City Council - Regular Meeting

Any additions or connections so moved to approve. Second. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Minutes are carried fourth.Questions on tonight's agenda for the city managers? . I do, Mayor. Please.

We have quite a few agendaitems regarding the same property and I would like to see if we can move under resolutions 10F , to right after nine A and ordinances so they fall in line. This is referring to the future land use plan that refers to nine B 1 and two . Is that appropriate?

It is if the majority of the Council agrees to that. It would be to rearrange the agenda to take the resolution out of the order that does impact future decisions that you make as to whether or not the land use plan is officially changed before you consider zoning in an annexation item . Okay without -- withthat? Okay. I will read it in that order and call your attention to it and say what item it is and say we are taking it out of order and the committee as a whole. Okay. Anything else, Ms. Witten? No, sir .

We did receive some e-mails I was contacted by a couple of individuals this afternoon about some confusion regarding the development agreement related to other development grievance in the area. I know you reached clarification on that this afternoon. Is that something we will take up later on in the agenda? Yes. It is my intention to ask that question under one of our consent items . All right. That would be A -- 8D1 . Anyone else on the Council have a question for the city manager ?

Moved to approve.

Item 9B5, Smith annexation. The title has been corrected. Thank you Councilman Parsons. And then under section 3D with the commercial development agreement proposed. It showed atotal investment of 1,025,000 and it should have been 750,000. That has been corrected. Thatis before you. Last but not least Emma councilmember Moreman asked for classification -- clarification on the land use plans and wanted colors labeled so you could understand what the land uses a rounded arson we provide that extra map for you you could see what those mean . Okay.

Anybody have questions for the city manager based on that information? Okay. Moved to adjourn to -- the committee of the whole?

We will start the

regularmeeting right at 6:00. we

will call to order tonight's Auburn City Council meeting for another eight, 2025. We certainly welcome all of you attending live with us in the Council chambers as well as listening on W NA or streaming. Roll call. Adams, Anders, Fitch Taylor, Griswold, Witten, Moreman, Parsons, Coblentz, Dawson.

I want to say it has been a tough day in our community. I will not speak to any specifics due to privacy concerns . Iwould ask that you please remember the families of the people that were involved in this tragedy today. Would youplease rise for the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing for a moment of silence. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. .

Please be seated . Earlier tonight during the committee of the whole, there were no official actions taking place. Councilwoman Witten did ask us to remove an item from the end of the agenda and place it earlier in the agenda and the Council agreed to do that. Wewill take that up in a minute. On the Mayor's announcements, what is taking graduations to the Auburn high school girls cross country team who won the state championship for the third year in a row and that is eight out of nine years. A great program they have with the girls cross country at Auburn high. We are very proud of you and congratulations. This coming Friday night will be a very historic all game played at duck Sanford Park. Auburn will play in the final four with a chance to go to the state championship game. That has never happened in the history of these two schools and it will be a great evening of great young people wearing school colors in fighting it out for an opportunity to play at the highest level. We are proud of our young men from you -- from Auburn high school, coaches, administrators and staff and parents and thank them for their hard work in the way they represent our community and we look forward to being there Friday night. I will leteverybody know that at 7:00, there will be more tickets released tonight. Don't get too distracted and what we are doing in the meeting if you want to the ball game and you don't have your tickets, please get your tickets . I want to say thank you to the SG A from Auburn University for hosting the on campus last week with ♪ ♪ with the mayor. It was a great event. We enjoyed talking to our students. I personallylove to engage with Auburn University students and hear what is on their mind and encourage them to be part of the great community. It was a well-planned event and I appreciate their efforts and their enthusiasm to have me over there. I want to say thank you to everyone involved in the Veterans Day . I thought it was one of the best Veterans Day ceremonies we have ever had. Itwas cold but it was bright and sunshine . All of our speakers added so much. The young people that came to sing were awesome.

We had a wonderful crowd. Ifyou are part of the crowd, I appreciated. Want to thank all of our staff. There are number of you that had a lot of responsibility in making the Veterans Day happen and I want to thank you for that. And proud that we live in a community that recognizes and honors our veterans . Next week is Thanksgiving. So you might be on the road or you might be here. You might have further is a ball game being played Saturday night after Thanksgiving. I hope for our community that all of you have a happy Thanksgiving and you enjoy time with their families and have safe travels and I think we all would be honest by saying that we all have a lot to be thankful for in this room. So God bless you and happy Thanksgiving. Does anyone elsehave anything they would like to say ? Any announcements? I do .

Yes, ma'am. On Sunday , November 23rd, this is the yearly senior citizens Thanksgiving dinner. If you are 55 plus or you know anyone who was that age or homeless or want a hot meal, come to the community center between 2:00 and 5:00 and we will be glad to give you a good, hot, catered meal. So the public is invited. I think I gave all the information. Yes. Anyone else? A quick one .

The holiday art sale is this Saturday. The 19th annual. Youmight see a Witten set up. I'm very proud of her and her accomplishments., out and support all of the artisans and makers that will be at the art sale this Saturday. Thank you. We will move ahead with Auburn University mitigations .

Good afternoon. The mayor mentioned already that we want to thank Mayor Anders in the Auburn police apartment for joining us on the campus last week for ♪ ♪ with the mayor. This was agreat event providing Auburn University students connections with leaders. I wanted to highlight that the Auburn as Jay had breakfast with Mayor Anders this morning. I was unable toattend but I heard it was a productive meeting. We are grateful for the partnership between the city and the University .

Top five, the following Junior girls will have the opportunity to campaign to be miss Auburn in the spring semester and in no particular order, Riley Johnson, Elijah Thunderbird, Virginia Holmes, Megan George and Camilla Ward . In addition to Ms. Auburn, registration for spring elections closed yesterday and school Council Treasurer, vice president and president are getting ready to run a campaign this spring as well. That is always a very exciting time. Yesterday was also better relations day. This is an event where the SGA hosts the students from Alabama as Jay. This allows the two of them to compare ideas and contrast positions, rules and just talk about their experiences between the two programs . And then, on Thursday, the food drive officially ends. If anyone is wanting to help donate to that, that is Thursday. And their multiple places downtown that you can drop off cancer that. And then as the Thanksgiving holiday approaches, we are looking forward to an exciting break hosting both the Mercer game and the iron bowl and hoping everyone has a safe holiday. That is all from me. Thank you.

We appreciate it. Thankyou. At this time, we will move into citizens mitigations and items on tonight's agenda. Ifyou would like to speak with council on items about tonight's agenda , this is your opportunity to do that. Please come forward and give us your name and address. For the record, you will have five minutes. I would point you to resolutions, which all of our resolutions have public hearings attached. If you would like to speak about one of those items, please wait until then to speak to those. [ Inaudible ] Axios me. For ordinance, we have a public hearing related to item 9A that will be continuing from the last meeting, correct? A number of zoning actions, you have public hearings also .

It is not listed in my book. I apologize for that. Here it is at the bottom . Thank you all for your corrections. Anyway, if you have an item you like to speak to that has a public hearing attached, we will ask you to wait . My name is Sam Leslie. I'm here to speak to ordinance 9B4 as the cold place annexation. We are the developer for the property. And we request that we postpone this to the December 16th meeting . It better aligns with our agreement with the landowner . All right. You have mentioned that to the staff,correct?

I did not have theDecember 16th date unless you shared that with me . That was not known that they wanted to postpone. I would remind theCouncil that that is up to you. There is a procedural difference between the planning commission and the City Council. It is notan automatic postponement. It is on your agenda. They haveevery right to request that and you have three choices. You canpostpone it or put it up or vote it down. Those are your choices. Thank you very much. Anyone else? Okay -- okay. We move ahead to city manager can medication.

Under city manager can mitigations this evening, I would remind you that there is going to be some shift of items. One item from resolutions item 10F will be moving up to just under 9A because of some actions that need to be taken . Otherthan that, I want to remind you that there are several vacancies on our boards and commissions. Two vacancies on the advisory board for terms that begin January 1st , 2026 and end December 30th -- ready first, 2030. There is one vacancy on the waterworks board for term that begins generate 20th, 2026 and ends January 19th, 2030 to pick those appointments will be made at the the summer 16th meeting. Will be opening applications tomorrow . Are you ready for the consent agenda?

Please it. first item of business is the consent agenda. Is any counsel never wish to remove an item from the consent agenda and deal with that item individually? Yes. I would like to remove eight D1 . Anyone else? Yes. Item eight Delta six . Anyone else? Okay. 8D1. 8D1 authorizes an introductory development agreement with Greenwood Village 2026 LLC. The item was postponed from the October 21st , 2025 meeting . Moved for approval. Second.

Ms. Witten. Yes , thank you. In thedevelopment agreement , it outlines the various things with regard to infrastructure. Oneof the items is a pro rata share of $146,000 . Could we get a next nation of how we came to that number ?

Absolutely. I will have Scott Cummings, our executive director of development services speak to that and remind the Council there is a number of development agreements up and down this area having to do with different phases of development with improvements and form Bill road, James road, farm bill enter section with Donahue. There are a lot of different moving parts and there are traffic studies that play a role in this. Scott . Yes. I think that sums it up very well as far as the traffic study. Determining what the amount was . We have been making each development have access . I don't think the microphone is on . Go ahead . There it is.

