Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

somebody. All right, I'll go ahead and get this this part started. Good evening and welcome to the September 15, 2025 meeting of the city of Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission. Any written comments sent to staff were forwarded to the commission directly. This time, I'd like to introduce our staff. Jimbo Woodson, deputy city attorney. Michael Garner, city engineer. Zack Ponds, director of planning. Leota Coin, principal planner. There are nine members of the planning commission. All who were appointed by the mayor for stagger terms with the exception of the city council representative who was appointed by the city council. I ask the commission members and introduce themselves and state the occupation. Beginning with Miss Prince,

Dana Prince, attorney Porsche Clark, 311 manager. Tim Harrison, general contractor. And Hornsby, attorney Raven Howard, councilwoman.

Katie Pew, retired. Bill Wright, business owner. There were signup sheets located outside for public comment. Four speakers are allowed to speak in favor of a petition and four speakers are allowed to speak in opposition of a petition. All speakers will have the maximum five minutes unless the commission votes to allow a longer time. The commission will take up the items in order of the final agenda. The commission will initially receive a presentation from staff as to the details of the agenda item. Additionally, we may hear certain matters involving the same property, such as an annexation and a zoning matter concurrently, although we will take separate votes on each matter involving the same property. After the staff presentation, I will call upon the petitioner to present their case. The petitioner will have a maximum of 10 minutes unless the commission votes to allow a longer time. At the conclusion of the petitioner's remarks, I will then call upon any party in order of sign up who desires to support the petition. thereafter call upon any party who uh opposes the petition. When it's your turn for comment, please introduce yourself, stating your name and address to the commission. Provide your remarks. Any written comments you have been would be included into the record. After receiving the remarks of those who oppose the petition, the petitioner will have the opportunity to respond to those objections. Any rebuttal will be limited to two minutes unless commission votes to allow a longer time. If the petitioner presents any new information respon in the response to the objections, the commission will allow those who oppose the petition the opportunity to respond to the new information only. Any response will be limited to two minutes unless commission votes to allow a longer time. During the course of the presentation, you may be interrupted by any member of the commission for clarification or additional information. Such interruptions will not reduce your time. Once the commission members are satisfied that they have received all relevant information, we'll then close further discussions by the public at which time the commission members will

discuss and on the matter and then vote. After the vote, you are free to leave. These proceedings are video recorded and broadcast live. All in-person public comments should be made at the podium and to the microphone. Jurisdiction and all matters pertain to the following items. This commission serves as the final authority. Subdivisions located within city of Tus city limits, subdivisions located outside the city limits but within the police jurisdiction, developments with a special district and an approval letters for developments in historic district buffer zones. As to all remaining agenda matters including annexations, reszonings, planned developments, and street vacation. This commission serves as a recommending body to the city council. In that regard, our decisions are in the form of a recommendation to be presented to city council. The city council will make the final decision on those matters. Subdivision approval requires the affirmative vote of six members of the planning commission. All matters which are recommendations of city council require majority vote for an affirmative recommendation. At this time I would ask do any members of the commission have any conflicts of interest to any matters before us tonight? If so please state for the record. Having heard none I would ask staff to confirm on the record that proper notice has been given to all parties and interest as required by law as to all matters before the commission tonight.

It has. With that, we will begin with approval of the minutes. As the planning and zoning commission has received the synopsis of the August 2025 meeting, I move that we dispense with a reading of the minutes and unless there are any deletions, additions, or corrections. All those in favor of approving approving the minutes of August 2025, say I. I. I. Those opposed, eyes have it. Good evening, commission. Starting off tonight with the consent agenda. We have one item here. I don't recall if um the person we had sign up tonight was for this one. Would you mind double checking, chair? Gotcha. So, no public comment on this one. Um good to vote.

Okay. All right. Staff, we have consent agenda item S8425. All those in favor say I. I. Those opposed eyes have it.

All right. Moving on to cases requesting to continue. We have uh a companion case here. Um they continued this prior to um mailing so no vote is needed tonight nor did we have anyone sign up out front. Um moving into our unfinished business we have a preliminary plat that is S7625 reservey of a portion of lot 10 Thompson Place consisting of four lots on approximately 4.7 acres located at 15329 through 15343 Bluff Drive. This is not in city limits and it was continued from the August meeting. You can see we're pretty far north here off of Highway 43. You can see that lot today. Uh it's one lot. It has some mobile homes on the property. They'd like to split it up four ways. You can see um all the lots hitting a minimum of one acre here. And you can see that without contours as well. Uh we do have four variance requests. We did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff

engineering on those variance requests? We don't have we don't have an objection to those variance requests but I do want to point out that uh it may not be quite clear on the map but tears patent is a minor arterial so we want all the lots only one access to tier tiers patent road will be allowed I think the way they've got it drawn it looks like maybe lots Two and three are going to share a driveway, but we need lots four, three, and two to share a driveway.

