Board of Zoning Adjustment - Regular Meeting

Okay. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Um, I'd like to take the opportunity to call the September Planning Commission to order. If we can have roll call, please. Dana Camp here. Nonet Reese here. Vanessa Eckles here. Jennifer Loverren here. Joseph Astro here. Phil Chancellor here. Jennifer Stevens here. Oscar Mosley here. Walker Davis here. Thank you. Um, next up we'll have citizens communication. If you'd like to come and speak before us on anything that is not on tonight's agenda, please come forward. Now

you we rarely have people come for citizens, but yes, please sign in and you can do it after you speak. Um, and then five minutes if Yeah. Thank you. kind of us a little bit or is it sure please because I can't see out there. Is there a clock on the top right? There we go.

Oh, sweet. Okay, clock's ticking. Good evening, commission members. My name is Jojo Van Horn and um I just want to share some comments, reiterate some comments I shared with city council last week. So, my apologies in advance for the city employees for it's for whose it's redundant. Uh, but really more than anything, I want to express my gratitude for the work that y'all do for our community. Um, I I'm sure it's a thankless job with a lot of behind thes scenes work that I don't know a fraction of what you do. Um, so thank you first and foremost. My wife and I live uh outside of the city limits on the Waverly side of town, kind of halfway between Pear Tree and and Waverly. We moved here three years ago after spending some time during CO at Lake Martin. And it was during that time that we really for the first time started to frequent the Auburn Opal Leica community and really fell in love with everything we found here. And so when we realized that we can buy a modest house on some land and just be 15 minutes from kind of the, you know, the downtown core but have some peace and tranquility out in the country, we jumped on the opportunity in 2022. And since then, we haven't regretted it one bit. Uh, which somewhat brings me to why I'm here before you today. Okay, so as you can imagine, we were a bit surprised last month when we found that a large timber track bordering us, about 800 acres, which is owned by an investment company out of Atlanta, was in the beginning phases of working with some developers out of Nashville to do kind of a urban rural style, what I would call high density, mixeduse development that would be um with outside of the city limits, but within the planning jurisdiction of the city based on my understanding of how that works, which is just in last month or so, I've learned how all that works. And so, some neighbors and I were concerned. And while I'm a proud supporter of development rights and free markets and all those good things, um I also think there's a time and a place for everything. And uh my limited understanding of development on that side of town that's already been improved inside the city limits. Um

something of this nature that's outside of the city limits without without access to sewer, police jurisdiction, fire jurisdiction, uh city schools. Um could be potentially problematic on a dirt road. Um so some neighbors and I started to figure out like what could we do? And so I'm the one that had some interest and uh and motivation and some time to educate myself. So, in the last two months, this is the second planning commission meeting I've been to. I've been to two city council meetings. I've been to two county, three county commission meetings, met with a handful of folks, and it's really during that time I've been nothing but impressed with what I've observed and the caliber of folks, the professionalism, the generosity of time, and honestly, what I've like a lot of spirited debate. You know, I've been up here just in my short amount of time and I've seen hard questions being asked. I've heard thoughtful answers being given. Um, I've seen split votes on things. Um, I realize I'd be terrible at this job because I try to make everyone happy and it's like there's no way everyone's going to be happy in a lot of these situations. And so I don't envy the work you're doing, but I appreciate it. And I just want to express that appreciation and petition you um, as I'm sure you already do, to keep the best interest of the local residents and members of this community who have a long-term vested interest in the community at the forefront of your decision making if and when some this plaque gets before you for approval. um as opposed to the interest of maybe folks from out of town that are trying to profit. And I understand it's complicated and I know the system isn't perfect. Um perfection isn't the goal. Hopefully, it's just the commitment to slow, steady progress, working together, making improvements where they're needed while also protecting some of the elements that we love and want to maintain of our community. So, thank you for the work you're doing. Keep it up. Thank you for hearing a voice of a new guy like me to town. And if they continue to make progress, I'm sure you'll hear from myself and neighbors down the road when the time is right. So, thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else like to speak in citizens communication? Seeing no one, we will close citizens communication and move to old business. Um, zero, you're doing that.

Yeah. So, uh, thank you. So, Hickory Creek LLD, you guys will remember that last time that there were four items on the agenda associated with Hickory Creek. There was the annexation and then there was the two reasonzonings and the conditional use requests. Uh the annexation was approved by you all and the reasonzoning, the double resonings and the conditional use were tabled because the development agreement was not in place. Um in between the last meeting and this meeting, there's been significant progress on the development agreement. uh staff feels good about where we are with the development agreement and that uh this can now move forward for decision from the planning commission. Um I guess I'm happy to give you guys a refresher of the project, but I my recommendation to you all would be to reopen the public hearing. Uh have the applicant give a presentation and kind of overview of the entire thing and then we can kind of circle back. You guys can ask questions of staff. You guys can also ask questions of the applicant and then also um let the public speak during the public hearing as well.

Okay. So, all right. So, I will open the public hearing for Hickory Creek LD at this time.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Um, thank you all so much for having me today. I'm excited to kind of explain all of the nuance this project. My name is Hayes Eyeford. I'm with Sanford Group. Um, and I'm kind of excited to dive in here. So, let's see if I can get this to work. Do we have to change That'd be great. Okay, we're good to go. Perfect. Thank you all so much. Um, so like I said, I'm H Ziper with Sford Group. I'm going to kind of start off by just explaining this area of town. I think we did that in the last planning commission, but I think it's a good refresher to just run through it. So, this area generally does have rural character, I'd say, especially once you cross Chalk Creek. Um, and the good news to that is as someone who looked at these developments and I've done a lot of work on Sand Hill Road as well, the natural configuration of the land over there doesn't really allow for much more dense development past this point. So, Chiwaga Creek really serves as a great um dividing line. It's going to be nearly impossible, especially without city input, to get sewer past Chapa Creek. So, we have a really natural boundary to development there. And I think that's important because I do think it's important to preserve the rural area out there, but additionally on the west side of Chocolate Creek, we do see that there is a lot more density. And so I just wanted to point out in the immediately adjacent area to the property, you know, to the southwest, we have CDD zoning. Um that's the Greens that we're adjacent to. It's got 6.7 dwelling units an acre. To the north, we have two properties across Sand Hill Road. So we have Parkerson Mill subdivision um which is

zoned LDD and currently has 2.1 units an acre in it in its existing state and then the other property over there is NC9 um which kind of by right and once you lay out NC9 you end up with a density around 4.8 units per acre. Our goal here with this property is to really, if you zoom out and look everywhere south of 85 on this side of town, there is a severe lack of commercial infrastructure over there. There's not a coffee shop to go um meet someone at. There's not a small general store. There's not there's just an absence of those things south of 85. And so, as someone I'm actually moving on Sand Hill Road right here, this is something that could be very desirable to have on this area of town in a very tasteful way. And what we're going for with the commercial aspects of this project, which I'll get to in a minute, is destination light commercial. And so that's a nuance. We're not putting gas stations in or big box stores or anything like that. This is going to be more thinking the line of botanic uh kind of what Waverly downtown has done with Wildflower. Um those kind of things that we've already seen work really well in Lee County. And specifically, it would be great to have them in the city of Auburn. Maybe Oh no, now it's lagging. Hold on. Okay, back in control. Okay, so I just want to run through the amenities in this development really quick. So we're really trying to go for yes, we have smaller lots here. The goal is trade-off for those smaller lots would be a much higher quality amenity package to where individuals can actually experience the wooded areas that are being preserved and we're not just getting big clumps of unused space like how do we integrate the people in the development to where they can use the green space that's