With the development agreements that have moved traffic to northbound [ Inaudible ] drive, each have been required since -- dating back to I guess 2017, 2016 . Or somewhere in that timeframe. And contributing to the future improvements to north Donahue Drive . We have increased that amount through the years based on inflation and to the cost of what it is today . And assigning to that. The pro rata share relates to how much of the percentage of traffic would be contributing to northbound [ Inaudible ] based on the traffic study and analysis of that. That is where we derived to get to the numbers assigned to this development .

That is because each development has their own . Yes each has its own andwould be individual and independent of the others. Off of the traffic report, what percentage of traffic would go toward Donahue? The traffic study indicated , we ran it up to 70% 70%. That would be north Donahue. 30%would be east, toward North College. Via form Bill? Yes .

Not part of the development agreement , but later in the agenda items, we talk about the schedule of construction . That doesn't play into the development agreement?

It didn't factor into this. We did discuss that. At Quail Bill -- a length before the concluding development agreement and looking at the schedule that we have proposed to design and construct the improvements to the intersection at Farmville and north Donahue and the proposed schedule for the construction and development. We felt they would sink it fairly well in order to get the intersection improvements done for any significant impact on there from this development .

And if we were to move forward with approval of this item in future items regarding the property , in order to not move forward , that voids the action on the item? Absolutely. The development agreement would be null and void if you don't approve the zoning actions that would go with it. We would not execute it . Okay, thank you . That is all I have.

I want to make sure I heardthis right. There is an equitable evaluation of each of these developments. And we charge a pro rata share based on what we think the traffic study -- with the traffic study and what that says to be created . Is that correct? Is that why one development would be this and another development would be this as far as what the contribution is ? Yes. That sounds correct. . Can you provide a comparison of old Sanford to this one?

I want to caution really quick. I want to caution the Council. We are happy to provide information there. They are apples and oranges. When wedo provide the information, my only caution point is that we run this through the legal gamut since it started and we are happy to provide the information. But they are apples and oranges based on traffic studies and different connections and all kinds of things that build into that number. So we went through an intentional process to get there. And so yes, when we start throwing out numbers, if Scott has those with him, they will differ. Scott.

On the per lot basis, Greenwood Village is -- payingabout $200 a lot more . As I said, based on the 70/30% traffic flow distribution, only 70% would be contributing to that. That is where we came up with the number . For Donahue, you mean? For Donahue, yes. $200 more is caused by what? By inflation and inflating the value in comparison to what it was at the time. And same for old Sanford.

Thank you . On the agenda, Sanford does a development agreement too. Isit paying into -- would it be paying into the same groups ? I think I read that in the development agreement agreement? They are. They are actually paying the same amount , the 1400 -- $1400 per lot for contributions to north Donahue. And also digital contributions they are paying for intersection improvements and street widening.

We can talk more about that when we get to that item because the councilman Moreman would pull it. Out of order. Any questions or comments? Motion and second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion carries. Now item 8B6 for farm bill -- wind get Oaks. Second.

Similar question councilwoman Witten asked. It says the developer shall design and construct a low pressure sanitary sewer and conveyor system along with it being a part of, the cost share of improvements to north Donahue West Farmville road widening and improving the intersection of James road and Farmville road. Can you do all of that with $87,500? It sounds like a heavy lift . That is the contribution that is expected . Not for the sewer system .

Just the intersection and the roads . Based on the 42 lots , the contributions would be in a pro rata share based on the number of lots toward the street improvements and intersection improvements and north Donahue Drive improvements. So there would be anadditional cost for them to design and construct -- They would have to bear the entirety of that cost within the development, correct work and that was moralized in the development agreement to make sure they were aware and you were aware that they had to provide sanitary sewer to the lots before they were able to be permitted for construction .

Okay. And one other small question. There was land indicated in the northwest corner . I couldn't tell what the land was set aside for . The lots were different on the map that I saw . Hold on just a second. That is not a part of the development. It actually looks like a chimney . Almost like -- that part is just not a part of that development . It is not annexed or rezoned it is not a part of the development. Like the western side of what you are looking at . Northwest? That is correct .

All right . Are you good? It looks like there are lots there . Are you talking about the white faded part? Yes .

Okay. So there are not, not two phases I guess. He was thinking there would be the parts that were the 1 acre lots and then these would be more estate lots. There was opportunity to partner with an adjacent property owner to possibly sell those to him . They were still in talks about that. That was something they were working out. That might not be part of -- the would -- when the preliminary plat comes in. That was something the developer was kind of working on. They included this in the exhibit of all the land they are currently looking at . It is a part of this. It maynot be included on the preliminary plat because it might be hashed out between private property owners .

Thank you . Any other questions or comments? . Motion and a second. Allin favor, please say aye. Opposed? Motion carries . To I have a motion to approve the balance of the consent agenda? So moved. Second. Motion and second to approve the balance of the consent agenda. Any further questionsor comments ? All in favor please say aye . Opposed? Motion carries.

Ordinances, 9A declares a temporary moratorium on the construction of multiple unit developments and private dormitory developments within the urban core an urban neighborhood West zoning districts. This item waspostponed from the November 4th meeting your emotion is needed and the public hearing is still open . Unanimous consent. You can just move and second. Move for approval. Second. Motion and a second. At this time, I will reopen the public hearing . If you would like to address the City Council regarding this, please come forward and give us your name and address for the record and you have five minutes to speak to the City Council . We had a number of speakers two weeks ago . You are welcome to come back . Yes, sir.

Actually, Mayor,procedurally, typically, you are not, if you've already's oaken. It is up to you guys if you will waive that procedure . Is Council okay? You need to set a rule for tonight. You typically -- if you want to hear some people a second time, you let everybody go the first time and go from there . Does that make sense ? Your normal procedure is everybody gets one shot at the public hearing. You are saying on a given night, you will give them that once but if they want to speak a second time, that will be up to you from there, tonight. Yes, sir. Appreciate that .

My name is Robert Wilkins. 261 Denson Drive, Auburn, Alabama. On here concerning agenda 9A. The village of the plains was born in 1839 receiving a charter from the legislature of Alabama. The moratorium is not about the immediate storm water and sewer issue. We pay the most money toour employees than any Alabama city resolving structural problems. But it is about future character of Auburn. I recommend permanent moratorium on private dormitory developments downtown because I'm 100% in agreement with Tom Haley that it is time. And I say way past time that the Auburn University build on their own property and stop merging downtown into a university student housing extension . Downtown already houses too many . The standard at Auburn West and Wright and 191 college and common and then the newest eyesore accolade, Auburn. The city of Auburn, the realtors and commercial developers with the Council and the mayor should develop a task force where the majority of members are Auburn citizens, by helping to Phase back in the multiunit development downtown were the recharacterization --recharacterization of the [ Inaudible ] village of the plains. I want to volunteer to be the first citizen on the task force. Let's bring back the unique warmth myself and others who attended Auburn University org have grown up in Auburn like Mayor Anders, Councilwoman Anders, Taylor and Dawson. There is no need to be to the greed of money as it vastly changes Auburn into a colder and unimaginative creation beginning to engulf the once loveless village on the plains. Alsomoney can bring people and

the community back together while preserving history and a love for each other. There are hundreds of stories about Auburn residents who are -- who have transferred their love from Auburn University with the strength and the love of the city of Auburn. There two stories representing that love that I want to talk about. Thefirst story I experienced firsthand. After the STR -5, Taylor Griswold, Anders Parson and Dustin voted to destroy half of the short-term rentals, constitutional rights, I had to find something they gave me flexibility and taking care of my wife who has MS. I started doing Uber eats deliveries. One day years ago, I delivered to one location and was immediately enthralled and amazed by the owner's creativity and obviously love for Auburn. A statement onthe website said that it takes is four years to graduate from Auburn the next 25 years, trying to figure out how to get back . A husband and wife was two teenagers moved from Memphis to start an adventure to strengthen their love for Auburn

while preserving and

transforming

And This rest with the Council about, ultimately, what is the city's level of participation? What to -- what do the projects look like. What is the ultimate density is are we satisfied with what we have now ? Are we making changes. And we are having problems with zoning. We are rewriting the zoning ordinance. Coming up, hiring consultants to do that. The waywe define height, we are being challenged

repeatedly by people who think that they get to interpret the zoning ordinance but actually by law, it is the planning director who interprets it with help from the legal counsel about, what does it say? There are number of things going on where we have to say to the City Council, we are concerned about a few things. We want youto be aware and what choice or what path would you like to go down with us? That is generally why we are here .

Thank you. As we continue on, I would encourage that counsel to begin this time with questions and obviously there will be time if there are comments to make. Does anyone have questions of the city manager or staff ? And know there might be people that want to make a statement or have comments . Or if there are any questions.

I will start off. I have several questions. Could be start with -- if we moveforward with the moratorium, what would be studied during that period period? And the second part of the question would be , do we have a process and a timeline already in place for gathering data , analyzing data and developing solutions or making recommendations to Council after that has been done?

