motion that the Commission recommend to the City Council that a compre- hensive drainage plan be devised for the whole City. Mrs. MzBrearty promptly seconded the motion. Mr. Shull called for discussion. Mr. Shull felt the proper item to be determined by the Commission tonight was to approve or ,disapprove the drainage plan presented to them for Shore Village Sub -Division. After more discussion, Mr. Sanderson and Mrs. McBrearty withdrew their motion 'and second. Mr. Lucey moved to disapprove. Seconded by Mrs. Foreman, motion carried over one "Nay" vote by Mr. Shull. Chairman Killoch set a Commission study session for Wednesday, September 3rd, at 5:00 pm in Conference Room #110. IMr. Shull moved to have a letter sent to the County Commissioners about the ;drainage situation in the area discussed tonight. Seconded by Mrs. McBrearty, emotion passed unanimously. IMr. Shull moved to have Mr. Lunsford draw up an"SOP" (Statement of Operating iProcedure or Standard Operating Procedure) and have drainage plans presented Iat the preliminary hearing (for sub -divisions). Seconded by Mrs. McBrearty, motion passed unanimously. Meeting was duly adjourned on motion made by Chairman Killoch, seconded by Mrs. Foreman.