being given to them. So community garden at the entrance dog park um kind of a a pedestrian thoroughare through the center of it we'll have a basketball court and then a central playground as well as the commercial areas. So these are just some renderings of kind of the vision of what these things will look like inside the development. Also, as a part of this PDD, we're proposing to dedicate 32 acres of this site to the city of Auburn primarily for the access to the the two main creeks that form the boundary on this site, which are Chalka Creek and Parkers and Mil Creek. This is some of the best section of Chocolate Creek in the city of Auburn. And I literally drove by there today and there was cars parked and people trespassing down there. Yes. But but enjoying the creek and it's this is a great opportunity to make this more accessible not only here but even further north. um by the greenway that we we've started conversations with the city that this creates a possibility for. So should this development be approved, we also developed Arborwood subdivision and then Bridal we didn't develop Bridal Creek, but in between this and Arborwoods easements have already been dedicated. This opens the door for the city to really bring in a significant greenway along probably arguably one of our best natural resources in the city of Auburn that's really only accessible right now through Chaffa State Park. This also would create just really great pedestrian opportunities, really great biking opportunities. Um, and it's very much in line with language from the 2030 comp plan stating, "The city's goal is to provide a more walkable city with a walkable downtown, sidewalks, and streets that are safe for pedestrians, and greenways that connect everyday destinations, and provide opportunities for interactions between people. That is very at the core of what this development is. And we believe that this is a really a great opportunity for the city of Auburn to continue to make it an even better place to live, not just for the people in this development, but really connect this area. There are over

2,000 homes within a mile and a half of this area that don't have access to things like this that people who live downtown can enjoy. And so I just think that that should be noted that that is a a big opportunity here um for the city. These are just a couple more renderings. That's actually a picture of Chaka Creek on our site on the top left with a rendering of what the greenway would look like. So, it's not just a madeup image altogether. Um, so these are from photos on site. This is the commercial area. It could tweak slightly, but generally this is what we're looking for. neighborhood ger, quick service restaurant, small event space, office space, um, and then small outdoor area, and then some pickle ball amenity area as well. We really want this to be an interchange between the vehicular traffic and the pedestrian traffic. So, think of a hub for people that can enjoy this area. Like, you can't just throw a greenway down in the middle of the woods. We have to have a way for people to access it who both live in the development and do not live in the development. And so that's the goal of this commercial area to really serve as that destination commercial and a hub for people who are going to enjoy the greenway and even traverse down from Mims Trail in these other areas to use these amenities. These are just some uh renderings. I'm going skip the sewer because I have 10 seconds. Um typical lots on the site. It's all in your PDD letter. We have um Am I on a timer?

Yeah. Yeah. So, so I guess kind of this was something that was recently changed, uh, just kind of at the council level and so we we've kind of been modeling that, but I guess um it's kind of weird since Hayes went first, but if you guys have questions that you guys would like him to kind of explain more, he'd be free to do that. You guys have to close the public hearing afterwards. So, so he can he can come back up and talk, but it would just be kind of in a question and answering afterwards for the applicant. So, I would say let uh other other people from the members of the public who would like to speak, let them speak and then ask his questions. I got through most of it. Thank you all so much. Thank you.

Okay, the public hearing for Hickory Creek LD is still open. If you have um anything you'd like to come forward and speak about that agenda item, please do so. Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing and commissioners, if you have questions for staff or applicant. Yeah. And so and so I guess kind of to to my point just kind of what we decided or what was decided just kind of at the council level there's specific aspects of Haz's presentation that you guys want more clarity on that you guys want to expand upon you guys want him to uh expand upon. Um you guys are free to ask him those questions and he's free to go into detail um outside of the clock now since they're just it's a question and answering um situation. I definitely would like to ask some questions

to the applicant to the applicant. Please go forward. Okay. Um, okay. I'll ask a couple of them to start with. Um, is the the commercial that you have there is that is that I don't know word that comes to mind is landlocked, but is the only access to that is driving through the neighbor the development?

Yes. So, that's that's a great question. That is a little bit unique about this project. And so typically in the planning theory world, if you let me get go that way for a second, is, you know, you want to be on the main corridor because you're looking for traffic counts, especially when you're looking at heavy commercial, right? We want to be on main corridors. We want people to drive by Starbucks so more people come get a coffee.

That's again not what we're going for here. We're really looking for an interchange between the vehicular traffic of Auburn. Give them a place where they have a hub to enjoy this natural resource. So the the places where you would typically if you if you think about pedestrian sheds is kind of the language if your pedestrian said shed needs a center and so that center could be along an intersection where you have the highest traffic counts or it could be around a unique natural resource and so in this case we would say we are our pedestrian shed is aligning with this natural resource this hub area to where people have access to these uh future greenway. So you're you're suggesting that that the traffic, if you will, is not just the neighborhood, which is what's closest to it, or people are going to walk to it.

So it mean they're biking or kayaking or on the on the waterway. Okay. Okay. All right. I'll buy that. It would and the traffic would be that traffic is included in our traffic study for all the traffic improvements that we're proposing. Um, you talked about so a big part of this is some sort of greenway access or whatever. So what what's that going to look like? I mean, you're are you suggesting that you're going to connect uh your development to Chiakla Park on a greenway? We have this could maybe chime in a little bit here from the city's perspective. We've had some conversations about this um over the last year.

Yeah. So, if you can go I guess that's that's that's probably in Haz's presentation, but um I I guess the Yeah, if you just want to go to that slide, we can Yeah, I can kind of talk through it. And is there some sort of u I keep as I understand it, the greenway plan has been all right. Desperate need.

Yeah. So, okay. So like Hayes mentioned there are several developments where there are they've already dedicated easements and it's been one of the things that we've kind of been looking at at the city of we have a collection of a lot of these easements these greenway ements have been dedicated for this specific purpose. Uh this chunk that's just kind of at the confluence of two creeks and just kind of with the I guess kind of the happen stance of Haze has done development down here. this would connect from this portion of this development all the way up to Chiakla. Uh as much I mean we've had conversations with Chwaka State Park about it and talking to their park manager just kind of about how it would function. Uh we haven't ironed out those details yet. That's something we're waiting back. We're waiting for feedback from them, but we've had a meeting with them uh about it. I I mean we've met about this several times of just kind of in theory this is something that makes sense. I I think from a execution standpoint I think that's what we need to iron out. But we do have there is a greenway and greenways master. There's a green space and greenways master plan that does have this corridor on there. Um and I guess like I said it's part of the exchange that

they would connect all the way to Chocolate Park. And so it's not something where he's just saying uh the easements are there. I guess we've had the ement layer. I could show it to you all. Just one of the questions um is right when you get on the north side of Sand Hill across from this development that part of the creek that so we have the east side of that side of the creek that part's incredibly steep. It's like 20 ft of fall kind of deal on the other side of the creek which they don't control would be more ideal. But that outside of that the rest of that does go all the way up and does connect to Chakla and is viable. It's just one of the things that we've been looking at. Um, how do we execute at some point? So,

good. That's good new news. Thank you. Um, I have a couple for staff, so I'll just wait. Anything else? Yeah, I I do. Um, you were talking about a destination in this event center. Yes, ma'am. Uh, can you uh explain what do you what what that looks like? Yeah. What does this look like? And then I've got a question about the amphitheater. Yes, ma'am. Absolutely. So, we've we've met with um a couple different people who specifically work in the hospitality area for Auburn University and ask what is the need and what is sustainable in the city of Auburn where where they booked out

forever and Red Barn is what came up and the the what came to me was if you build another Red Barn, it will be used and so the that is what we've modeled. the dimensions on that event space are exactly the same as Red Barn and that's what we're looking at doing. And so think um corporate meetings, um dinners, those kind of thing. It's not necessarily 500 person wedding. It's not going to be that size. So I think if I think we can all refer to Red Barn, I kind of know what I'm talking about as far as that size. Okay. Okay. So we're still going to have people driving in through the neighborhood. That's correct. Okay. All right. Now tell me about the amphitheater.