The four keys we are looking at are sewer, traffic, zoning ordinances, items and stormwater. Will have the individual department heads in charge of those items go over a few things with you based on feedback received at the last council meeting and work sessions . We may talk about some of those things, Councilman Adams, if that is all right, in tandem, which is we have consultants that are writing RFPs and we have other things and that will give you a bit of an idea of where we are with all of that to move forward . Ultimately, when we get to the end of what they tell you, ultimately, we need to come back to you in a work session style . Likely, we need to do this frequently to let you know where we are. We also will have to come back to the Council and the planning commission with recommendations for changes of which they need to make the ultimate decisions about what changes we may or may not be making I will start off with Eric Carson who is a water resource management director and he can talk about sewer and what our plans are there .

Okay. Like we discussed at the work session, we recently completed the sewer model several months ago, the base model. What we plan to do during this time is come to you with a task order from our engineer of design solutions who are preparing a task order for us to do a comprehensive collection system master plan that will look at our model that we have now built and with planning, look at all the zoning throughout the city. See whatthe maximum density is in each basin and try to determine , -- right and if I were the challenges are and prioritize them and then we can come back to you with a plan of which ones we need to work on next. Like I said, we are working on that now. I hope to have a task order in hand hopefully by the end of the week . Maybe it will be a draft but hopefully have it to you come to look at for approval sometime in December . I think that study will take some time. 12 months animal I think. But we can get some information early on to start working on things as we identify them and as we are waiting on the full reports.

Is the full report for the whole -- is that for the entire city? It is for the entire city. We will certainly focus on the hotspots first where there is high density development occurring. But it will be for the whole city. It is a three-step process. It was the GIS mapping and getting the maps together. Second step is getting the model built. This is the third step, coming up with a comprehensive plan. Wehave been working on this for years .

Do you feel like , if you were to hyperfocus on this specific area, that you could -- that you might get one portion of it done sooner than the 12 months ? Or are things stacked on each other ? We could focus on some areas . I think the results are faster, yes. Given the exact timeline, I don't know. Certainly within 12 months. I think we could identify . You never know where these to elements are coming in at .

I want to add , in support of Eric, we are at the upper end of the basins here. When we do this model, we have to look at the entirety of the treatment plants. What affects here as we could see affects further in the system that I know they are going to dive into. And so I wanted to add that to what Eric was saying . How does zoning or any future zoning updates impact what you are looking at ? How does zoning affect us ?

The density. Like Scott said. If you put thousands of units at the top of A-Basin that only has an 8-inch sewer , you could obviously have some capacity issues if the slopes are not appropriate. And so they were not designed for that kind of density. Fortunately, we have had good slope. And to date, I have not had to tell anybody know, that we couldn't handle the sewer. As more and more of these come in, it becomes more complicated and the capacity gets used up. We are kind of to a point where a pause would definitely help us catch up and identify the areas and address them .

This allows us, for the consideration for you, is how are we being equitable in allocating that capacity if the lines are limited and have challenges with upsizing ? Thatis one of the questions we have. Where the property owner is now, versus four years from now , are they directly impacted by somebody's redevelopment upstream, to the extreme that they can't realize near the density they could have. Thatis one of the things we are looking to balance . The items we are looking to study don't operate in a silo. Correct . Anything else on sewer, you can always come back to it .

I will have Brandy go next about traffic and what her plans are. We will talk about some ofthe things we are weaving as Brandy dives into the citywide traffic study and the next one and then she will talk about how we separate and speed up aspects of things in this area .

Yes. We are talking with aconsultant now as far as the scope of the citywide traffic study . We are hoping to bring that to you guys for approval by the end of this year and the first of next year when we get that, that is a citywide study that we do have different areas of focus as part of that. Andthis area is obviously one of those areas of focus. The idea and our schedule is that we will take traffic counts in the spring and in the summer, we will start crunching the numbers and doing the data analysis for all of these areas. And the goal is to do does have plans and maybe do some timing implementations and things like that in a subsequent Phase once we get the data.

Also, that means from a policy standpoint, as we talked about levels of service and intersections . We are looking for this to come up with alternative measures . Where we make knowledge there is traffic in the area but what does somebody have to do to mitigate those circumstances ? We talked a lot about timing is one of those things where we are running out of some of those options. Is it sidewalk or biplane funds? Is that other things? What are theyrecommending and what are you willing to accept -- knowingthat generally speaking, density in this area is where we intended for it to be. I don't know if it is to the current level that density is allowed based on these other studies . That is one outcome of the traffic study piece that we have to decide collectively. What isyour tolerance as a counsel for -- Council for the mid- getting circumstances? We could tellyou technically but what flies are you and what are the citizens expecting ?

There have been a few traffic studies done in this area over the last year I guess . Is their data available through those that we could put some early suggestions together on, to suggest -- or some ideas of what we can do ask is their something within this comprehensive study that will defer to other ideas or whatnot or are they different issues I guess is the question?

So the traffic studies, while they have covered multiple intersections, have not looked at it comprehensively. Our comprehensive traffic study will look at things like travel -- we will use big data to look at the origins and destinations coming through the corridors to see where people are coming from and where they are trying to get to. And we will look at it as a comprehensive grid and how we can make advantages here that might impact something else. Alot of times, if we improve a road on the boundary, traffic will move to the road and improving internal road . There are things like that that could be considered when we look at copperheads of plan that are not considered when he look at individual intersections as part of a traffic impact study . To add to that, as Megan mentioned , we are looking at current regulations and what medications we are using right now are away, can we have them pay into a fund for that ? Those are the kind of changes we might be looking for in our design standards.

I also think Brandy is, if I'm understanding questions from the Council correctly, we don't want to hold up this study for the whole citywide traffic study. Same with Eric 's. There are components that involve this area and are you comfortable writing the RFP where we can pull out the components and get enough big data to focus on this area in a reasonable timeframe? Yes . And the current data we are operating on , already identifies intersections that are low-grade . I won't say failing. Not any of them are truly failing it.

We do have a we consider tobe unacceptable levels of service on many of the approach lines. Thank you .

I think we are being kind by saying that we have some that are not failing. Just drive around town and you can certainly see some that are failing on a given day. We have a treasure trove I think of expertise in the city of various developers that have hired their own traffic studies . And I wonder if there would be some mechanism for you all to use the local expertise of the people who have done the studies over the various intersections and pool them and try to get them to give us a leg up or a heads up before we go out and spend who knows how much more money on a comprehensive study .

We can certainly evaluate using the same consultants . We can sometimes pull from their data we sometimes try to get current data when we do that. Many of them, when the reports -- with the reports they give us, we ask as part of those reports, what do we need to do to bring it up to standards? And those reports, they are already giving us the information. The problem we are running into is that we may not have the right-of-way to make that improvement. So what do we do in the interim if we don't have the right-of-way necessary ?

There are certainly intersections where the right-of-way will be a significant issue. Donahue and Glenn, I think in particular is one that comes to mind . If we have a pool of money that people are contributing to but we can't build anything because we don't own the right-of-way, what is the next step? What do we do?

What we are looking at here is we need to pick the brains of consultants and look at potential mitigating circumstances. The other thing is, what we are focused on here, we have other intersections in the city are having challenges . What we don't do is we don't pick and choose. Whateverpolicies we are going to make for this area , a lot of the policies will permeate throughout the city. So if youcan't mitigate , in the suburban areas, you have more of an ability to widen. What we are looking for is guidance , and with. Community is, about, what do you do when you get to this point? We said we wanteddensity in the area. We have traffic not meeting certain standards. How far are we willing to go with medication? Bucket, Atlantic, Peachtree proper are used as an example. They are all of these high-rise buildings and traffic is horrible. Those monies, we are paying into other things that go toward Marta. We are not getting Marta. That is not what I mean. But there are thresholds where the governing bodies are deciding we will live with certain circumstances for these mitigating factors and that is part of what this is about. Are you okay with whatever these mitigating factors are in this area which will often be applied to the rest of the city ? So that is where that stands .

And there are limitless -- maybe not limitless but a lot of things that could be done to try to deter -- toll roads. I'mnot saying we want to do that. With are things that can be done to discourage traffic or to encourage use getting there by bike or transit or some of the other services we currently have . We just need to explore what those options are and how we would fund those options .

I want to clarify. When you mentioned local, are you talking about local stakeholders within the community ? Not necessarily consultants, but folks may be that are engineers or folks doing this in the community now ?

A lot of the project come before us. We asked if there has been a traffic study. Inmost cases, and correct me if I'm wrong, I think the developer actually selects a source for the analysis . And they present that back. So they are doingtheir own analysis, which doesn't mean it is bad because the city didn't look at the analysis. And their people in town that certainly would have some opinions and expertise that we might be able to tap into instead of just waiting for a new scope of work and going off and spending who knows how much time and money . If we had to focus on specific problems we are aware of, perhaps that is a way to move out. I'm not saying it is the answer by any means .

They might expedite being informed about some things. Yes . I understand what you are saying. One of the things important as anything they are doing and studying is submitted to us and we have all that data, right quick so unless it has been submitted to us, we would have the data. We can collaborate with people but there are certain firms that go out and collect data versus some that collect and analyze some or just collect and provide to somebody else and so on .

We have the data from -- what was it? 2016 when we did the last of these . We have not seen what happened on the 30 something plus that came out of that. I think that is probablya good place to start . As we all said, it is not anything that just happened overnight. We have been dealing with this for a long time . We went over that this area come by and large, they were very for projects not accomplished in this area. Is that what we mean, Brandy? That is correct. In the area we are talking about. Any other questions related to traffic? No.

