Planning & Zoning Committee - Regular Meeting

Today is approval of the minutes from June 23rd.

Motion to approve the minutes from the June 23rd meeting, noting that the minutes that we have say June 9th. So it's either the 9th or the 23rd.

all right i will second that with the note about the change in date all in favor all right all right that motion passes minutes are approved all right before us today our next item on the agenda is zoning case zac2026 08004 it's an application to change zone district boundaries from mixed-use medium, MUM, to mixed-use high, MUH, in order to construct a mixed-use building consisting of residential and hospitality components. We have a member of Planning, Engineering, and Permitting. Hi, Kim.

Good afternoon. Hello. My name is Kim Spurl. I serve as the city zoning administrator. The case before you today is located at 1240 22nd Street South. This might look familiar. This item did come before the committee just a few months ago. The council did approve the rezoning of this property from R6 to mixed use medium on May 5th of this year. So now the request before you is to rezone the property from mixed use medium to mixed use high. The proposed use is the same. It's a mixed use building that will have residential and hospitality components. included in that building. The applicant can explain their process of how they got here from the mixed use medium to the mixed use high. But I wanted to let the committee know that they are open to queue conditions. There are some suggested queue conditions in your packet. but the applicant is open to queue conditions for the rezoning. The long-range land use plan does identify this property as mixed-use medium. There are no staff comments except the typical comments regarding future permits, that soil erosion and civil construction permits will be required when they begin construction. The property is not located in a special flood hazard area. It is located in the Southern Framework Plan area, and it is in the Redmont Park Neighborhood Association. However, it is adjacent to Highland Park. So as a courtesy, the applicant did attend both neighborhood meetings. The Redmont Park Neighborhood Association met on October 28, 2025, and they voted to not support the rezoning request. There were zero votes to approve and 30 votes to deny. And then at the Highland Park Neighborhood Association meeting on November 11, 2025, They voted also to not support the request. There were zero votes to approve and 29 votes to deny. The applicant did attend the Zoning Advisory Committee meeting on July 7th of this year, and the ZAC voted one to three to not recommend the rezoning to the city council. But the applicants are here, and they can present this request to you, and that concludes our staff report, but I'm happy to answer any questions if you have them.

Thank you, Kim. Any questions from committee members for Kim? From PEP.

Yes. Can you remind me how many members of the ZAC are there?

So we have seven total, but we only had four members present. So there was one vote to support and three votes to not support. Okay.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

Any other questions from council for planning engineering permitting? Seeing none, I believe we have applicant present. Please state your name and tell us a little bit about this proposal, please.