The amphitheater is just going to be a small outdoor stage and some picnic tables essentially for some live music. Okay. Because we'll have we have restaurants very not a thousand. Absolutely not. No. And and even what if I can go through Yeah. Let me show you. Please do. Yeah. Absolutely.

I have a zoom in of the commercial on here. Let me find it. So yeah, you can see those little dark black squares, right? Those are picnic tables for reference. So that's the size of this that we're talking about. And again, really the idea is leave a lot of this area wooded so that you actually feel like you're going out to be in nature while you can still have coffee and ice cream and those kind of things and interact with the trail system. Um the goal is not clear every tree, make everything one level. All all this will be stepped and they'll be you know really trying to create like I said a way to interact point. How do you feel about

I'm sorry. How do you feel about parking and how do we collectively as as the city feel about the parking requirements so that you are keeping people off of these out from in front of these people homes potentially?

Sure. Yeah. Absolutely. So generally the parking is in line with the city ress. Um we there aren't a lot of specifics around amphitheaters. Um but what what my argument to that would be is amphitheater will not be in use when office is in use. So we have a little bit of shared parking. I know Justice and I have talked a little bit about um kind of really thinking logically through this of when will this parking be used? And so I think we off the top of my head, it's in the letter I believe, but I think it's 106 parking spaces being provided and we feel that that's um going to be adequate to support these uses at their intensity level. Like for instance, the neighborhood grocery store is 10,000 square feet. That's much smaller than like a Walmart. Obviously, I think scale is really hard to grasp here maybe. And so that's more of a general store size.

So a couple questions that I have. So sir, the ger service, restaurant, etc. That's phase three of your development, correct? Yes, sir. And what kind of timing are you looking at? Um, number one, for that. And number two is do you already have uh tenants lined up?

It's it's very difficult to line tenants up prior to zoning being established, especially. It's very early on. We've talked with people and there's general interest. I can tell you that much. But as far as signed leases and those kind of things, that's a little bit further down the road. And yet that's a risk that our development group is taking on. So I would say we're highly incentivized to make sure that happens. Um and so we have not had that put in place yet. We also need some rooftops in the neighborhood before doing that and that's why we've listed it in phase three in our uh PDD letter. Okay. Yes, sir. But no no specific timing at this point in time. Not yet. No sir. Okay. Any other questions? Commissioners,

are have you given any thought to making an entrance that's closer to the this part with the event space and all of that so that people aren't having to drive through the neighborhood?

We have. So that's a great question. We would like to do that. The issue with that is we kind of have a choice here. We either have to align with Mil Creek and make that a clean transition point to where most of the traffic is going to be coming. we anticipate most of the traffic coming into the development or the issue is if we start shifting far enough away from Mil Creek where it's adequate uh distance between those intersections we start running into the bridge at Chwaka Creek and so that's why we kind of landed on this entrance at Mil Creek uh just felt like it was a safety a better safety situation and then avoiding obviously widening a bridge um which is a big undertaking so

that was also one of my questions I see that there's two entrances I I know that that is a super specific location for traffic that is going fast for sure. So aligning that I do feel like is is really our our best option personally. But is that part of this that we'll go through or later on from a condition is to kind of beef that up as a as it relates to both traffic studies and just safety in general.

Yeah. So, like I me like I mentioned, I think staff has kind of pointed out that there's been there's been interest or I guess some curiosity about requiring a third entrance just kind of on that far east side and looking at that and that would provide I guess in a different rendering there was access to the trail like a parking lot kind of similar to that but also would provide a more direct access to some of the commercial on this side and so that'd be one of the things that we'd either work out in DRT or I think the traffic sad back and so I was kind of talking about much more like the ingress ingress stuff, not necessarily um the need for a third access or not, but that'd be something that we'd probably figure out in in DRT and if it became a sticking point that that's something that we we'd require.

Okay. What about Lee County? I guess you can the coordination with Lee County. Yes, we've been in contact with Lee County and they are they are going to impose their requirements which are completely separate from ours, but that would be left and right turn lanes at the two access points. They will have to verify site distances maintained and all of the things in accord with what they typically do. So the additional entrance is not right in right out only on that. Those are both full access. Wow. Okay. Okay.

I kind of worry about the uh without that third entrance the I kind of I would be concerned of the viability of the commercial property. You know, if you're only taking people from the development and the people that walk in. I mean, not not trying to say anything bad about that. I'd love to walk in, but I'm not, you know, having enough traffic to support that much commercial. I I actually kind of see the other side of that as people coming from the Mims Trail Parkerson Mill area are going to go directly into the neighborhood at the light or whatever entry of that they they have a way to come in.

Yeah. And kind of one one of the things that that I mentioned uh on on Monday um I'm not I'm not familiar I don't know how many of you have probably remember Greenville before like the Swamp Rabbit Trail, but it was South Carolina.

Yeah. Greenville, South Carolina. There is a town north of Greenville, Travelers Rest, that was a really sleepy town. Not much there besides churches and the people who have always lived there. And then a bike trail went through it and then suddenly there were taco shops, bars, apartments went up and it was this massive um economic development bon. But I but I think also it it kind of engendered like this massive cultural change of just like where are all these people coming from? And they were all coming from a trail and they were like but there's some highway that goes through here and it was literally just because a bike trail went through it. Um, so I I I don't want to speak and say that I I think this would mirror that. I I but I do think that eventually the traffic and the people who would be hanging out and discovering this wouldn't they wouldn't all just be people driving by or people who lived in like neighborhoods like in proximity. Um trails trails do just kind of end up working as a magnet to people there long enough.

Thanks. Yeah. Any other questions commissioners? So with respect to water, sewer power, those kinds of agreements are in place. I guess if uh Chris, do you want to speak to the confidence of the agreement? I can't speak directly for Loa. They will have to meet city fire standard for for any type of flow volume for fire protection. Uh on the sewer side, we've got an agreement in principle. Scott Scott Scott's been working on the development agreement with the with the developer, but there is a cost sharing mechanism and a new lift station and and all of that stuff that kind of goes along with it. And that will be able to service all of this, including this commercial.

That's correct. Yeah. Um this I've got a kind of a I guess a staff question, but I don't see the right staff here. Um, so 32 acres being dedicated to the city. I mean, does the city can the city support that? I mean, you know, that's nice, but can you Yeah, man. I I joke with the parks and recck director that I I try to give her land like every other month and she just tells me no.

Um, so so uh so I I I think there's been there's been she so she's been she's kind of she's been a part of the conversations uh just kind of about what it would look like for the trail. And so we've talked with public works and and parks and wreck just because they construct the trail, maintain the trail, all of that. Um the trail side I don't think there's an issue with I I think there's a lot of skepticism when it comes to you know 32 acres is flood plane. There is some skepticism about that. But I guess there would be be a passive park and I think the the biggest thing that she had questions about was let's say we take it you know the trail head greenway and all that stuff. Um there's a lot of floodway on the site I think especially on the east on the western side and so then flood wave I guess for everybody in the audience the flood plane you can build things uh minimal disturbance kind of stuff you cannot build things in the floodway and so from a gazebo and then just kind of like what all could be done there um were kind of her biggest questions I will say I think there is a lot of apprehension about taking on flood plane just kind of take it on but I but those are things where that flood plane is an island and I guess like one of Uh, I'm struggling, but the it's like the 30 something acres that was up on North College. Um, that was a part of a development. Ashton Lakes, I think. So, no, no, no. It's it's it's south of that, but that was another one where that one's not a part of a trail. That one was an island of just flood plane. Didn't really make any sense for the city to So, this would be different and there's a greenway that would run through it. Um, but I do want to do want to stress on their side there is apprehension and I don't know if they would feel differently about it if there with the trail going through it. But I they have been a part of the conversations. Um, they would like to know kind of what would happen in that is why they kind of push for the parking. Um, but then like I said their biggest thing is just figuring out what they can and can't build from a gazebo standpoint, benches, trail maintenance and all of that just kind of with and staying out of the floodway. So short answer, they've been a part of the conversation. They're aware. It's something they're

decision. Yeah. Yeah. No decision. They're they're on board of having a trail that would connect to Chiwaka. I think for the larger vision is what they're kind of in support of.