I will have the planning director go over the planning and zoning portion .

Thank you. We are looking at a number of things. Initially, I think when we talked about the zoning rewrite in the budget proposal, it was looking at the entire city in the entire zoning ordinance. Weare going to expedite it and look at the urban core and the urban neighborhood West District. Focusing on the regulations. So those are table specific. Planning on lookingat that and the scope of the group . Sort of like the water resource manager director. We talked about coupling density to capacity and looking at it as a block by block and is averaging with the densities might be. And talked about definitions and entertaining story heights and a big sticking point that happened on a lot of the buildings that have been built or those that have been proposed. Breaks.Not as were the brakes are but what gets broken. Kind of a building along with the façade. I think on the timeline portion, that is where things get tricky on our end. So talking through and thinking through the different policies and things we want to change . One of the things we learned on our end and the catalyst for this will be , it is hard for us to anticipate what the end goals and the end results will be. But we want to establish the policy changes. But then I guess take the draft and kind of run building gains with those with architects to see what could be built. To see that -- see if we are comfortable with what the policies will look like in effect when they got built. I think on our end of the timeline, 10-12 months, we identified the zoning consultant Barbican turnaround the contract quick. Looking at the urban neighborhood West. Urban core District from an architect standpoint . We are identifying a couple. The reason for that

is, the architect specialized in different things. Difference are more focused on student housing and things like that. Others are more imaginative and would be able to challenges and poke holes in the ordinance we did write. That is something we would do. The timeline would be10-12 months , for us to have good due diligence on the confidence and the ordinance we would put forward would be the changes in these tables .

So 10-12 months would give us -- get us to a point where we might have action items we could take that would put us in the position where we are comfortable where we are no longer -- no longer have a moratorium .

I think that will depend on, if you adopt, how you will be sitting at the time toward -- the election is in August. And we changeover counsel in November. So we are already looking at whoever that then counsel is . And we are likely making decisions. So you would be in the ramp-up of that. We need at least quarterly meetings. They might be more often with the Council depending on what outcomes are . I cannot of acquit -- unequivocally say we might be done studying. And with recommendations, it will depend on the ultimate decision makers and where they stand and how they feel and what information they have and if that is enough to make the decisions are not. That is the hard outcome. I think the work the justices referring to can be done in that time period and we can get out with recommendations . It will depend on what the then feeling is about adoption or the changes . Amity toinclude obviously every step of this way when we get along with things. We will need to include stakeholders and/or citizens and aspects of what we are doing. We have information we can share and get feedback on . We won't be there in the early going .

Anymore? Absolutely. Dan.

We have had a history of localized flooding conditions in the urban neighborhood West and the urban core and in certain locations. Although there have been studies in the past , the studies have been pretty limited to specific concerns of the time. They are also outdated . We would spend some time moving forward , expanding the scope of the previous studies to better understand the drainage analysis and hydraulic analysis to allow us to better strategize the forms of improvements to minimize or mitigate the localized flooding issues. Very similar to , we would want to study what is there and we would want to study to -- how tobetter strategize and medication to minimize the localized flooding issues .

Would that involve a third-party consultant? Yes, sir . Timeline on that . Do youfeel comfortable ? 6-9 months, I'm comfortable we could have a steady complete . Any questions for Dan related to stormwater? Tyler. Still yours. I have heard -- we broughtup several different departments using consultants . And itsounds like -- it sounds like we are already working toward getting some of those on board and getting those contracts in place .

Correct . Some of these studies, we were underway with aspects of getting the RFPs together. Eric already has his team retained and he does new task orders with them and then Dan who is looking at further issues . We could move fairly expeditiously with the contracts. It is the timeline wise from where we get started , we will be in the 10-12 month time range. The reason the 18months is before you is that it is giving runway -- you can always end at early, it is giving runway to come you don't need to extend it but it is up to the Council for whatever timeframe you feel appropriate because it would come back before you for decision and would automatically expire on a date set in the ordinance and it would be up to you whether or not in the days leading up to that, you would want to extend it or cancel it sooner .

If we move forward with a moratorium, I would like to move forward to these studies as expeditiously as possible. AndI would like to possibly contract that to the shortest period of time that is reasonable for us -- for adefinitive period where we can get the work done based off of what I have heard . And itsounds like the 12 month mark is reasonable . It is certainly up to you. The ordinance could be amended accordingly.

And I like the idea of --I would like to request. I'm not sure of the counsel, if we need to settle on this today . It won't be in the ordinance but if we move forward with this, we should receive regular updates . Whether that be quarterly updates or monthly updates . Just on the progress so we know her staff is . And what data we collect and what direction that we are moving toward . Understood .

If anyone else has any questions . Are you good? Does anyone else have any questions?

I have one, if I may. I think it is a question that is probably in the back of many people's minds. And we are here to consider a moratorium, which is an unusual tool in our kit I guess . The question would be , why a moratorium ? Is theirsomething that happened? It is a rather sudden thing ? A rather different tactic to take . Was it because the growth was much more rapid than we thought ? Oris it because we needed a quiet period to consider these things? Or have we run out of easy solutions on these things and the solutions that we would reach for now are more complicated ? But why a moratorium? Why does it benefit the city of Auburn to stop taking applications for building permits in those areas mentioned ? And this facilitates our ability to get this done . To get a look at all four of these departments .

Generally speaking, and it is our job as a professional staff, to tell you, who are the policymakers, when we have concerns about things or we are seeing trends. And as we talkedabout at the start of this , that is born out of things that we are seeing and questions that Council had about the two recent developments. The mark and the rise. The markets 836 bedrooms and the rise is 718 bedrooms . It is two large projects in urban neighborhood West in the market is probably -- partially the urban core from right -- Wright Street to timber Street and rises out West Glen. It is born out of that. As I discussed early on, also the moratorium is a tool . It is up to you. It is not required. It is whether or not you are comfortable. We need to studythese things anyway and they will be studied . They will be coming to you with contracts to study them. It is up to you if you want to allow certain types of development in these two zones to continue with the information we have provided to you and the concerns we have raised while we study this and before we get regulatory changes in place . And some of that, we are just looking from a sewer capacity standpoint. Eachproject has been fully evaluated the rise in the mark -- andthe mark rise in the criteria. Fully evaluated. A lot of dialogue with the staff to get both of those approved internally. What we are saying is that those are large projects. There are otherprojects to come and we are trying to be equitable to people who own property in this area about the capacity of the sewer lines in the area without more information and we are trying to be equitable to people crossing to the area, that we have traffic concerns and we are not easily mitigated. It is certainly up to the counsel -- Council. The decision lies with you if you think this is the appropriate tool at this time that you have a legal basis to use as to whether or not you want highly dense development going on in these two zones at

this time with these certain concerns . That is up to you. The study will happen regardless and changes need to be considered by you regardless . I have one. I have one too . Would you say it is fair to say that we can study these more expeditiously , possibly without continued projects coming in , if you have 12 months to be focused?

There is no question on the developer side and the city staff side, there is a tremendous amount of work that goes on with these. And if youwere to adopt a moratorium, we would not be doing pre-application meetings. It would be formal with these types of projects in these areas. We would be doing meetings to determine if they would be under the umbrella of the moratorium because sometimes, there are projects that are multiple unit development nor private -- private dormitory. If you are not spending time reviewing project , then yes, we are working on this . We are through two very large ones that are really basically approved to begin construction. And youhave one that you heard about tonight and you received a letter about and you also received a letter from me and response to that letter. About -- that is the one. We have heard from people. You have heard from people to my understanding in the last several weeks, of all the sudden considering projects. There is a lot of talk about project that we never know about. The formalreview process not being undertaken, yes. It does free up more time to work on this .

One other question I had was, and this may be a planning or traffic study question or traffic question. But is their concern that, with the moratorium in these two zones, considering projects, when projects get pushed out of the zone, per se, if there is such a need there from a market standpoint , they get pushed to other areas of the town creating traffic issues and exacerbating the issues we have now. And just after that concern at all at this point ?

One thing is, with the growth in Auburn and the market in general, people see opportunities with multiunit development development -- apartments outside of the area and inside . I think the planning director can speak to, he has seen both .

That is correct. I mentioned it in the work session. The density offered at UN W in urban core are so far greater than the density offered anywhere else that a lot of the bigger developments we see trying to build to the 800-900 bed, they don't really mess around and any other zoning districts. We have seen developments like the District and we have seen other places where there are hard corners of CDD that still exist where people can put multifamily but those are hard corners where they have to but commercial as well , but that is another special tea -- specialty. The developers we are dealing with here deal specifically with student housing in the high density, talking six plus story buildings. That is what they're bread-and-butter is. The peoplethat have contacted me, they are hoping to get to 250 beds. 300 beds kind of deal. Those of the projects they deal with. They are not dealing with these units and trying to acquire 20-30 acres to make that happen. That is not what they do. They want to exist in the high density areas of town .

Are you good? I was going to ask the question. Max read my mind on that one. Will we -- will stakeholders -- I say stakeholders but members of the community, stakeholders that may be affected by this moratorium, will they have an opportunity to speak to staff or have any say or communication during the process ? At what point in the process do we envision that?