Good afternoon. I'm David Silverstein, and I am president of the Five Stone Group. I'm formerly a partner in Bear Properties. You may be wondering why I'm back to discuss our Tremont project. You will recall that the development plan that we presented on March 24th, 26th showed a boutique hotel with 80 keys and between 10 and 15 condominiums on the upper four floors. The development plan showed the placement of the building on the site and was 125 feet in height. Allow me to put in context what has occurred really over the last year and a half. Over a year ago, we met with the planning staff to discuss the southern area framework plan and how the plan addressed the zoning of our site. At that time, the framework plan showed our site as being rezoned to mixed-use high, nestled up against the Red Mountain Freeway with the Crescent office building just to the north and the 2222 office building just to the south. It was an appropriate classification, in our opinion, to go to mixed-use high. Mixed-use high allows for a building height of 125 feet, while MUM permits a building of 65 feet, which would be barely above the freeway. Not sure what happened to the framework plan subsequently to our meeting, but it was shown to now be zoned, proposed zoning to MUM. We made the decision, a business decision, several months ago to move forward with a zoning request to rezone our site to the MUH classification for several reasons. One, waiting on the process of the framework plan to be adopted is truly no longer an option. Our project is ready to move forward, plans are drawn, our hotel operator has been selected, and an $80 million project is being severely impacted. Secondly, we believe the staff who initially believed that the MUH is the appropriate zoning classification had it right. On October 23rd, 2025, we filed our request to rezone our site to MUH. October 23rd, 2025, we filed our zoning request. Subsequent to filing our zoning request, we were asked by a well-known resident of Highland Park and a longtime advocate and a friend, to consider amending our zoning application to go back to MUM and seek a variance to take the height to 125 feet. He expressed a concern that if our site was zoned to MUH, that it would set the stage for MUH to creep up Arlington Avenue towards English Village. I must say I found the concern to be somewhat unfounded, but continued our discussions for a couple of months. We actually met with other high-profile residents of Highland Park in Redmont who confirmed that if I would seek MUM instead of MUH, they would support our variance request. I've always tried to work with residents to reach acceptable compromises. So I agreed to amend our zoning application to go from MUH to MUN and seek a variance. Our amendment to the zoning application was filed on February 18th, 2026. And at that time, we also filed a variance request Council, as Kim pointed out, not too long ago, rezoned the site to MUM, which then afforded us the opportunity to seek the variants. We proceeded to CBA, as the agreed-upon plan called for. Go to MUM and seek a variance. On May 14, 2026, we were denied the variance. And I will say that not one of the individuals, not one of the individuals that came to me and said we will support the variance if you would go to MUM showed up to support. So here we are. We want to go back to the MUH zoning request that we had originally filed because we feel it is absolutely appropriate for this site and where it's located. I have a packet for you to see. Actually, my partner. Who has it? Oh, you have one. This right here? I didn't introduce my partner and my son, David Jr. Walking through a couple of pages of the presentation that I have, it just summarizes that we are looking to build a boutique hotel of 80 rooms. There is absolutely a void in this market for that upper-end hospitality. The Grand Bohemian, sort of by default, in Mount Brook Village, captures a good bit of that. But there's not a hotel at that level within the city limits of Birmingham. Additionally, the top four floors of the building will have between 10 and 15 high-end condominiums. Look, I have a saying in my office. Birmingham is not Mars. Birmingham is not Mars. What's happening in other sister cities, whether it be Nashville or Charlotte or Atlanta, have these types of projects where people would love to live in a hotel that provides concierge service, room service, valet service, and it's a true amenity for those that purchase a condominium. Look, I've been doing this a long time. I know the elephant in the room. And the elephant in the room to many of the residents, to some, not many, but to some, is the height of the building. And what we have attempted to do throughout this process is demonstrate that the height of the building is consistent with the scale of other buildings in close proximity. And what you have in the package is what I call a corridor context. You can see how the Tremont relates to other buildings in close proximity. If you flip to this page that has the blue dots, All of these buildings are equal to or higher in scale than the Tremont. Some actually are further into the neighborhood than Tremont. This is in scale with other buildings in close proximity. I don't know how to better address it than to show how the building will sit on the site. No residential properties are negatively impacted from a site line standpoint, none. If you're up on the Crescent, maybe you will be blocked to see the freeway, maybe. Maybe you won't see the Chevron station on the corner of Highland Avenue. but your views are not impacted. This is not the Vesta in terms of scale. Some will say because of the elevation of this, we're gonna be at the same height. Well, Vesta sits much lower and still is 50 feet taller than we are. You know, it takes a project some time to stimulate infrastructure enhancements. If you turn to this page, and it talks about infrastructure enhancement, we have been working for quite some time on what I call the Gateway Project. We recently completed the renovation of the building on Arlington called 2222. Spent about $40 million, brought some really quality tenants from outside the city of Birmingham into Birmingham. But the stretch of Arlington from Highland going up the hill is atrocious as you get to underneath the expressway. We have what's called the Gateway Plan that's reflected here. We really do want to improve the look and feel of the underpass of the Red Mountain Expressway as you're going up Arlington. It's a gateway into Redmont and it's a gateway coming down the hill into Five Points South. The hardscape, the sidewalks, the lighting, the landscaping. Come on, we're better than this. But sometimes it takes projects to give impetus to those type of infrastructure plans. Councilor Vazza, one infrastructure improvement to your district concerns the speed of cars that are coming down Red Mountain Expressway and getting off on Highland Avenue. It is like they're flying down the hill. If you keep going straight, you can end up in front of Bottega. But it's like they come over a ski jump. It really is. We've met with James Fowler and we are proposing some changes to that ramp. We want to slow people coming down to where they get to a stop sign before they keep going straight. We will actually build a sidewalk and make it two-way coming up from Bottega to the stop sign. Hopefully build sidewalks, make it far more pedestrian friendly. I have found in over 30 years of doing development that it takes projects to give impetus to major infrastructure enhancements. So we want to do that as part of this project. We can't lose sight, in my opinion, of the economic impact that this project will have. Over the next 20 years, we will approach $80 million in tax revenue that this project will generate for the city and for the county. It's enormous. Right now, the site produces nothing but a pittance of Avalorne, Texas. Gentlemen, I have had the pleasure for the last 30 years to work on projects in my city, your city. It's been a real privilege to do that. Whether it's the summit, whether it's PZITS downtown, whether it's the Crescent office building immediately adjacent to this, I believe I've always demonstrated my commitment to beautiful architecture, wonderful landscaping, and a proper scale. This is no different. This is no different. I've only been working on this since 2018. It's been a long process, but I believe in it. You're probably not old enough to remember the dirt pile on 280 where Whole Foods is. It used to be a dirt pile. And we were asked to figure out how to eliminate that blight. I took unmitigated, you know what, when I came forward with that plan. I recognize that people have... A tendency to member view change with skepticism. But the dirt pile was reinvented as another village in the city of Mountain Brook and it's producing nice revenue and the blight is gone. My point is simply this, my commitment to this city and to your residents and your district, Highland Park and Redmont, to do a quality project that's in the proper scale. As Kim pointed out, there's some Q conditions that are attached to the application. These Q conditions eliminate some of the, what I call perhaps obnoxious uses that the MU zoning classification would allow. Uses that the city doesn't want, the residents don't want on the site, and we don't want on the site. Additionally, at the ZAC meeting that we attended a couple weeks ago, I offered up one more compromise, just in the spirit of trying to show that I'm willing to work with the residents. Let me stop for a second. One of the reasons I love the site is because the passion that the Redmont residents and the Highland Park residents bring to their communities. It's a lovely, lovely, they're lovely communities, which is why I'd like to do a project here. But I've offered up as part of the queue conditions to reduce the 125 feet down to 115 feet. No one's asked me, but I have said look, I recognize some of the concerns and I'm certainly willing to try to accommodate. So we're prepared to go from 125 to 115. A little nuance that I'd like to point out is that we currently have a variance on the site that allows us to go to 80 feet. So we're really now just asking to go from 80 to 115 so that I can be assured of doing a successful project. I don't think that that 25 feet is going to be negatively impactful. I am here to answer questions that you may have, and I'd like your support.