So that kind of makes me another question. Um, you know, we we just approved and the city the city council just approved a uh proviso that allows rural commercial, you know, and we and the whole thing that was behind that that discussion and and why, you know, it made sense to us was that it would be built in accessible, you know, like ons at crossroads

places that that would you know have traffic be able to support and drive through and all that and then you you contrast it with with what we've got going here with this proposal. Um I got to say first I I I like it. My my issue is I don't know if I like it where we're doing it. It's you know and part of that is city I guess this is kind of a city question too a staff question. We have a lot of infrastructure needs in this city. Okay. And and so we're prioritizing where do we put those resources to get the best for the citizens. This is out there and it's going to cost a lot of resources. And is this the best decision to make now, you know, for this location, you know, where instead if we put the resources somewhere else, we'll get a greater good because it'll affect more people. We don't have unlimited resources in our city. So that's where I'm kind of I'm on that's kind of where I'm at.

Yeah. So So I think that was a layered mult multiaceted uh comments. So, so, so, so I think from a from a commercial standpoint and I and I think kind of the arterials, the current configuration that is shown, let's say he was just to subdivide this kind of create these roads and the commercial wouldn't be viable. They wouldn't be able to apply for that. They've all, this is all a state rule because these were not going to be collectors or or arterials. Um, and like it so it would kind of force the road frontage, but I guess kind of like, you know, hey, he's mentioned this is much more destination. and he's not really that he's kind of playing a different game doing different calculus on this one. Um, so the only means that he would be able to achieve it would be to ask for the reasonzoning, um, ask for the PDD associated with it. Um, kind of in the face of the future land use plan, in the face of, you know, just kind of the infrastructure needs. Um, I guess

Well, so that's that's another thing, the land use plan. Yeah. Yeah. And I guess kind of doesn't that does at this point the way we've just updated it, it doesn't

Yeah. And I guess so. Yeah. And so the and he but he touched on that that as well that the infrastructure I guess the real cut off on utilities is east of Chakaco Creek and I guess is on the west side of it. Um and so the I guess I don't I don't really want to speak to that but the I guess as far as the allocation of resources infrastructure upgrades that is one of the things in the city of Auburn we do not subsidize people's infrastructure upgrades for development. developers will tell you that they build the roads that if there are any upgrades that are required that are signified needed in a traffic study, they have to do them to move forward. It's not something that the city will participate in. There's cost sharing and other things where there it might be a benefit to the city to take something offline and build something bigger to take care of an entire sewer shed. That is different. But from a road standpoint, if the road needs to go from two lanes to four lanes, that is something that you pay for. If the road needs your development needs turn lanes, that is something that you pay for. that that's not something that um we're never going to subsidize a private development and that's not what the development agreements do. So, understand.

So, uh I've got a question that leads me to this question about roads, streets inside this thing. Now, the subdivision itself, the houses, the town homes, the town homes have alleys, so that's private.

Yeah. And so, that that that's been a that's been a prominent discussion that that we've kind of had had with Hayes. So initially from a design standpoint, he wanted to move this through from a PUD side to take advantage of unlimited exchanges so they could subdivide off alleys. Even conceptually, like I said, I've I don't know if I've mentioned this to y'all, but I've I have floated this idea internally to staff about how they felt about subdividing off alleys. It's very lukewarm response. Um there was not a lot of excitement about it. So even from a design standpoint, I don't know in the if the execution would have been there on staff side to ever find support for that. And so on the question about if the roads would be public or if the question is if the roads would be private, some of the town homes, I mean they might shrink from the rightway necessary side, but I mean I think they would probably still in they wouldn't be alleys, I guess, is what I'm what I'm communicating. They wouldn't be alleys. And so some of them, you know, as far as fronting off of things and taking rear access, we've done that in other places, but it wouldn't be raw just subdividing off of alleys. That's not a that's not something that has been communicated to me that we're comfortable with as a as a staff yet.

I don't think well so what's the you know you had a good explanation for you I understand the fact that you know the city doesn't subsidi subsidize developers. So what sort of you know with to me I I still believe this is a stretch this much this far out what kind of impact is that having to the city I think the biggest thing would be if you want to go to the if you want to go to the prox map and within the within the other one well there's already

Yeah. So that massive chunk that's not in the city, um that would connect a lot of that stretch of sandill road and that might be that might increase one of the roads that the county tries to give us when this county settles up at the end of the year. Um but I mean there's a ways past that now with some of the several annexations. I mean there's not big I guess the there there are there are bigger neighborhoods coming further down the road uh to the east of this and there are existing developments that are east of this as well. Um, so I mean, but San Road I think for a lot I mean looks really long on a map. Looks even it feels even longer when you're out there. I think it's about six miles in its entirety, but it would put this western portion of Sanhill Road um probably predominantly in our ownership at some point in time in the near future. And then I guess the adding of I mean if you want to go to the if you can go to the next slide. Yeah. So the call out just kind of like the $195 units essentially is kind of what they're asking for from the town home units to the single family houses. Um as they would have to run more buses down there. But like I said, all of this would be internal. It's not like they'd be getting picked up on Sand Hill Road,

right? And there's already kids out there across the street. Yeah. And further down Yeah. Yeah. And to the east of Sand Hill, too. So it sounds like the big hit is um the county saying It's yours. Sand Hill Road is yours. Yeah. I guess what what's the portion of Sand Hill that's ours now? Sand Hill Road. Our portion currently stops at the western side of this property at that bridge. Yeah. So the bridge is ours. It is not. We if we take over this section, we would also get that bridge, but we would not get the the bridge at the eastern side. The bridge over

and then we're concerned about the bridge. haven't looked at it. So that that's not something we've inspected at this point. And and when you say you you you'll get it, what is how much of that? Just to the end of this property or all the way down Sand Hill Road till the end of it? So our agreement um our inner uh governmental agreement and also state law when both sides of the road are annexed into the city continuously then we take over that portion. So, at this point, it might go I think I think if I remember correctly, it would stop at this property. Yeah, it's pretty it's pretty sawtooth down on Sanho Road about what's in, what's out.

Okay. Any other questions for anyone? Yeah, I guess I did just want to um since I didn't kind of kind of give an overview, but I guess the 195 units, there's the I think 73 town homes. Um but so there's the town homes and there's about 31,000 ft of commercial. Um like I said, so the existing mutual land use is rural. Uh what they're asking for is to reszone to LDD um I I guess on this one and then they'll reszone to the PDD which would then allow for the viability of commercial and the mixed use. And then there are the conditional uses that are associated with it. And so the so the conditional uses are just kind of what they've outlined of the neighborhood grocery store event space. Uh they have a church listed as well. I think there's also um a brief mention of a senior living facility in in their plan as well um that that we'd have to talk about. And so there is some nuances to the conditional uses. We can talk about it more if you guys um if y'all want to move forward with it uh on the conditional use portion of this. But but I just want to outline what LDD is. And so the performance of it uh conventional is I think two dwelling units an acre and then the performance is five dwelling units an acre. It's slightly less dense than DDH which I know is what people oftent times come in with. And uh it would that would that's why they're asking for the they're asking for that so they can do the neighborhood shopping center. And so normally that would allow them up to I think it's 150,000 feet or 100,000 feet of commercial but they're only doing the 31,000 ft. Like I said, this is not trying to capitalize on traffic. This is trying to c this is trying to capitalize on a place being in proximity to a natural resource and destination theme like commercial um just kind of in this location.