I think generally speaking,we are happy to meet with people . When we collect data and look at potential outcomes of how the data will be used from a regulatory standpoint, that is where we need the most feedback. They may have ideas or concerns of their own or ways that they think we can attack the concerns we have unilaterally. And weare always happy to listen to that. I think it is a little bit of, what did they think ? Happy to listen and a lot of that comes when we learn more from the data about about, here is what the data says? Here thepotential solutions . And we need their feedback and input about what they feel about that and what their opinion is . Thank you.

Do you have anything to add to that? Okay. Any other questions? So proximity to campus, the ability to put high density units is what is driving the demand for these monster things ? I guess kind of and some of my passing conversation with folks, people are looking at the occupancy rates at the buildings are reporting and the premium rent s that the buildings are charging and they are trying to get into the market . That is what they are doing . I guess from an outside . And the comprehensive plan said we want this style of housing within a mile of campus. Student housing.

So when you are doing your zoning studies and considerations , has there been a thought to increasing the density door say the next band out away from downtown? Right now , you can't drive from East to West .

So there has been a discussion I think and focus groups on other points. Notnecessarily tied to this, about where there would be places you could strategically add density. Those are areas that also are in immediate proximity to campus. We also have NC areas that are in proximity to campus. That has been discussed I think on a very hypothetical -- like a strategic meeting kind of thing. But the vast majority of this has been tied to looking at , how do we address the current density -- a lot of the pushback we get from a lot of citizens is that there is still a lot of land that can develop and can add density and don't need to be zone. When you drivearound the urban core or drive around the urban neighborhood West , everything is not five stories. Every thing is notseven stories. You have plenty of things that are two stories, three stories or one-story. All of those things can add density to them. What I get on my end are the self-described real estate nerds who are playing with formulas and looking at density and looking at acreage and going, there are inefficiencies here . There are inefficiencies in the units. They are not counting units and beds and I can add , like they spoke earlier, they are changing 200 beds, to 900. That is an addition of 700 beds. They are looking at properties where they can add several hundred beds to add to the revenue model. It isan efficiency game they are playing and they come to us with. Like I said, I want to reiterate everything in the zones that is not already five stories or seven stories. They have a market inefficiency and there are people looking to buy and assemble the properties and it is all under one owner the condo ownership makes it a lot easier for them . That is what we are running into. As you know, driving around, everything is not that tall and can be

redeveloped. That is what weare looking at. So I guess some people asked, should we push out the people that live in the outer bands, they are very loud and say, there is still property that can be redeveloped in these areas and can add density . One more question please . Yes.

That university has master leases on these big high-rise apartment complexes , several of them. So the University basically pushed this problem over to the city as far as infrastructure . We are being asked now the citizens of Auburn are being asked to build infrastructure and traffic improvements . Because the University is increasing their enrollment year after year and told us they wouldn't be doing that. And now they are leasing the apartments off campus so they don't have to build their own dorms. Probably a lot moreexpensive for them to build dorms. As -- is the University a player in all of this? They have been the impetus to part of our problems .

I think you have to look at the history of Auburn. I'm not as qualified as other folks in the room to talk about it who were born and raised here. Butthe city has long provided the majority of university housing. And I don't know of a time chief Dawson or Mayor Anders, that students were required. I don't know in my tenure here were freshman's were required to live on campus or anything like that. They actually reduced to the number of dorms on campus by taking the hill off-line. Theybuilt some back but the private sector has long balance and a lot of people in the local economy had depended on students living and private sector units. It is a balance of construction and of real estate and of leasing and maintenance and what have you. And it has been a balance over the years and that is how things have been. Certainly up to the Board of Trustees and administrative team, how they choose to view that . The master leases for us have not been -- I have some strange bug walking across my monitor. Sorry about that. The University master leases have been helpful for us because we know those things were leased by the University. The private sector is getting some form of rent to for that or the occupancy. You kind of know what that is. We also dealt with, since 2015 and the proliferation of a lot of these things, big concerns about vacancy. Councilmembers frequently asked, you have given me a study that this is occupied and all four bedrooms are occupied. The answer is that we don't know the answer to that question because they are not required to report it that way . And so it is a push pull situation. It is certainly upto the University , what they do. If they require freshman and sophomores to live on campus and build a bunch more housing, it could vacate a bunch of these units which then becomes a concern. That is part of what the Council balances and has for years. And I don't know chief Dawson or Mayor Anders, if you have any other lens on that .

Nationwide, college attendance is going down. Auburn has not had that problem. The enrollment cliff is not impacting Auburn University the same way. Not yet . At some point, if that enrollment cliff does affect Auburn, we will be left with all of these high-rise buildings that are vacant . So then you have to ask what happens next.

That is an interesting dynamic and something the City Council for years has asked those questions. Longtime staff members. It is not a new question that we answer. And it is this balance to the private sector and a property right state and we balance all of that in market conditions. And that is certainly up to the people making the investments investments. Did you want to respond? I always thought the marketwould adjust itself. I guess plain and simple .

Yes. And it has been doing that for many years as the housing has been provided . And you dealt with mobile home parks for years and duplexes and different trends and apartments and academic dwelling units. There are a variety of things in the market adjusting all of this.

As I said last week, I have had conversations with President Roberts. He has told me that the University is not planning to grow the numbers. The freshman class will remain what it is . 6100-6200. That is what the Board of Trustees has told Auburn University that they want the freshman class to be, continued on. For Auburn University, I don't want to speak for them. I want to be careful when I say that they had a lot of old inventory. Theymade a decision to tear a lot of it down and build academic buildings they are. They arereplacing some of that. Some ofthat, they have done master leases off campus. I understand particularly for freshman parents come they like to know that their children are living in University government housing and that has been part of the thought process for them to do that . Where that goes from here, I'm not sure. Obviously the University is adding 300, almost 400 beds at the Haley center and then 680 where Cambridge -- is it Cambridge? Were that is and they will tear that down and add on to that. And I do think they will stay in the housing business. I thinkthat they value and see what the private sector offers . And they have made a conscious decision recently not to be so heavy into it that it affects the private sector . That is my observation of what their strategy has been. I could be wrong about that .

I think the largest employer in the county , we enjoyed quite a wonderful life. And Auburn. We have a lot of amenities that people don't have. We have alow crime rate . And due to the taxes that some of these high-rise buildings are paying. Look at where your money is coming from . You can't have athletic facilities for kids and our schools like we have without this building and development. That is one thing that I would keep in mind. We live in a wonderful place. Bringing private industry in . The University, that is the main cash cow so to speak. I love -- the students. A level they are all gone but I level may come back. You have to have a lot of groceries on the University pays for a lot of that. You have to keep that in mind. And the big propertyrights person. I do understand if you get told by your staff that you have problems, you certainly have powerful [ Inaudible ] I think you have to take a look at what is going on. I don't want to be one of the people you point to [ Inaudible ]

Thank you. We will use that as a point. We have anything else that the Council wants to say? I guess we are done asking questions. If anyone has a statement. Do we move toward a vote ? I want to ask the gentleman in the blue. Where's thatdevelopment that you talked about? [ Inaudible ] Pass the waffle house, there is a tall building toward Donahue. It would be next to that. Okay .

Anyone else have a statement or anything they would like to say ? I am teeing you up, Mr. Griswold.

I lost a lot of sleep onthis. A lot of phone calls and comments and responses. Actually wrote down some things. So bear with me for just a minute minute. I amdisappointed that our regulations , processes or rules or whatever, have resulted in us having to consider a moratorium tonight. I think the Council as a whole should ask ourselves questions about this. It's notjust the folks on the audience . Our decisions have allowed these large developments to come in over time and partially it is the cause of the current problems. The Council, we are not privy to the developments. That move through the system. Until the development agreement is being considered. That is usually after major resources have been expended . The city procedures don't allow the Council to get into the weeds. That is part of the state laws and the way the city government is organized. We need to figure out if there is a point at which , earlier involvement would have kept us from reaching this point. That is up to us to ask the right questions and ask for council from the city manager. We all have been in touch with our constituents about this stuff and they have been sounding the alarm for at least the last seven years I have been on the Council . It is a very constant drumbeat. They are worried about traffic. That isa big thing. You look at the city survey. People are worried about traffic. That is the big thing. They begged us for smart development. Nobody really knows what that is is. Not just development. Just because something is allowed by right for can generate a whole bunch of tax revenue , it really is not sufficient. We need more than that . So what could we have done to elevate our constituent's concerns ? I

don't have the answer to that. Butthat is something we need to ask ourselves . We have also consistently addressed and questioned adequacy of the infrastructure when we have a major project on the agenda . And usually that is when we reach that or have a development right in front of us or not earlier in the process. For the most part, we have been reassured that developers will be contributed to the infrastructure, which is a great thing and that the city has adequate studies approved for making the right decisions. Ithink the studies may have failed us or Mr. Martin a bit on this . We certainly did not plan on everything happening because of the market situation . So I was concerned. And I believe I speak for several others here when we were first alerted about this discussion, we were having a future land use plan meeting . This was kind of a coincidental discussion that popped up. And it said we are approaching the capacity on roads and infrastructure . If we had not had that coincidental discussion , would the issue have surfaced? I don't know . What could we do to ensure that we never again reach the point or we need to react as with a moratorium rather than stay ahead with a plan? I don't know where we are in terms of our ability to do that . I'm not trying to point fingers. I'm just saying that , we have reached this point were we are considering the moratorium and it is just aggravating as can be to me that we had to get to this point . We are where we are. I think that a pause -- however long people want to decide to pause for staff to consider these things is appropriate and I hope we can move on at some point. So,thank you.