Thank you, Mr. Silverstein. Now is the time for the committee to review the information and present some questions to the applicant or to PEP staff, since both are available. Do we have any questions offhand? Yes, Counsel.

Yeah, so, and this may be Kim or anybody can chime in, but... Is this generally about the height of the building? I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Clinton. I was asking, I'm going to go to Kim first, but generally trying to make sure I'm clear on what the...

Yes, sir. So the uses are allowed in mixed-use medium, but the height is restricted. So the mixed-use high is primarily for the height.

And that's what you would, you think the community concern is centered around height?

That was the primary discussion at the ZAC meeting.

Thank you, Counselor. Any other questions from committee members?

All right.

I have a couple.

How are you today? How are you? Good, good. So if I'm looking at this information, this is the boutique hotel that's going to have like 80 doors, right?

I'm sorry.

80 doors for the hotel?

80 keys of a high-end boutique. Before you came in, I said Birmingham lacks that type of hospitality offering. The Grand Bohemian in Mountain Brook tries to capture that. But we don't have that type of project here, nor do we have a project that has condominiums that are on the upper floors above the hotel. You go to Atlanta, you can go to Nashville, Charlotte, they're all doing these types of projects today.

Okay, and then I'm just looking at the presentation, 10 to 15 condominiums.

Between 10 and 15.

10 to 15, okay. Okay, thank you.