Yeah. The the question that I struggle with is uh you know given the proposed density of LDD um you know what is compelling about um you know recommending uh to city council that this go forward versus you know what we just approved which was you know rural um you know

yeah and I guess that that wasn't so this wasn't contemplated in the future land use plan and so in in the future land use plan like I said there's a lot of things that we looked at kind of corrections there are places where there were big intersection changes where infrastructure was suddenly possible in different places. Uh this wasn't contemplated in that. I think the position uh like I said Hayes has just kind of been on the fringes kind of waiting on the PUD. Um, but I guess from a density standpoint with this the I think it's right under three and like I said, I mean they can achieve five in theory,

but just kind of with the flood plane and then just like you wouldn't be able to achieve that. And I think that's the thing about the max density. Oftent times the what you may be aiming for cannot be achieved if you max something out from a density standpoint. So, you know, it's just the commercial that they're looking at here and the the residential just kind of comes in lesser. And so I think from a utility side and just kind of everything around it to say on you know all of this is just possible. I think that the engineers are always like well I mean we can always find out a solution. It's just kind of y'all's decision if it's something that makes sense if it's something that y'all think the city is ready for from an infrastructure standpoint. Um and like I said staff can always engineer a solution. It's just up to y'all to determine if it's something that y'all think we're ready for.

Can you roll back to the prox map? Yeah. fix. So that's all LD up there and on both sides of

So So here's you know what's really this is really a tough nut to crack for me. Um we're walking into you know as we go through the next couple items here. We're going to get one at the end there that's going to talk about a PDD and it's going to um basically fly in the face of our current land use plan. So, you know, um that's to me that's a major impact. Um you know, we have a plan. We have that plan for per for a purpose and it, you know, it doesn't support this project here. Um I'm not sure if I have a good answer, you know, to that, but that's that's a concern of mine.

Yeah. I think I think one of the things that I that a lot of us asked for with the update was to figure out if we had places like this where there was infrastructure available and the possibility that there could be development there. Agre and and this one just by whatever means did not didn't get it didn't didn't show up. Okay. There were means though and I'd like to know that there was a reason why that that decision was made. Why was what was the reason for that decision? So why though why this was omitted?

Yeah. So, so the future lady's plan, I guess by the time it was presented to y'all, I guess by the time that like this project came forward, the future landies plan was kind of already ready to go to council. I think we'd already had several I want to say we already had several work sessions on it where we talked about it um where it was virtually done and I think this came in towards the end of that process and I and SL and I I think I I did put it on like hey I think we should talk about this and it was this is new we have not talked about this everything else people have been prepped on people have contemplating that this would be a deviation for kind of where we were for an expansion to consider Um, if there's to be a consideration on this, then they can ask for a reasoner, and that that's fine. I mean, that's that that's how several others are handled. Um, it it's not that it shouldn't be contemplated. It just is going to just be contemplated in a different form such as this one. Um, so that was kind of the position. Like I said, it was kind of kind of came in at the very end of it, at the tail end of it. And then I think also on the other side of this is just kind of the era that we're in in Auburn. development is creeping out to places that we never thought there would be development. Like, you know, now there there are neighborhoods on Sand Hill Road and Sand Hill Road is a good 30 minutes from town just kind of depending on and there isn't a good direction to go. It's really long and they're only you can't get through the middle of it. Um, same thing with Society Hill and Moors Mill. Same thing with up on Farmville. Uh, that was just one of the things of when Donahghue Ridge was originally out there by itself. it was green all the way in between from Candom Ridge to um Suge and then now you know just kind of in the near future there's not going to be much green in between there anymore. Um so I I think that's just that's just kind of the error. So the answer to that is that this kind of came in on the tail end of the considerations where there was already a lot of technical analysis of the other sites that were put forward um of the other places where the optimal

boundary was but from the uses that should have been upgraded there was already a lot of technical analysis and that was largely done um when this project came forward and the position was that the project needed to um just kind of ask for it on like on its own and a singular request such as this. I I got to believe that had Oh, go ahead.

Because if I could add just just to touch on that. Um, Justice, I mean, in some of the places we've looked at and, you know, where there's infrastructure in place and it's it's part of an existing sewer shed where you could extend the gravity sewer and drain it. Um, you know, those made sense to think about, you know, where we had uh road future road networks planned, anticipated, you know, those those areas made sense to anticipate, you know, some potential future developments where essentially you're kind of infilling areas. This this looked more like an ex extension of of an area and and reaching out because you're having to build a new lift station even though it's adjacent to some other things. And then it's um you know we're also a neighbor to this and have a sewage treatment plant across the street and uh you know that we don't get a lot of odor complaints until people move down near that. So um just that's just typical for things. But yeah,

you know after listening to the the discussion here tonight and having a good explanation by the representative, I got to believe that had this come in in a little bit different timing, it would have been included. Yeah, you know, um anyway, just a comment. Okay, so I echo I echo that point.

Okay, so currently there are three item agenda items associated with this. The first one is from rule to LDD. We've done the whole presentation for the all three, but there are public hearings for each. Um, so if we're ready, commissioners, I'd like to to move forward with a motion on agenda. Motion to approve KRZ 2025-012. Second. I have a motion and a second rule to LDD. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? No.

Thank you. The next agenda item is number two, Creek, you like to say. Yeah. So, it's the PDD. Yes.

Yeah. So, same thing. Uh just kind of the it's 195 dwelling units. Um it's on roughly I guess 68 68.5 acres at the intersection of Mil Creek and San Hill Road. Go to the next one. Um, so I'll so I'll wait till the conditional uses. I just kind of talk about it, but the PDD is just kind of what would make the what would lock them in at this number. Um, the master development plan like you guys can see. Uh, that's still kind of open to comment and to subject to change is kind of what the what gets implemented from the traffic side and also the DRT part of thinking through if another entrance would be required. then also parking spaces for the amenity associated with it um for ease of access to not disturb the neighborhood.

Will you talk about the positives of an overlay PDD for this?

Yeah. So if you want to go to the to the layout layout. So on a similar case that not a similar case but on a case where there was a PDD uh PDDs lock in the uses. So there and if anything were to come back, there would either be an amendment or there'd have to be a conditional use underneath that um for uses that were not established at this point. So the beauty of the PDDs is that it provides certainty of what can be developed. It's not like Hayes can come back and say, "Hey, well, you know, I'd like to just do a massive 200 unit MUD." Um he wouldn't be able to do that. That'd be a major amendment um that he have have to get. So this will lock them in to um substantially this same master development plan and also from a unit count. The unit count is locked in. So people can change units and go from muds or town homes to single family. You cannot reduce your single family number to increase your number of non-s single family homes. And so any if they did want to if they did want to go from they did want to do that they would need a significant amendment to do that. So the beauty of PDDDs is that like I said it's a contract with the city pretty much of what can be developed. It assures us of what's going to be developed. It also gives the developer um assurances of what they can build and move forward and that way they can establish kind of their phasing tenants etc and move forward with that.