Mike, what about one? Are you okay with it? Lot one's uh they got a note saying it's going to access Marina Drive. Okay. So, two, three, four, we got issued. That's right. All right. So, petitioner, name and address for the record, please. Jonathan McKenna, 15317 Woodbin Road, Northport, Alabama. Tell us about the access. Yeah, Eric Engineering has an issue. Come on. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah, it looks like we're sharing a driveway. We've just got it split up, but it's it's only one entrance going in as far as I can tell. I don't see a driveway at all.

Or lot four especially. Almost. Oh, yeah. Lot four obviously. Yeah. just right beside the other two. We only had one entrance coming in. We just had to split it three ways and have land coming all the way in because of the I think it was the county that made us do that.

Mike, you okay with him saying this? And then at some point he's got to pull it permits, right? So, what we'll require when they submit the final plat to divide the lots is the the access easement that they're showing will have to include uh reaching the property line of lot four. So, right now they're showing a 15t access, which is fine, but there's a gap of land on lot three that the easement does not join the western boundary of lot four. So that it'll have to be adjusted to accommodate. That makes sense.

But that ement was made 45 ft right there or whatever to go to touch for it would work. Yes, sir. That's right. That may make sense to you. Yes, sir. I understand. You have any other anything you want to tell us other than Oh, we're just trying to clean the place up and put some nice house on it. That's it. I think that's desirable from what I know. We plan on building $1.52 million homes, three of them on the property and removing all the stuff that's currently there. Any other questions for petitioner?

Thank you, sir. Anyone sign up for care to speak for or against this petition request? Well, Mike, you going to take care of this? It doesn't have to be anything that we vote on that says it's I think we're going to say for the record that I think you need to add it in your uh recommendation for approval that there'll only be one access to tears patent road. Yeah, I agree.

Anyone else? All right, commission. Before us we have S7625 with four variance requests. Engineering has no issues with the half street improvement sidewalk construction and cap sewer. However, on the lot configuration, we want to make sure that the petitioner is aware that he must um increase the access easement to include and reflect that on the plan to include lot four has having that access easement on it. Fair enough, staff. Okay, that being said, do I have a motion and a second? Motion. Second, Mr. Hornsby. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved.

All right, moving into our cases to be heard tonight. Starting off with a companion case. It's 14310 Santorini Street. Um it's an annexation and reszoning of 031 acres. Um once annexing reszoning from SFR1 to LR, you can see we're pretty far north on the lake in the gates of Emerald's Ed subdivision. You can see that triangle. Um that is what they would like to annex and reszone. Uh you see the lots vacant today. You can see that triangle piece to be annexed um into city limits. Um and this may look familiar. You saw this subdivision last month. You can see that proposed lot 74G did pick up that triangular piece. Um rest of that lot is already in city limits and zoned SFR1 or excuse me LR lake residential. Um that is why they would like to annex and reszone to kind of create a consistent um uniform lot. This is in our future service expansion area. Here are department comments on the annexation. Moving into the resoning again, reszoning from SFR1 to LR. Um, here's that piece again, uh, vacant today. You can see the rest of that lot is already LR, Lake Residential. I'm just kind of cleaning up that reszoning again just to have a consistent lot. Uh, here is that again. You can see um that subdivision you saw last month. Um, and eventually they are building a home here. Um in framework, this area is identified as Lakeside Living um which is kind of that residential area up on the lake. Uh so this zoning request um and use do conform to the plan. You can see that Lakeside Living use identified here. Here are permitted uses for LR. Uh we did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff? Ma'am, petitioner

commission. I'm Robert Martin with Duncan Coker Associates. Um, be happy to answer any questions. I think this is pretty straightforward. Um, annexing, reszoning the training the piece there. Robert, you finally got an easy one, didn't you?

William Miller got his easement. Good. Any questions for petitioner? Thank you. Anyone care to speak for or against this petition request? All right. Having heard none mission before us, we have an annexation of AN525. We're going to be annexing sorry annexation 1625. We're going to annex at 31 acres at 1430 Santorini Street. All those in favor say I.