All right, I have a couple of questions myself. Mr. Silverstein, certainly appreciate the work that you've done in the city of Birmingham. There's a lot of history there, and that's certainly acknowledged. The first question I have is I know there's a lot of history related to this. As you mentioned, 2018, I believe, is the first time the variance was bought, two neighborhoods or two conversations. Can you walk us through just very briefly what those conversations were like and where they ended, what the outcome of that was?

At the very, very, very beginning? Is that back to 2018? Yes. Okay. We always felt that the combination of a hotel and condominium would be good for the site, perfect for the site. But once COVID hit, everything turned upside down. And we decided to try to move forward with just a condominium project. The hospitality industry was severely impacted, negatively impacted through COVID. And we began to market just a condominium project. And interest rates skyrocketed, inflation went up, construction costs went up, so we took a pause. Sometimes when you're in the business in which I'm in, knowing when to say no is the best decision you can make. So we took a pause and sort of let the economy come back to life. We renovated 2222, which I'm sure you're familiar with on Arlington, in the interim, and turned that into a lovely Class A office building. Then, and so, like I mentioned, we learned that the Southern Area Framework Plan was gonna come forward, which would allow for hospitality under the MU zoning classification to occur. The void that we had in 2018, we the city had in 2018, it's still there. It's still there, so we just decided to be patient, and let the economy settle down.

Thank you. It's my understanding that at the tail end of that conversation with neighborhoods that there was, as again, as I understand, I know I wasn't on council at that point, but neighborhood was sort of okay and had voted to be okay with a height increase to 80 feet, even though the MUM, the mixed-use medium, would cap that at 65. So through conversations with neighborhood, the neighborhood showed an openness, a willingness to support an increase to 80 feet. Is that correct?

Yes.

And as I understand, that is currently still sort of in play.

Right.

So that is an option to have a structure that is max cap at 80 feet. Is that correct?

may not work for this project, but yes, we have the 80 foot variance, 80 foot height variance on the site as it exists, which was under the R6 zoning classification.

Right, so, okay. As I'm, I just wanted to make sure I understood that history. Sure. what is before us today is a request for a change from a mixed use medium to mixed use high. And that variance would go, as you mentioned, from the sort of neighborhoods stamp of approval of 80 feet cap to one 25 is the request. One 15, one 15.

I'm offering up today a further compromise. to go from 80 to 115 to ensure that we can do the project that we really want to do. And I've tried to demonstrate through the materials that you have that at 115 it is consistent consistent with all those blue dots on that page of buildings that are of the same scale and some a little higher. And some of those buildings encroach further into the neighborhood than ours being immediately adjacent to the expressway. You know, getting the building to that 115, allows for those condominiums to be a little higher up above the freeway without, as I say to you, the sightline study show that it has negligible, if any, impact on sightlines of any residential in close proximity.

Thank you. So as I'm looking through the recommendations for Neighborhood Association, I know that you did present to Redmont Park and Highland Park. This property sits within Redmont Park, as I understand, but is adjacent to Highland Park.

It's adjacent. When we did the Crescent office building, we also met with both neighborhoods, the Crescent being immediately adjacent to the site.

All right. And as I'm looking through this, just to review it, there were zero votes to approve the move to... 125 feet, 30 votes to deny at Redmont Park. And at Highland Park neighborhood, zero votes to approve and 29 votes to deny. I also see that at the zoning advisory committee that was, I believe, last week, that committee that is also resident-led, but not specific to any district, So they voted to not recommend the rezoning request to the city council three to one. So three to nine to one. So I guess my question is, and if I'm not mistaken, this also went before the zoning board of adjustment, which is a separate process. Right. I just wanted to make sure. recognize that. I guess my question is it is often rare for many neighborhood groups and advisory boards to sort of agree and be in complete alignment around a particular vote. My question would be given the unanimity of these groups voting against this approval to 125 max, why do you think as the applicant that this committee should reach a different conclusion than what the neighborhood associations, the zoning advisory committee recommended?