Mr. Griswold. Does anyone else have anything they want to say? I have a comment. Please . I was the one who asked about the capacity and so forth during the work session . I believe I would have asked that question later, had it not come up during that . It was something front of mind that -- it wasn't coincidental. It was timing. Our discussion was about land use. So it was not a foreign cousin to what you already brought up.

Again, it is not something -- I vigilant -- I initially would have brought that to the forefront at some point. Do think it is important to point out that, over the course of a decade, we had been working off of a downtown master plan that has said exactly what the plan was driven to do that had involvement of multiple stakeholders . Over a long course of time to develop . Where we are is, we are finding that the market factors are not typical market factors. We have an area that is under an opportunity zone . And so that compounds the market in a way that we are not seeing in other aspect of town. Additionally, I think it is important to note that this moratorium is a narrowly focused moratorium on high density which would have the greatest impact on key elements we have discussed this evening which are sewer, traffic, zoning and stormwater. It is very important that we state that this is not an affront business in the city of Auburn. I think the Council has proven time and time again that we value our businesses and industries and we want to continue to thrive this is because -- I personally feel business is the backbone of this community along with our people. And so I just wanted to state that this is a narrowly focused ordinance in front of us and it is about density and impact moving forward and we have reached the capacity that we need to reevaluate . So the reevaluation is what we are looking at an considering . And I think giving staff the time and ability to look at those is key and important . I would say

that 18 months is -- it feels like a long time but we have heard multiple staff members mentioned 12 months or -- that is 12 months to get the studies done. Then we have to get the studies done and then we have to put pen to paper and find the solutions. If 18 months isn't something we can digest, then I would say we look at something like 14-15 months. I think 12 months is too short of a time frame since we heard from staff. Those are my comments. Thankyou. Thank you. Anyon e else?

Just a very short comment. I think it would be a good faith effort to say 12 months because we can extended . But if we feel the heat of that time period, we might get it done . You also have the ability, as you can cancel one early, you can extended months in advance. If you have nine months in and saw, based on what you are seeing, that you had concerns -- you have flexibility any way as the governing body .

I agree . I think 12 months is the way to go. If you look -- if you get to the 12 month period or 11 month period . I certainly hope we don't have to do that. I don't like the word moratorium. I hate to use it in that situation . As far as the traffic goes , traffic has been bad there all my life. I havebeen here for 60 years. They stood fight over traffic spaces -- they do fight over traffic spaces. I know because my dad was one doing the fighting. Idon't know how you will change the traffic . Like I said before . You saw traffic problem downtown Auburn, I went to meet you because you have something going on if you solve the traffic problem .

I would piggyback a little bit off that. A moratorium is not my preferred tool to use , to use here. But obviously, with the concerns that have been presented to us by staff , I think it is appropriate to take a pause and look and study these issues that have been brought forth to us, especially to me regarding capacity . I thinkthat is driving. I support in the next 12 months -- I think 12 months is an appropriate amount of time . And it sounds like staff is prepared and ready to study these issues . We should be laser focused on these issues over the next 12 months to bring forth as much as we can, data that we can support and I encourage staff to challenge the data that is brought forth to make sure we are thinking through every scenario. I know that isimpossible. We have a lot of stakeholders . A lot of folks in the community that can help with the process. And encourage usto be engaged with those folks throughout the process. And Ihope that we as a Council received, if it is monthly or bimonthly or whatever it needs to be, updates on the process . I think we need to be laser focused on doing that and using every available resource to us to help shape the future of the area to shape the future of Auburn and provide a fair solution for all the parties involved . Like I said, it's not my preferred tool but I certainly understand where staff is coming from and I hope that -- I hope it might be the last time we have to use the moratorium. I think a lot of us would like to see that. Nobody could protect the future and say that. But I would love to know that we took the time and understood to figure out a way

to make this work for everybody going forward . Anyone else?

Yes, Mr. Mayor . Relatively quiet tonight. I'm somebody who tries to state in my lane as a representative of Ward six. And I think for all of us, as representatives, we see and read and produce fate and regular citizens surveys and time and time again , and my tenure on council, the two major concerns of citizens responding to the survey are concerns of the city infrastructure and concerns of traffic . And as a result of that, when I'm asked about what I should represent in terms of the priorities of the Council -- Council, those are the issues that come up again for me because I feel like I'm staying in my lane, representing the community here . I'm very thankful that we have got such talented and qualified staff that can bring these concerns to us , staying within their lanes as well . And just feel like I'm confident that prudence in this case is front and center and for that reason, I will be supportive of the concept of a pause .

Thank you, Bob . Anyoneelse?

Yes. I brought up possibly amending the ordinance to bring the date down to 12 months . Ihave one question about that . Mayor pro tem Witten did bring up , when we are think and about solutions and trying to come up with putting pen to paper , that might push us out a little bit further. One thing, I would still like to stay with the 12 months. One thing I would like for us to do is, as we receive monthly updates , if at any period of time during this moratorium, that we may see pushing that date out a month or so is necessary, I would like to encourage the Council to go ahead and do that on the front end . I feel like , this tool, one of the most damaging aspects of it is that it provides uncertainty in the business community. Any way we can limit that uncertainty , whether that be by a timeframe , is really the best we can do it , I think that is something we should look to do . Procedure oblique -- procedurally, Megan, should I go ahead and propose an amendment ?

If you want to amend the timeline, please go ahead. I have some comments to makeand we will move into that . We have a motion and a second. You will need to amend itbefore you deal with a motion and second . Give me just a minute and I will turn it back over to you .

I don't want to be the only one on the Council that doesn't say anything about the moratorium. I just want to say that I don't have a problem with it and 12 months seems pretty accurate . I guess a temporary solution, if it is voted on, that we should do this . And basically, I would love to see , from all the studies that we do , I really want to see the traffic study , because I just think that is -- everybody talks about it. Even when people come to me and they are talking about the traffic, the traffic, the traffic. Being that we have a train that runs in our city , that puts a lot of strain on a lot of the traffic issues . So that is the reason why I'm just curious to see, especially on the west side . I don't know how backed up it can be in other areas of the city. Where the trains run. But on the westside over there is where the University is actually at. And so that is a really, really bad area. And if we continue to [ Inaudible ] and some he was talking about an additional 200 beds were this stuff. Even though it is and within walking distance, the end of the day, people still choose to use their cars and stuff. I would like to see what the traffic study -- how it will affect and how you

can make any type of changes to -- howeverit comes out. So that is my most concern. I understand the planning . But that traffic is something that really needs to happen. And it needs to happenthroughout the city. Especially in the area we are talking about . I just wanted to be able to say something tonight. And where did that bug go? [ LAUGHTER ]

You look at the agenda tonight and later on resolutions, we will be looking at a couple of companies making significant financial investments . The industries . S HIN HWA was going to make an investment of 14 million and now 210 million. We have an item or we are improving the supple complex to make it more usable more often. So we can let our folks play on it more as well as attract opportunities for people to come to the community on weekends. And we are taking apractice field at the soccer complex and trying to turn it into a field that can be used more often. Again, with lights and turf . We have got a lot of good things going on in Auburn . And unlike many of those people appear, the word moratorium is a very difficult word for me to deal with and this is not my first rodeo with this concept . I appreciate our business community and our development community . They have certainly made investments and taken risks that have changed Auburn Auburn. And I firmly believe most of the change has been for Auburn's betterment. And it is offered -- lifestyle amenities and opportunities for our citizens that wouldn't be here without those investments and our community and I'm grateful for that. And I'm grateful for the people that have made investments in the side of our downtown . It was a conscious effort by the leadership in those days that had a lot of feedback from a lot of different stakeholders in the community. That students should live closer to campus. And they should live closer to downtown and they should -- it should be easier for them to get around every day. And that is why thedecision was made to increase the density. And my goodness, it worked. And they came. And of course we didn't know what the word opportunity zone meant .

That was not part of any of the discussions . And here we are today. The staff has brought tous through our questions and curiosity , that they are concerned about the infrastructure over here because of the quickness and the intensity of the growth . As I told somebody today, I have never been underground in Auburn. I don't know what those pipes look like . I don't know where all the storm water goes. I hope it goes through the cracks and gets down under the roads . I do know that I trust the people that work here . I trust their education. I trust their daily practice. I trust her certification. I trust what they are giving us is guidance and concern . And so , I believe stopping for 12 months. And I agree with Tyler. That 12months is a good time to do. That is the prudent thing to do for our future, so we can come back in 12 months and hopefully continue to build and continue to provide great housing on this side of town and do the kind of things that make Auburn a better place for our future . I know this does not taste good to some people in this room and I respect that . But I do believe it is the best decision for all of Auburn's future. With that, we do have a motion and a second, correct .