Perfect. Thank you. Um this does require public hearing. We'll open this now if you would like to speak to the PDD for Hickory Creek. You can do it after.

Hi. Uh, my name is Dustin Norris. Uh, address is 1600 Sand Hill Road. Um, I'm going to try not to ramble, but want to, uh, touch on a couple points. Uh, Mr. Phil had brought up that, uh, or or or from what I interpreted just the future land use. Uh it just the proposed development just didn't align. Uh there are several uh proposed developments. So I I actually own uh right across the street. I'm purchasing a lot from Chwaka Ridge subdivision uh which is currently being uh constructed. Uh the the lots were were uh required three acre minimums. Um, you know, again, uh, to me, the the proposed development just doesn't align with some of that. Um, and and as far as the the infrastructure getting to it, I understand that a lot of that is paid for on the private side. Um I I you know may be considered biased uh considering I'm I'm uh you know uh do plan on building a property across the street but uh you uh Auburn uh middle school high school grad uh been here uh basically my whole life. Uh we do have to understand the impacts that go into developing u you know something of this nature. Um, and then the the I I'll tell you, uh, I've been monitoring the property that I plan on building my home on right across the street. the where the creek bends. Um just east of the southernmost um the southernmost uh dwellings that you see on the the plat there. Uh the piece of property I plan on building on has about a uh probably a 500 foot uh

100year flood. about a month and a half after I purchased the property, uh I had about 4 foot of water, about 450 ft uh of the property. Uh I I'll just uh again, no civil engineer. I'm a general contractor, but no civil engineer by any means. I I'll just say I would have concerns about uh some of those properties flooding in general. Um and yes, we do see I think at the at the last uh hearing um several of the San Hill residents spoke on just the traffic uh coming across the bridge and and just the the natural way that the it just necks down in that general area. Um you know and and Mr. Justice spoke on or or or someone spoke on the the I think somebody said trespasser or you know we see fishers uh fishermen park on the bridge or alongside the bridge every day uh being down at my property against the creek and again the the aren't trespassers by any means. Um just walking the creek inside the creek uh the the the I think the greenway is a is a positive in a lot of ways. uh connecting uh Chawaka State Park, but it is going to invite uh a whole different um you know I think number of people to the area. I I just I I think as the bridge is positioned and the flood plane um I think the bridge itself flooded uh in December of 24 uh or it was December 23 uh but it it does flood every every year every other year. Uh makes it impassible uh that only going to create that much more congestion in the area. uh

especially with the uh with the traffic count this proposed development is inviting. Um and again and I I just I guess generally speaking uh based on the last public hearing with several of the other Sanhill residents, we just think that it's unlike anything else that's uh been out there to date. And uh and again with the the future land use uh idea and plan just doesn't really align. So thank you. Please sorry.

That's okay. Anyone else like to speak to this agenda item?

Seeing no one, we'll close this um public hearing to that. I since we have approved the LDD, in my opinion, putting the PDD in place is a benefit to this project that keeps it not just from going ary. Yeah, that's correct. Yeah. And I think if my position would be if you were going to if you're going to support the reszoning, you should support the PDD to lock to lock the numbers in just because the the math on it is about from a performance development. Like I said, it you can't realize it, but it's about 60. It's nor it's it's about 340. So, right. Yeah.

Right. You just don't want to just let that you don't want to let that out there. Um commissioners, motions, questions, comments. So, there's a question that I have. Um so, there were a couple of uh institutional uses that staff recommended that uh not be included. Can you speak? Are we on conditional use or are we on the PD in there? Yeah, it's in the PD. That's that's the thing in in the next one. Okay. Should we wait for that one? Yes. So, my question was is uh third.

Yeah. So, okay. So, so, so would you guys like to talk about the uses now? Well, I mean they're on this one. Yeah, they're at the PDD. So,

okay. So, all right. So, Okay. So, there is So, there's a neighborhood shopping center designation uh that allows a host of uses underneath it. I think the recommendation in the staff report is to remove that and then go back and add the event space and the neighborhood ger. Um, but there's also concerns there's development standards of the senior living facility that would not be met because this would not be on arterial. Um, and also the neighborhood shopping center also the development standards for that also aren't met.

Um, so those are things that y'all can carve those caveats out. Um, go back and add them in. Um, but it was just one of the things like SAP want to make you aware of the development standards associated with with each of these uses. And so you guys can um if you guys wanted to and I guess the other thing if you just wanted to leave them in the option with that is that there would be an automatic waiver associated with these that you guys would then have to I guess you guys wanted to make it a condition that you know he'd have to come back and get a waiver for these to when he actually came time to fill it he he would have to so so I mean there's several options that you can kind of move forward with. So, you can either list the it's the take out the host of uses from the neighborhood shopping center because it doesn't meet the special development standards. Same thing for the senior living facility. Or if you want to move forward with them, um they're just going to have they were they would require the waiver associated with them.

Is that right, Amber? Yes. Well, it's not just the nursing home. It's for all the institutional uses. There we go. And the main development standard is Can you can you speak into the mic? Sorry. There we go. The main special development standard is that the institutional uses are to front an arterial or collector, which is not possible. Um, and the neighborhood shopping center has to front an arterial or um arterial and collector. And these uses can be within a PDD without the neighborhood shopping center.

So if we take them off the PDD but and put them under conditional use or just if they had a school interested they just need to come before us. Yeah. So far away. Right. Right. Okay. take them off. Take institutional neighborhood shopping center. Okay. Okay. So then I guess you guys So whatever motion you make um if you guys are going to motion in the affirmative uh then it would be a motion uh removing the institutional uses and the neighborhood shopping center. Okay.

But it doesn't stop them from coming back and asking for those in the future. Correct. Great. Shouldn't we remove those first before we got to do it in the motion, right? Yeah, you do motion. You need to move to get the case to the vote first. Then you would need to amend the motion to remove those. I move to approve RZ 202516. Second. I have a motion and a second for a PDD overlay. All those in favor? I think we need We need to amend.

Yeah. So, so I need an amendment, a motion to to amend. Case RZ202501. What way? To remove um the institutional uses and neighborhood shopping center use. Second. I have a motion and a second on an amendment to the PDD overlay removing neighborhood shopping centers and institutional uses. All those in favor? I. Great. Perfect. Now to move to the original motion to approve the PDD overlay for Hickory Creek. All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? I'm going to abstain. Okay. You have that. Okay. Thank you. And moving on to the third agenda item dealing with Hickory Creek, we have conditional use requests.

All right. So, it's kind of what we've covered. So, it's the institutional uses, the office use, commercial and entertainment uses, um, and the commercial recreational use, and the neighborhood shopping center use. And so you guys just motioned to remove all the institutional uses and take out the neighborhood shopping center use. Um, and then like I said, we so guess they can come back and ask for this under conditional use and they would have to ask for it with a waiver associated with it. And also you may want to add back in the event center and grocery store, right? Because the neighborhood neighborhood shopping center, grocery store, neighborhood store. What are the what's the we would

technical word for us? It's grocery store. Okay. Yeah, because he's still bound by the square footage of of commercial. So, they can't use they can't like one they can't they they could use it all up, but they they wouldn't do that. Use up all the square footage associated with it for one store.

Okay. Um, conditional uses uh do require public hearing. So, I'd like to open that now at this time for conditional use approval for Hickory Creek. if anyone would like to come forward and speak to this. Seeing no one, we will close the public hearing. We will need to move to approve and then amend the motion. Commissioners, move to approve KCU 2025-046.