I think that, as you know, you have a very passionate neighborhood that you represent. And I commend them for being passionate. There are so many people that have come up to me and said, we love your project, that live in that district, your district. I've learned a long time ago that most people that come to a meeting on a zoning request come to oppose something. I've seen Botanical Garden's meeting room overflowing with people when they are hugely against something. We didn't have overwhelming opposition, not at all. I can tell you there are more people that have come up to me to say, keep going, this is a great project. We need it in the city of Birmingham. The scale is appropriate. So sometimes I think cities get strangled by doing nothing, really. I think cities in today's world get strangled by doing nothing. And in this instance, this project has a tremendous economic impact. It's beautifully designed. It will bring something to Birmingham that we just don't have here. And I still submit it's the proper scale. It's the proper scale. I had people, not that it's necessarily relevant, But when we were trying to fix the dirt pile where Whole Foods is, I had people come up to me and say, we wanna keep it as a nature preserve. That was pretty tough to swallow, a nature preserve. There are some people that just don't want a hotel here. Well, it's gonna be zoned, whether it stays MUM or MU High, to be a hotel. Our challenge, and we're up to it, is design it beautifully. The operator of the hotel, I know, give me one second. The operator of this hotel will be the gentleman that runs the Auburn School of Hospitality, which is an incredible school down at Auburn University. that trains their associates when they graduate to be able to go work for Ritz Carlton or the Four Seasons right out of the program. They have a hotel at Auburn called The Laurel. It's the only five star hotel in this state. The fellow that will be the operator of this hotel is Hans van de Slogen, and he comes out of the Ritz-Carlton background. I'm not gonna operate the hotel. I know what I don't know. I probably could, you know, if I had to, but we're not. We're gonna have the best of the best operate this and bring something that we don't otherwise have. It's a long-winded answer, but I believe in the vision. I believe in the vision.

Well, I appreciate that. You know, being the counselor for that specific district and overseeing sort of those neighborhoods there, it's interesting to hear you say that you've had residents come up to you and express, you know, favor for this project. I've actually heard the opposite almost nearly unanimously. And so as I look at the, again, the neighborhood recommendations, the emails that we've received and the input from the neighborhood overwhelmingly is in opposition to this height from 80 max cap to 125 or as you're proposing 115. So I guess the question around that to me is what prevents this project from being successful at the MUM max cap at 60, or in this case, the variance to 80 feet.

We just can't build the project that I think will be very successful at that height. We need the extra 20. Now it's 25 feet over 80. Am I right?

25 feet, 80 to 150.

35. To ensure that the condominiums are far enough above, it's expensive when you put this much infrastructure in the ground All of the parking for the Tremont residences are under the building. So it just doesn't pencil if we can't get the right density to marry up with the right infrastructure costs. That's the world in which we live today. It's expensive to build projects, this one in particular.

Thank you. I can understand and imagine how difficult that is, especially with rising costs. At the same time, you know, making sure that we do what's right sort of for residents and neighbors. For me personally, I find it hard to support this increase in max cap from MUM to MUH, considering the Again, unanimous, overwhelming denial of this from neighborhood associations and from the ZAC. But I appreciate your presentation for sure. I know some of the other concerns that were brought up related to an increase in traffic in a primarily residential area. And so there's parking, there's traffic. and some other concerns as well as we talk about hospitality. But I also feel like I'm monopolizing the microphone. So I just wanted to bring those concerns up. Welcome to follow up on that. Yes, Counselor Ronson.

David Silverstein, Jr., also with the Five Stone Group. I wanted to comment quickly on what you stated regarding neighborhood votes and it being overwhelmingly against and zero in support, those votes, and Kim, please correct me if I'm wrong, were specifically related to the original mixed-use high application. When we went back to the neighborhoods for mixed-use medium with the variance request, the votes did not reflect the votes that were taken in mixed-use high. I believe, Kim, you may have the numbers. Redmont Park took one vote on both the variance and the rezone versus voting on a variance, voting on the rezone. Highland Park took a vote on the variance and the rezone, and there were some that did support both the rezone and the variance request. As Senior also stated, most people and the loudest voices are typically those that oppose projects. There are some of the audience today here that do support the project, and I'm sure there are some that do not. So I just wanted to make that point of clarification. And if you look at the count from The original mixed-use high application to the mixed-use medium with the variance, the numbers were actually smaller in terms of those that showed up to those neighborhoods.