Yes. You have a main motion. You would need anamendment if Councilman Adams was going to make one for the day. I moved to amend sectionthree on page 2 of the proposed ordinance . To remove the date , May 31st 2027, and insert the date November 30th, 2026, in its place. With the remainder of section three left unchanged. Second .

We have a motion and a second. Basically to consider a 12 month moratorium as opposed to 18 months with the date of November 30th, 2026. Anydiscussion or questions on that? Would this be roll call? We will do that for safety sake. You are just voting on the amendment. Is voting on the amendment. Lindsay.

Adams , Coblentz, Dawson, Griswold, Moreman, Parsons, Witten, Anders . Taylor. Yes. Main motion as amended. We need to make the motion. No. Further discussion .

Any discussion ? Is everybody okay where we are? Are we ready to vote? We have an amended ordinance here . I want to agree. I think it isreally important that there is a lot of communication to the Council that we are well aware of what is going on and we don't breach that 11 month . And betotally surprised that, we are in a good place and we are ready to either stop or extend. None of that should ever be a surprise to any of us . If it is, it is on us. I like that. It won't happen . Okay.

Motion and second. Lindsay,this is voting on the entire ordinance as amended. Parsons, Taylor, Adams, Coblentz, Dawson , Griswold, Moreman, Adams, Anders . Yes. Ordinance is adopted as amended .

Now we will move forward . Taking an item out of order from a resolution because it is dealing with a land use plan as discussed during committee as a whole. 10F authorizes changes to the future land use plan as opposed growth change number eight located on the north side of West Farmville road between pepper would trail and Auburn Lakes road. If adopted, this would change the land use from rural to low density /medium intensity -- sorry, medium intensity mixed-use. The planning commission unanimously recommended approval of the change at the November 13th meeting and the public hearing is recommended. I will explain. State law says for land use changes, there needs to be a public hearing. There was already one at the planning commission meeting . And so that counts but we put recommended to give that opportunity to you . It is up to you.

I would support that . Need a motion. Move for approval. Second . This is an ordinance. It is a resolution. You are just out of order. So you don't need unanimous consent. You have a motion and a second. Motion and a second. I will open the public hearing. If you would like to address the council, give us your name and address and you have five minutes to speak to the Council . This is regarding the land-use. Yes, sir .

Evening. Leaf Thornton, [ Inaudible ] engineer and applicant. I want to say that you will probably be hearing from a good bit on the next couple of agenda items. Iappreciate this getting moved earlier in the agenda as was moved earlier in the meeting. I think that will help shape the next couple agenda items. Happy to answer any questions when we get to that point. We are obviously in concurrence with the proposed come unanimous future land use plan. I thinkit makes sense with where it is considering the adjacent developments around it. I havebeen there for a long time. It is almost across the street . And consider working at the end of the development, the [ Inaudible ] Again, thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Close the public hearing. Discussions or questions from Council . The reason we asked -- for back to planning, was at the time we had the future land use plan to evaluate , we did not have updated information about the timeline of improving North Donahue and Farmville . We have since received the information which is the reason we requested it to go back to planning. Alittle history for how it got here.

Any other questions or thoughts ? I have a question. Yes. On the revised map that we have got here , there is currently commercial to the east of Auburn Lakes road already, right ? Hold on. Getting the microphone. That is correct. Even though the land-use plan said rural. How did we getto that point?

Great question. The future land use update, if you remember, there was -- the category. One was corrections and one was kind of the proposals. And one was theexisting land-use. And so even though -- I guess this was part of the proposal , but east of Auburn Lakes road was really just a correction to match what the current development is. There is existing storage units out there. And so then just ringing it across on the west side of Auburn Lakes road and adding a hard corner there for no debt and having that match on the other side of the development. East of Auburn Lakes road, that would have counted as a correction to the future land use plan to match what was already on the existing development .

All right, thanks. To piggyback on that , the implication there is that this is a reactive document . And we are making a concerted effort that it will be a proactive document. In other words, this will determine what we do rather than changed to reflect what we did. Is that fair to say ?

That is correct. Some of the contradictions were we did end of making the corrections as a reaction were more of a result of the existing zoning District not matching the future land use plan. And so we had places in town I guess where it comes up a lot where there is RDD where it is 16 dwellings per acre in the future land use plan says neighborhood reservation we cannot current -- constraint applicant's density based on the future land use if the loaning by right allows them [ Inaudible ] per acre. That is not what we practice. That is how we get these areas where the current -- the current project and land use not match. I guess thereare other areas on lesser intensity where it is a neighborhood and neighborhood preservation but there might be an island . And the edge of Cross Creek and cause wealth, there was a land -- it was rural but there was a house in the neighborhood where there would always be houses there. That was updated and neighborhood preservation as well. I wanted to point out that the contradictions exist where the zoning doesn't necessarily match the future land use plan. The future land use plan is an aspirational document that should reflect what the city wants to do from a buildout standpoint to match what the utilities can support with infrastructure of the roads and sewer can support and where we see density going. That is correct. The future land use plan is a proactive document of where we want the road to be .

It is to your point, we do FACTA operated for years. Of the Council agrees to a rezoning change even if it is outside of the land-use plan, the land-use map is kind of defective changed or amended at the time. Andwhat we are trying to align and with this very case here, as we rewrite the zoning ordinance , we are trying to be more intentional about community land-use change. Of the future land use says something different and the Council is good with that and the applicant is asking and you change the land use, zoning should match the land-use as part of the process and be a lot less confusing. I think we are heading in that direction with [ Inaudible ] on board and leadership and working hard to row the vote was -- boat in a direction.

And wrestling with this concept. It is not -- the planning director pointed out this is not the gospel of whether it is right or wrong. We still have factors, rezoning that drive this. Sometimes you adopt land-use well ahead of the zoning changes that then need to follow it and that is where things get confusing. We are struggling to understand how we approach this .

Understandably so and that is why they are trying to get more intentional. One of the first times you are seeing this is trying to get the land-use dealt with before you actually consider the zoning change items where would align. If you are going to do this -- if youdecide to change the land-use, the zoning actions you have that follow this for your consideration, you have other things to consider, especially with the planned development District but those things would better align . Correct . Thank you .

It would be fair to say that adopting this land-use change , even if the project that follows this doesn't pass . If it doesn't pass or go forward, the land-use plan stays where it is that . So it could encourage a future project similar in nature and in the same area if it is that case. We are changing the idea from rural to this no matter what happens with the project that follows .

Correct. The recommendation that staff afford to change when it had nothing to do with the project -- I guess the project proved a lot of questions are answered a lot of questions staff had about the property. Initially, the property was ruling the future land use because we had questions about those. There is a water tower nearby and proximity. What that does to residential water pressure -- was a lot of questions. There was also thequestion about access and viability of utilities on the property . And so there were questions about, could, those property owners gain easement from adjacent property owners to provide utilities? Those are all questions that were answered in the time that we were reviewing this. That answered a lot of the questions. For the longest time, this was left because we had questions about the utilities and if they were possible. This answered a lot of the questions and proved that the property was viable for development and that remains true whether or not this project moves forward or doesn't .

Thank you . Any other questions or comments? Okay. This is a resolution. We have motion and second. All in favor, please say aye. And he opposed? Motion carries.

Now we will go back to the ordinance item 9B1 is a request to present approximately 53.5 acres of property located on West Farmville road between pepper would trail and Auburn lake road for a project known as Greenwood Village. The planning commission did not recommend approval of the request by a vote of 2-7 at the August 14th meeting. The item was postponed from the October 21st meeting. A motion is needed and a public hearing is required . Move for approval . We have already seen this. Correct . Motion . Second.

Motion and a second. I will open the public hearing. If you would like to address the City Council, please come forward and give us your name and address for the record and you have five minutes to speak to the Council .

Good evening again. [ Inaudible ] cadre engineering. A couple things I wanted to point out again. Appreciate theconsideration of the project. One thing particular note that I'm sure you noticed is the August planning commission meeting on this was up for approval originally for the recommendation and you voted no on the rezoning for the DD each. Interestingly enough, which we can get into on the next agenda item, voting a primitive for the PDD which was confusing to all of us . The back story behind that is primarily to do with the future land use plan which you just [ Inaudible ] The back story on this, going back even further, I think this was brought before you guys like a year ago. Where we voted inthe meeting . That was primarily due to the future land use plan made rural at that time. My understanding was the reasoning for that originally was primarily the infrastructure concern on Farmville road and even more so, the intersection of Farmville and north [ Inaudible ] Drive. We believe we sufficiently answered some of those questions. We also updated the plans accordingly for some of those concerns. I just wanted to point out a few of those for your consideration. And I know we will probably run out of time for the public hearing so if there are any additional questions after that about specifics , and happy to come up and answer any of those. And a lot of those might be directly related to the next two. Infrastructure in particular, like I mentioned, intersection work at Donahue Drive. I believe this was mentioned for the development agreement . We demonstrated as part of the PDD packet , the later agenda item , the development of the neighborhood. The first Phase in particularshould be on the west side , would not be complete until after the planned completion of the intersection

improvements of Farmville and Donahue. We also have the pro rata share plugged into the development agreement as well. That was a big concern everybody had. Also the traffic in general on Farmville road. Part of the development to make infrastructure improvements to that. And in particular, turn lanes and the development . One major change that you guys will notice on the site plan , from what you saw originally, was at one point, we had a connection for each Phase of the development to Farmville road directly. That has change particularly on the west side. Pepper would trail and unfortunately, the county road number escapes me up here. Right here on the west side of the development, currently on the west side, the first Phase of the development now will take access off of the county road. It will be improved appropriately so that we will have only one new connection on Farmville road for the full development. That will be on the east side on the line and thereabout with the existing connection of Woodland Pines elementary . Also here, there are a couple of commercial out parcels and there are probably some specific questions I can help answer on that. We are planning to develop residential development with the out parcel coming a future date date. We don't have any planned use for those commercial out parcels and working on the next agenda item , we put in there that all the potential future uses would have to come before you as a conditional use. If that alleviates any concerns. There was also a big Central Park aspect to this is part of the open space . It will be a benefit to the community and the development of particular , to try to maintain as much natural area as we possibly can.