Second. I have a motion and a second. Move to amend case CU 202546 to remove institutional uses and neighborhood shopping center and add in event center and grocery store. I have a motion and a second on an amended motion to remove institutional uses, remove neighborhood shopping center, add event center, and add grocery store. All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? Now to the original motion to approve Hickory Creek conditional use. Motion. Is this with comments? Always always always. That's what I made. Motion's been made. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. Okay. Okay. That is all we have under old business. Consent agenda.

Now I would like to move to the consent agenda. um packet meeting packet minutes and regular meeting minutes as well as final plat for Vintage East. Move to approve the consent agenda. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Wait, wait, wait, wait. I'm sorry. Don't you need to Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Did There we go. Do we need to remove Technically, you need to remove that one off the consent agenda? Okay. Yeah. Um, I need a motion to remove the final plat for Vintage East from consent agenda. Sorry, Madame Chair. I need to recuse myself. Yeah, there we go. I went too fast.

I need a motion to remove. So, we got the consent agenda. Oh, motion to remove the uh case E 2025 20 unless you just recuse from all of consent agenda items. Okay. No. Off. Yeah. No. No. So, okay. So, pull vintageies off the consent agenda. Vote on the consent agenda, then vote on vintage East, and then we'll go get So, I need a motion. Commissioner Lover to approve the consent agenda. I need a motion to mot FP2025-021 from the consent agenda. Second. All those in favor? I.

Any approve? Any opposed? Thank you. Now, consent agenda. Now, no, you need to consider that one first and then then go back. Go back to consent and we can invite her back. All right. Sorry. A final plat for Vintage East development. This does not require a public hearing. All those in favor? We need to I guess you Yeah, we can we can talk about it if you guys like. Yeah. All right. All right. So I John that whole business business really took care of Yeah.

from whatever. There's not much preparation that went into this besides my staff report that y'all have. Um this presentation that is um this is a final plat approval request for a 31 lot performance residential subdivision. Um it is located just north of EUD and Gate uh west of Gatewood just south of the Auburn Flats Apartments and u just east of the existing vintage development. Like I said, it's um 31 total lots with 26 of those being town homes and five of those being open space common area lots. Um the largest open space lot being this one over here uh to the east.

I can answer any question y'all may have. So, we went from 30 lots in the preliminary plat that we approved in July to 31 now. Yes. Okay. Yeah. The road situation um got resolved over time with how they were subdividing off the private access drive.

Yeah, that's a great qu that's a great catch. So, if they would have added, let's say they would have added a residential lot, that would have been the issue. Um, and then we would had to see a new one. But this, with this just being the open space and the the road essentially, just kind of you guys remember um from the private drives, this is how we do them. Um, that they carve them up. Uh, we we prefer that they that they don't be on the that that the road is not on its own lot. Uh, that is just a part of everything else. And then that it is there's an access easement going through it. And we do have the um parking spaces for the town homes on the lot on the town lot.

Yes, they'll be required too. And um we'll look at that one more time in DRT and through the building plans that get submitted. So that'll be guaranteed. Okay, perfect.

This is a final plat request. It does not require public hearing. Commissioners, if you would like to make a motion. Move to approve SP 2025021. Second. I have a motion in a second. All those in favor? I. Thank you. We still have to approve the We're going to let Miss back. Yes.

Back so we can do the consent. Consent agenda at this moment now just cont consists of the packet meeting minutes and regular meeting minutes of the August planning commission. Does not require public hearing. Move to approve the consent agenda. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I. Thank you. New business. Oh man. Good.

Man, a lot of talking tonight for me. Okay. Centercom. So this is the action request is a recommendation to city council for conditional use approval for commercial and entertainment use. All others, excuse me, gun customizer type one FFL use. Um I said I I have not had a lot of dealings with FFL requests in my first I think 18 months or so. And then over recent months I've gotten a slew of them uh to locate all over the city for different purposes. um people representatives for really big businesses, people going into business for themselves. Uh this is a similar situation. Um people who were doing prospective uh site locations that didn't that never made it to you all. Um so the big distinction here is the type one FFL use. Uh type one is just would allow them to transfer guns. So, pretty much kind of like we talked about, if you order a gun online, you cannot have it Amazon or Prime delivered to your house. You cannot do that. Um, what you can do is identify someone who has a federal firearms license that the gun gets shipped to them and then you go to them and you pick up your gun. They transfer your gun to you. Uh, that is one of the things that this this would be possible for. So, I guess just kind of how FFLs work. Um, I guess people I asked the applicants here, he can talk about it a little in a little more detail, but what happens on my end is I get a call from the ATF. They say, "Hey, I got an application for a federal firearms license." Um, does the zoning allow for this person to do that? And so, type one is um critical here because there's type seven that allows gun manufacturing. And as far as the law is concerned, the gun part of the gun is the lower. If you are assembling the lower, it is gun manufacturing. Gun manufacturing kicks this to a place where it has to locate in industrial. It

cannot locate in CDD. It cannot locate in the commercial support areas. It must locate in an in anywhere where industrial is, which would then be conditional use, etc. Um, so talking with the applicant, talking with the ATF, downgrading this to a type one FFL. Um, that is what would be appropriate for this location at 1937 Watley Road. This is a space if you want to go to the prox map. Um I don't I don't know how it's kind of just a quasi industrial area over there just kind of right behind the mall. Um there's all sorts of uses over there. I mean we've approved car wash places. There's automotive tinninging. Um there's also uh barber shops. I mean there's just a whole host of things over there. Um so it really kind of fits in uh just kind of from a gun customization standpoint. But like I said, this what triggers this is the ATF calls me, ask if the zoning is allowed, and then we kind of work through um if a conditional use is allowed or if they can or can't do it at all kind of deal. Um but then also I I guess the all other uses. So if it is not explicitly listed in the use table, um it is or I guess if it then it's not allowed or it gets kicked to all other uses. So, when we do have something that is listed, right, and it doesn't have a P or C by it, then it's not allowed at all. Um, so like when you guys look at NC, the only thing that has anything in it is single detached single family housing. All the other ones are not considered, they're not conditional, they're not all other uses. Um, this isn't contemplated at all from a use standpoint. And so those uses that are not listed, those get kicked to all other uses. And so the only reason that gun manufacturing isn't allowed is because explicitly it must go in the industrial area. So, that's the only thing. It is a type one federal firearms license, uh, gun customization, and the applicant is here to speak on behalf of that and kind of answer any questions that you guys may have.

Doesn't a type one federal firearms license also allow you to sell guns? Yes. Yeah.

This does require public hearing. If the applicant would like to speak during the public hearing, please come forward. I'll open that now. Good afternoon, commissioners. Uh my name is Austin Bridges. Uh started talking with Justice early this year. Um it's not a new business. I had been in business probably three years now. I was in Opalikica um in an industrial district uh where I carried a type seven FFL. Um and then after discussing and all that, I had to renew it. I believe it was in April. Um, and I'd already kind of gone into the change of business location thing to Auburn and trying to find locations and stuff like that. Uh, I let my license lap because we were going to hopefully um, get this squared away. Um, and this kind of ran into the type one verse type seven um, stuff. So, if y'all have any questions.

So, was your original attempt to This is the This is public hearing. We're after calling back after public hearing.