You're right. No, I do remember those votes, that vote at the Highland Park Neighborhood Association, that they were separated out between zoning, R6 to MUM, versus the second piece, which was the high variance.

I must ask one question. Were you aware of the, I call it, the Tremont Peace Accord that was negotiated, that we were asked to go down the MUM path to go get a variance because they didn't want MUH, and we did that. And no one came to support. But the individuals that assured me that they would are key players in your community. And you probably know who they are. They're key players in the community. When we sat in my conference room and I asked them both if I were to change my application to go this, can I count on your support for the variants? I don't look back. I look forward. But that's the context in which I stand before you today, trying to work with the neighborhood.

Well, thank you for that. I can't control or was not aware of conversations that might have had in conference rooms, but just looking at the votes as they are here for the neighborhoods and the zoning advisory committee. All right, I've monopolized plenty. Any other committee members? Sure, Mr. Chairman.

Yeah, I think you mentioned it you know that may have been 2018 that there was a Study of the city and the need for additional hotel rooms You know my understanding is that there's a significant amount of leakage out of the city of Birmingham To the hotel that's over by the zoo, the Bohemian. Grand Bohemian, yeah. Yeah, so I'm sure you've done some sort of market study. Can you talk a little bit about how much opportunity the city of Birmingham's losing to that hotel specifically?

It's not just to that hotel. It's to the Valley and Homewood. That's another... competing site. If you look at the back of the presentation, you will see that we project, we've had an economic impact study done. The Maynard Nexen firm did it. This project, over the next 20 years, will produce close to $80 million for the city and the county. Those are conservative projections because the current ADR that we're using, average daily rate, that's in our proforma, is a little over $400 a day. Or you can go to the Grand Bohemian, probably call them right now, and they're getting $700 a night. There is just a void, and it's been there since we started in 2018. And we've shared all this with Coriate. It's huge. It's huge. Now, the summit produces, on an annual basis, $18 million a year in sales tax revenue. I'm not suggesting that this is the next summit, but this is a project that will have very positive impact on the revenue stream, and God knows we need that in this city. Excuse my passion, but I am passionate, and I want to see Birmingham be the best it can be. I have no alternative agenda.

So I'm not a developer, but my basic understanding is that this project is going to cost X number of dollars to build, and therefore you've got to project that out amortize that out over so many years and basically figure out that you need the property to generate X number of dollars per square foot of the lot size in order for it to pencil out, right? And that's where... I would assume that you're saying, you know, with those additional height, that gives you additional space to lease. That's right. So it raises the dollar amount per square foot of the acreage that you'll be able to make the project pay for itself, right?

Correct. You sound like a developer. And the additional... 25 feet in height, gives those condominiums some breathing room above the expressway. You know, one thing that I failed to point out, brother, do they have the site plan?

Yes, it's in the package.

In your package, you have a site plan. May I approach the bench? M or H. The zoning allows for us to build a project within basically up to the property lines. Up to the property lines. That's what the James has done at the Western supermarket. It's a chunk. that is built out to the property line. What we have done is we're taking up 38% of the site versus we could build up to 80% on this site if it's more block. That's not the right way to develop this site. It needs to be nestled up the freeway and have some verticality versus building what you have at the James. I don't want to do that, and I don't think that's in the best interest of Redmont or Highland Park, that type of project on this site. So I failed to mention that, and it's the right plan. It's the right development plan. I think this was yours.

Another question that I had. So there's a couple of different renderings of the building and the packet. And one of those renderings indicates that the exterior cladding on the building is going to be brick. And that's to really kind of bring it in line with what you see in the kind of terminal vista with the Highland Plaza condos and the 2251 Highland Avenue. So that's, the cladding is going to be brick. Okay, gotcha.

Concrete structure cladded with brick. All of the condominium units are corner units. So you have a nice outdoor space for each of the units, probably five units to a floor. So yes, it's all brick.

Yeah. So tell me a little bit about your... YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU HAVE SUGGESTED COULD HAPPEN ON ARLINGTON UNDER THE EXPRESSWAY, THAT'S GOING TO INVOLVE, YOU KNOW, ALDOT TO SOME EXTENT OR TO A LOT OF EXTENT. SO HAVE YOU ENGAGED THEM IN CONVERSATION? YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF FEEDBACK HAVE YOU GOTTEN?