Theremight be specifics on this and I would be happy to answer any questions you might have on that. Justice mentioned water and sewer improvements. We have been able to secure at this point, verbal easements , or verbal discussions on easements to the affirmative , to the development particularly for sewer which would be off-site through Woodland Pines elementary property. We have been working well with the school board on that to date . So no concerns about utility connections in the future . I think that is it. Again, if I'm missing something, feel free to give me a shout .

Are you concerned about school traffic and folks leaving and going to work and trying to get into Woodland Pines ? We analyzed part of that in the traffic study. Should I answer questions right now? You are fine. We pause the clock . Not particularly doing well on the procedure side . I believe you. I have the gavel.

I don't envy you. We analyzed as part of the traffic study. The benefit to thechanges we made to the plan in particular are where we are now proposing -- we get rid of one of those entries . The main concern will be on the East entry . There will be overlap for the timing of when people are leaving work in the mornings and obviously when people are coming to drop off for school. I think a big benefit to that is the school, the drop-off traffic, which is much heavier than the bus traffic is on the west side where we no longer have the driveway aligning directly across the street. That is a big deal. To avoid any kind of potential impact related to that . The timing of Woodland Pines and again, I'm sitting here -- that is a K2 school. I'm trying to remember exactly when they start . I think 7:45 is when K2 starts in town. And so it peaks a little bit later when people are typically leaving .

And the park area , is that -- the HOA going to maintain that? But you said the public would be able to use it .

Yes, sir. And I know we had a lot of discussions with Allison or the director. I'm just making sure you are there. A lot of discussions about that . At one point, it was -- we were considering maybe a more prominent public access . I think in our discussions with Allison, it was so saying it wasn't appropriate. But would be -- taking access off of a future public street on the west side of the development . And it would be maintained by the HOA. That would be documented in the formation documents of the HOA . I'm sure there would probably need to be some kind of maintenance agreement between the HOA and the city. I mightbe speaking out of turn .

We wouldn't require anything other than typically on the plat, we require on the plat that the HOA maintain so it is memorializing and running with the land. That is right. And the Department doubles as an open space for the community but also public access. Playground. A couple of the pavilions and more nature trail kind of walks through their in that area. You think the people that live in this neighborhood will be okay if [ Inaudible ] shows up with the children and want to walk and play? Just want to make sure while we are here.

That is a fair question . We think it will primarily be used by the neighborhood obviously. That was part of the discussion with Allison about, where the public access would be appropriately or best located within the development . We think where we are showing it is probably going to lend itself more to being set up as more of a private amenity . But it can function as both. Is this out by Farmville road or is it by the lakes about halfway back or where's that located? The access? The park.

The park is actually -- it is the entire center of development. It splits and wraps in a couple of different places. What drove your decisions to change ? Was at the traffic ? Tochange the access on the west side , to the upper tree trail?

Primarily traffic related. Impact to existing infrastructure. It made more sense ultimately with discussion of the staff to improve the existing -- w e will call it a curve that but County Road. To prove that rather than have a separate access on to Farmville road where obviously there were concerns about connections and things like that. I know a lotof the concerns were primarily related directly to the intersection . And those improvements were happening and being done by the city kind of outside the development. Same number of lots?

I believe we reduced them from the last time you saw them by a few. But it is not substantial. I think it is 146 lots. At this point, I believe we had 160 or something . That has come down. It is a little bit last.

The total proposed written down as 2.72 units per acre. Weare asking for TDH, which gets too .5 total allowable . So much less dense than what will be allowed under the TDH zoning. We also don't believe a lot more density is viable under the piece of property . I will remind the Council too that great questions, talking about the DDH zoning and a lot of this relates to the planned development District , the next item and plenty of time to ask questions further about the plan development . There is a lot more detail and that PDD.

And I would remind you that because this is pre-zoning, everything kind of hinges on everything else, including the annexation that follows each decision point could affect the next couple of applications one way or the other . It would be all of it to proceed with this development. Not just any one item . And it is unusual in a rezoning that -- withpre-zoning, if you do aspects with this and you don't annex it, I don't know that you have zoned anything , correct? Correct. It is very different whenyou do rezoning. Just FYI . Any other questions? What drove your decision to make it a public park?

That had to do with the PDD and exchanges set up in the zoning ordinance. As opposed to a private park? Correct. Yes or. That ispart of what is listed in the ordinance related to the PDD and citizen exchanges. Justice,correct me on that if you have detail to add .

It is -- kind of the thinking on that -- a lot of that is driven by what is in the zoning ordinance, that you can dedicate open space . I guess to compromise that, we landed on the liability standpoint, that it didn't make sense if HOA owned it. And if it did want to function as a public park, that is fine. But not necessarily advertised as a public park. Ithink one of the things we advertised compromised on was the facilities in the park itself. Upgraded significantly. There were direct recommendations from staff and the park director about what needed to be included and there was a sizable gazebo. Also trails and recommendations about the standard and the quality of the playground that needs to be in shifting to the infrastructure of the park in the open space that would be required on this development and exchanges .

And justice, while we are here, and this is for the PDD agenda item and not this one. There are teeth in the subdivision plat itself about HOA maintaining the park. Do you see anywhere else that the requirement -- yo u have staff notes on it. With that requirement reside anywhere else? No. That would be in a note on the plat.

Okay. I want to clarify for everybody. That runs with the land. I can tell you we are dealing with different situations and different neighborhoods and where nobody read the plat and people are selling open space lots and doing all kinds of things and we are still cleaning all of that up. When it gets to staff withan issue, we do address it with the legal team . So the plat will stay -- this is a public area? No. The state that they maintain it.

It is a pretty traditional -- on plat set especially in a mixed-use development or residential development, when a development has maxed out its density , it will be on the remainder -- the remainder of the land that has to be dedicated what that is. It can't just be, here is 3 acres underdeveloped. And we will leave it undeveloped. It must be stated that it is either open space or future commercial because it cannot be residential , that they then go back and exceed the density at a later point in time. They cannot do that. That is the reason we state the use for that. As part of that, also in the notes, we would state that the open spaces maintained by the HOA and codified in the PDD about it being a limited public use park. We wanted to put that on the plat as well. We could do that. There are also conditions tied to the open space and the facilities they have to provide as well. As part of the PDD that will eventually be a condition on the plats going forward.

At any point, could this become a private space? Not if it is approved likethis, no . It says that the HOA could not come forward at some point in time and say, no trespassing or stay off of our playground .

I guess something like that -- there would have to be an amendment to it were they would have to do it . But if it is put on the plat, they would have to take it off the plat and get amended in the PDD to do it. We discussed this from a limited public facilities standpoints and focused on the facilities they would have to provide and the schedule that they would have to provide them to really kind of toward the front end of the development and not at the very end or not on a timeline associated with the rest of the lots coming forward. [ Captioners Transitioning ]

But any way, my wife sent me a video of the fireplace. I said the last thing I need is to The is a moratorium, and I appreciate that very much. We give thanks for all the things you said, Beth, and excuse me, Tyler and also max. I thought there were a lot of good questions asked. I hope you all include the citizens. Something you brought up, councilmember, didn't know where it happened. The city brought up the problem, but you did mention the real answer and the citizens have been bringing up for a long time. And as long as I have been, dealing with the short-term rental stuff, I have also brought that up, and I made videos on that. So I think you're going to have to start include the citizens, so when you make decisions, you involve them. The involvement means we need a task force really bad. And also I think auburn University has been notified, you might have to do a permanent moratorium on that kind of development in just this area because we have enough. We have plenty. I believe your next major decision is going to be even more difficult. What is big enough in auburn? What are we really looking for? Are we looking for an incredible

community? Are we looking for income? Are we looking for great revenue? Is that all we're looking for? Because that is all I ever hear, to be honest. It's all the revenue, all the things we can do. Even some of the developers. I believe in development. I own businesses. I understand it. But is there a level we need to start looking at and then refining the things we have? I don't see what the planning commission does other than zoning things and there forth on the requirements. Maybe there needs to be somehow they start working on the beautification, and the beauty of a city like auburn with all the great talent, all the great things, involving more people in the community, and all the committees, involve more people. Thank you.

Moving next. Anyone? Okay. Close session. Council members have anything they'd like to add? I was going to move to adjourn. [ Laughter ] Just a second. Happy Thanksgiving. We are adjourned.