Sorry. Um but yeah, so my original intentions, um I built customized order stuff online. Uh it was pretty small scale. I don't keep inventory on hand. I don't have a really a retail spot. Nobody ever shows up. Um my license my obviously with the license everything. My address is online. So if you order a firearm online, I pop up as an FFL. You can choose it. I get contacted. Um I get in contact with you when your firearm shows up. you come pick it up, run all the background um checks and all that, and then you take it home like every other uh gun store. But I do a lot of duck hunting down South Louisiana. Um I got into the customizing side, doing Cerakote and other paints like that um to customize some stuff. It's what I've kind of got into lately. Um, but going back to what Justin was saying, ATF considers the lower piece of the pistol, AR, anything style gun, that is what they care about. That's where it's serialized. That's what they really um really care about. Um, so that's what is needed um for when transferring stuff. That's what they care about. So, under the ATF's law, if I I don't know if y'all are very custom firearms or y'all's background in that. Um, but anything under say specifically for an AR, anything below 16inch barrel is considered a pistol. So, you have to have um there's different age groups for that that can buy and purchase it. Your license, you have to be in the state to purchase the pistol that your license is. Um, it's different than long gun. um shotguns and stuff above 16 inches. You don't have to have the same state ID that you purchase it in. You could be 18, you don't have to be 21. Um stuff like that. Uh kind of rambling now. Um

but if you change a firearm from a rifle to a pistol, that is considered manufacturing. And it goes into the customization side of stuff. So, if I buy all these different parts and put them together and put my company name and logo and serialize it myself, that's manufacturing. I don't have big CNC machines milling out lowers and all that stuff. It's just assembling. Um, but going back to that wasn't a huge part of my business. It's just some people like different things. Um, but after speaking with Justice, instead of that being a type seven to a type one, we can reduce some of my business models and just match what is needed um to continue for that. So,

thank you. Um, please sign in when you can. Would anyone like else like to speak at the public hearing on Cinder? Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing. Commissioners, do you have questions for the applicant or staff? I'll just move to approve CU 2025027 Center. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. Welcome.

Okay. Uh so this item is a conditional uh use request for an industrial use um an automotive manufacturing facility in the industrial zoning district. Property is located at 760 West Veterans Boulevard in the Auburn Technology Park North. Uh previously the property did uh come to the planning commission in 2004 to get approval for up to 90,000 square feet um conditional use approval for up to 90,000 square feet. this uh 24,000 square feet expansion um is over that 90,000 square feet which is why uh conditional use approval is required. I can answer any questions if you have them about this item.

Was there the idea of the expansion to begin with? Like did they think that that was happen? I believe so. So the lot the setbacks all the space is there and and all that will be addressed at BRT. Okay. Any other questions for before we open the public hearing? Thank you. This does require require a public hearing if anyone would like to speak on conditional use approval for an expansion of an ind industrial use. Seeing no one, we will close the public hearing. Commissioners, move to approve CU 2025-047.

Second. Have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. Excited about the expanding businesses. That's positive. All right. So, our last item tonight is Oh, I was already on it. So, this is a recommendation for conditional use approval of a performance residential use. Um, specifically we're looking at a 8unit multiple unit development.

The location of this proposed site is 406 North Donghue Drive. Um, kind of just north of the Auburn Recycling Center, kind of in that area. Um, and it is located in the corridor redevelopment district west. So, kind of taking just an overview of approximat West. um kind of just the surrounding makeup uses of those areas uh is single family and multif family residential. So that's kind of what you have going on as well as the recycling plant. This just kind of gives you an overview of a future land use map for the city of Auburn. As you can see, we have a future land use of mixed use 2. Um kind of just wanting more high use development, commercial types um as deemed necessary by the 2018 uh plan as well. So, this is currently looking at a site plan of the proposed development. Um, the current lot has been demoed back in late 2024. So, it is um currently vacant. You can see here that there is two different buildings. One right here housing six units and then a separate one right here housing two units. The proposed parking for this development is 43 spaces. Um that was just the measurement given based on the calculations of beds which is 32. Um and then we do have a elevation rendering. This is looking at the east view. So this is not the view from a frontronting north donny if you're going north. This is from the parking lot. So if you were to go into the units themselves, this is the facade.

And I'm happy to answer any questions that y'all have. So this is a conditional use request, but there seems to be a significant number of comments, right? And we have those comments for the DRT process. Okay. Kind of just later down that line. This is strictly looking at conditional use approval just of the multiple unit development. We'll can address some of the specifics in DRT. So I did include those. So MUD is conditional in CRDW. Okay. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for you before we open a public hearing? Just to be clear, this is residential use only, correct? There's no commercial.

Yeah, correct. Yeah. And so and so I guess on the on the mixuse um mixuse, too. So it doesn't specify that all projects have to be mixed use. Mixed use means horizontal and vertical. So there can be residential and then on another lot uh commercial or they can be combined into the same development. And I guess kind of on on some of this this is was very had a lot of forethought into it and I guess just kind of right now commercial really hasn't expanded that far up. Uh Donahue just just kind of in that in that section it's still like primarily residential.

Okay. Okay. Um this does conditional use does require a public hearing. I'd like to go ahead and open that now if anyone would like to come forward and speak on this agenda item. Evening. Lee Thorp, Kadra Engineering, uh, representing the applicant. Stuck it out this long. I just wanted to be able to sign in on the book. There you go.

One thing I wanted to talk about real quick was I know you mentioned this was the elevation facing the parking lot. I think we've got some we've got some issues there from the slope that's shown up against the building. This is what we're kind of planning on it looking facing Donahghue on that six-unit piece. So going to screen the parking lot with the building as much as possible from the street which is going to block the majority of any of the pavement. Um trying to clean that look up there especially since it's going to be facing the new uh boy center. So pretty excited about the nice big sidewalk that's going out front too. So, we think it's going to address the street really nice, but just here to answer any other questions y'all might have. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Public hearing. I'll close that now. Commissioners, do you have any questions, comments, or motions? Motion to approve KCU 2025-048. Second. Have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I any opposed. Thank you. Any comments from our leader?

Man, man. Uh exciting time to be in Auburn. Uh I think we there I guess to the to the gentleman who spoke earlier at the top of the meeting just kind of in citizens communication. He also spoke at um he also spoke at the council meeting a couple weeks ago. Uh what he is talking about is a development that is north of Parryree Road. A significant development uh I think in the council meeting about 750 acres possibility of 750 lots um way out north of Pear tree. So we'll uh once we

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And so I guess on a map it is firmly outside of the optimal boundary. Has no means to annex whatsoever. no contiguity at all.

Um but is within our plan and jurisdiction. A lot of jurisdictional uh just kind of jeopardy there just kind of work with the county. Um so we will get with you all um just kind of below quorum thresholds means of two or three and kind of brief you all on this just kind of everything that that we know with it. Um but yeah, I guess just where they're at right now. I think they're I think what he was talking about tonight that they're they're hosting a shared out out going on right now. Um but I guess we'll we will brief you all in the coming weeks just kind of about more that we know more we find out our perview would be with it.

Yes. And so I guess just kind of out in uh let's say like you know they don't annex or anything and they just want to move forward with developing. We do review plats in the planned jurisdiction that aren't in the city. oftentimes they do not come to you all because they're for two or three or they might be family subdivisions. Um I think the last one that came to you all was Hans Hall way up on 188 and that was for an eight eight it was like eight residential uh single family lots is what it was. Um not to the tune of several hundred. So and just so you guys know plats are under the sole discretion of the planning commission. They do not go to council. There are no ask with them. That is just solely under y'all's discretion.

So, and so we have to vote for them if they meet the requirements. So, that's we got to understand what I don't know what kind of requirements we have them to. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And so, we're going to meet Yeah, that is correct. I I question that because it it doesn't if it comes before us, we have an option. Right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, but we have an option, but no discussion on this. This is just something that comes before us just in case they ever want to be annexed into the city that they meet our subdivision requirements.

Yep. And so, so I guess like like I said, we'll you all will be briefed on this um once we know more um we will talk to you all about it. And so, like I said, we we'll we'll answer those questions, Phil, just kind of what the purview is, all the questions. um all the things we'll be looking at. So, just so we have a map. Yeah. Okay. I need a motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. All in favor? I opposed.