Extremely positive. We've had meetings with DeJarvis Leonard, who is the local head of the transportation office here, and I've known John Cooper, who heads Aldot. We are currently maintaining the parking lot under the expressway. They build bridges and roads, but they don't maintain anything. If John was here, he would agree. So we put new lighting underneath the expressway just to light the parking lot. We've repaved it. But yes, we have shared all these plans, not only with Aldot, but with James Fowler, to ensure that we were headed down the right path.

Councillor Quinn, you made a comment earlier about the creep of some of the Grand Bohemian Hotel as well as the valley and unfortunately my computer died but thankfully my phone has all my documents saved. We had a market study performed in 2025 and I'd like to just share some numbers in terms of occupancy rates. of the Grand Bohemian and the Valley as those compared to the hotels in the city of Birmingham. So Grand Bohemian had a occupancy rate between 80 and 84% as well as the Valley Hotel. And when you look at the Elyton, the Kelly, and the Redmont Hotel, the occupancy rate was south of 65%. So that clearly demonstrates that folks are choosing to stay in the Grand Bohemian or the valley outside of the city of Birmingham versus the quality of the hotels that are currently here.

That's why he's my partner. Yeah, the options here are limited to compete. They just are.

Thank you, Councilor Pro Tem.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Silverstein, I did hear Councilor Voss talk about a lot of parking. Seems to think that the parking is going to be an issue. My question is, all the parking is on-site, correct?

Well... Not all. We are leasing. There's a parking deck across the street where the Crescent is. And we've entered into an agreement to lease 50 spaces on the upper level of that deck. When I built that deck, the city parking code required you to build maximums. And that deck is way over part. So we will use the upper level of that deck for valet. And the residents will be, and some hotel guests will be under the buildings.

Okay, so it would be not off-site. People would access the deck and on-site parking, and the overflow would go over to the parking deck.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, thank you, sir.

Thank you. Pro Tem. Two last questions that I think we can go to vote unless there's any additional questions and they're simple. Um, these questions, uh, if, uh, this structure was, uh, to, to remain at mixed use medium, would hospitality still be on the table?

I'm sorry, counselor.

So if the, uh, if this does not move forward, this, uh, transition from, uh, this request from mixed use medium to high, uh, would hospitality still be applicable to the MU? Much different. I can't say for sure. I don't even want to think about that.

I didn't come here thinking about that.

Right, right. It would still be, as I understand, allowable. It would still be what?

The hospitality component would still be allowable as a mixed-use medium. Oh, it's allowed under the MU zoning classification.

And then secondly, as a mixed-use medium project, would the corridor improvements still be a possibility as well? Still be. All right, thank you. I don't have any further questions. Are there any other questions from committee members? Seeing none, there are no public comments for this session. Now, when we get to, and that's not unusual, that's typical for planning and zoning, but when we get to council, there will be opportunity for that. Yes, sir. All right, do we have a motion on the table?

Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we recommend approval to the full council.

Second.

I clarify, with the Q conditions and with the 115 height?

Yes. Let my motion reflect that. I do have a question, though. On the Q conditions... I'm a little concerned that we're queuing out child care centers. So, you know, maybe a minor point, but that's not what I would consider a nuisance. No. Or something that I would be concerned about.

If you want to strike that, you can.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So my suggestion is that we, out of the suggested cues, that we exclude C and F. C is the child care center and F is the accessory child care center. So all the other cue conditions would apply. at 115 feet. Second.

So we have a motion on the table for approval of this to mixed-use height with the acute condition of a cap of 115 feet and the removal of C, child care center, and F, accessory child care center? Right, from the proposed acute conditions, yes. All in favor? Aye. And I am in opposition, so I vote no to recommend that motion passes.

Thank you. All right. I appreciate you listening.

All righty. Thank you, sir. All right. To go back to agenda, I believe that is all we have today. Make sure. Old and new business. Any old and new business from committee? Seeing none, do we have a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Second. All in favor? Aye.