I. Those opposed eyes have it. Commission for have Z 2125. Mr. McCay petitions reszone 3.31 acres located to from SFR1 to LR in conjunction with annexation previously mentioned. Have a motion and a second. Motion to approve. Second. Miss Prince. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Motion approved. All right, commission. Next up, another companion case. This is at 6950 University Boulevard East. Um, this is an annexation of.7 acres um as well as a resoning um from SFR1, that default zoning to GC uh general commercial. So, you can see we're in the Cottondale area right off of University Boulevard and Hurricane Road. Uh you can see that lot today. It has been developed. Our aerial is a little out of date. There's an existing sea store and fuel station at this site. You can see they'd like to annex that property into city limits. Um, and here is that site today. You can see that development has already occurred. Um, they'd like to annex for uh future utilities. Uh, this is identified as a primary primary, excuse me, expansion area. You can see um our department comments here um regarding the annexation. Um moving into the reszoning. So once annexed um hitting that default zoning of SFR1 uh liking to reszone to general commercial. Here again is that site again. It has been developed. You can see they do touch other general commercial uh property. Um and they'd like to reszone as part of that annexation request. You can see this is that site plan um kind of showing what has been built here already. Um and here again is the photo of the site today in framework. This is identified as corridor commercial. So this um request and use do conform to framework. You can see that corridor commercial identification here. Um here are permitted uses in general commercial. We did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff? Did you say they want to access for future

utilities? This is um their application did state, let me get back to it, that they'd like to annex um for those future utilities. The petitioner can confirm more about their annexation. What are the what's utilities are they own now? They own septic. Do we have sewer out there? I don't know that sewer is readily available at the site. We're just going to get ready just in case it does and take their taxes. It's not not for alcohol by chance. No. Petitioner.

Yeah. Hey, my name is Don Shamsudin. 2260 Old Gold Run, Hoover, Alabama 35244. So yes, for future like we can possibly connect to city sewer, but really we I have another business like a mile down in Cottondale which is already in the city. Um it'll just make streamline doing accounting and keeping up with all the taxes and everything will be in the city. So explain to me the future utilities.

Right now we have a grease um what's it called? septic tank system right now because there's no s sewer around. But like in the future if city ever decides to put sewer, it'll we can connect to that city sewer if we're already in the city. Why wouldn't you just wait till it ran? I'm sorry. Why wouldn't you just wait till it ran? Why would you annex it now? Oh yeah, we could possibly do that. I was just thinking it would streamline all all our accounting and all our paperwork. Streamlining purposes, it sounds like. Yeah, I've got like uh another uh Texico convenience store which is about a mile down the road which is already in the city which is further from the city. So

I think I think that business is connected to city sewer already through the Mercedes sort of line. Mr. Wilson. They had the PJ on. Yes. It's interesting. So, they had to come for the city to get alcohol license for Monday through Saturday. Yes. Yes. I've been here for that, too. They've already got alcohol license from the city. Yes. Yes. So, they're automatic be grandfathered in. Yeah. That's what I wanted to do. Okay. Then a lot easier. Hey, we get more another day of revenue, I guess, right? Man, yank my leg up here. Okay. Anything else?

Any other questions for a petitioner? Thank you, sir. Anyone care speak for against these requests? Having heard none. All right. Commissioner of course we have an annexation 1725 uh going to annex 7 acres 69 University Boulevard. Do I have a motion? Well, all those in favor say I. I. Those opposed. Eyes have it. Mr. for have Z225 Delta Investments and Development Petition to reszone since there are now annex from SFR1 to GC which they currently are. Have a motion and a second. Motion to approve. Second, Miss Hornsby. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Motion approved. Welcome to the city. Thought you might want to get some of that future Starlink. They were

all right. Next up, we have a reszoning petition. This is Z2325, Chase Adcock's petitions to reszone approximately 78 acres located at 1431 Hackberry Lane from UC to MRU. You can see uh we're right next to 15th Street, uh the Bread Factory. You can see that site today. Tonight we are only talking about uh this property here. Um and you'll see that as we move forward in the plans. But that property today, you can see it's currently zoned university commercial. It does touch um mixed residential university. Um the applicant would like to request to reszone uh to allow for the construction of four U triplex buildings. You can see the site today. It's a package store and laundromat. I mean you can see kind of the adjacent properties um to the north of the site. Um here are some elevations that the applicant submitted um of those proposed triplexes um moving around to the rear um in the side elevation on the north. Um here's a rendering taken from Hackberry. You can see those here. Um since the packets were posted and we received those renderings, they have revised the site plan. So you can see that um here. So, this property, just to clarify, um that is the one you saw on the map that's already zoned MRU. So, really tonight, we just looking at this uh property to the south. Um and this is a a conceptual site plan for what this could look like um in the future. Moving into our analysis, this is identified as campus services in framework. Um this as excuse me this does conform um to the plan and the uses identified in framework. You can see that campus services identification here. Uh here are permitted uses in MRU. Um and moving through that uh we did not

receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff? Just out of curiosity where we we approved a while back the gas station on the corner there. Where where is that hole? Where were we at? So they uh I'm presently reviewing their their LDP plans. Okay. That's going to provide plenty commercial use for just about the beard. Okay. Petitioner,

Mr. Chairman, members of commission, Al Cavinus with Cavinus Engineering representing Chase Adcock. Um and thanks to Leotaa for a good presentation. doesn't leave me a lot to say sometimes. Uh we have looked at we first looked at this property and trying to deal with the with the commercial zoning. Of course, that was the new map and that's current use there. So, understand why that's there. The uh Can we go can we go back to that photo, please? Um showing the Yeah, there may maybe. Yeah, maybe even an aerial view of the Yeah. So, the parking lot, the existing commercial retail there, uh the parking configuration is pretty creative, but it doesn't meet anything that would work now. So, we would have to have 90 degree parking. uh you but you take in your setbacks, you end up with about 40 ft of building depth if you were trying to build residential in there, which is not a real functional space. I don't think we want to build any more non-functional commercial space. Uh we looked at trying to just have a driveway by the building and park in the rear. And again, you just get you get an awkward piece of property with some depth there that you just can't really use for a good retail use. So then we looked at just doing the whole thing as as same type of development that that's been redone in Cloverdale. Um matter of fact, we're about to permit one here in the next couple of weeks. The one of the remaining lots there that's in this photo. Um so we're looking at triplexes. looking at four triplexes. We're at 54 beds right now. Uh that works out to like 57 beds an acre. We're way under

the allowable zoning. Uh and this is u this is where we are right now, but this is pretty close to where we're going to be. We'll we'll develop this into a preliminary plan. You'll see next month that we're successful here. And um but so this is this is our concept. We have uh of course a sidewalk along Hackberry that we'll be reconstructing. There's already a sidewalk north of us getting at you Wesley Place and then there's a sidewalk we did a number of years ago along the lot on the north side there that gets you to the railroad. So it's uh very walkable to campus and we feel like it fits in with the surrounding development. Same type same density same type buildings uh that surround us. Uh so we think it fits in the neighborhood. I think it's a better use than than trying to force some commercial in a place that is way too narrow and way too deep for us. Are these leased by bedroom or by apartment or?

Yeah, they're they're leased by by leased by building or by unit. By list by unit by what? By unit. So there's triplex. Each you would someone would sign a lease for first floor, second floor, third floor. Okay. Preferable. But in reality, they're all signing individual leases for the bed. I'm sorry. They're signing individual leases. No, I don't think we they're signing one lease. One lease. They're signing one lease. Yeah, but a lot of them go into saying you got to sign your own lease. I ran anyway. It's not important right now, but it looks like you got your parks.

I'm trying to figure out your number your parking space. You got three number 55s on here. I counted them. And you got spaces. I just trying to figure out the number system here. Yeah. Let's see where I'm where where are we over on the hard to hard to make copy and text auto not change the numbers. All right. Any there's spell check, but there's not number check. Well, this is a pretty easy one right here, but obviously we want to see those clearer picture next time you come back. You'll see a much clearer picture on the preliminary. Yeah.

All right. Any other questions for Mr. Cabinets? Mr. Adox. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Anyone care to speak for or against this petition? All right. Having heard none commission before us, we have Z2325, Mr. Adcock. petition to reszone 78 acres at 14th and Hackberry Lane from UC to MRU. Do I have a motion and a second? Motion. Second. Second, Miss Prince. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved.

See you next month. Right.

All right. Commission. Moving on to our next uh item here. It's a preliminary plat. This is S8325 Lake Cove Estates number four consisting of nine lots on approximately 9.8 acres located south of 11992 Grand View Lane and east of 12,04 Cherokee Drive. This is not in city limits. You see we're pretty far up on the lake here off of 43. You can see there's one large parcel today. Um they'd like to split it up nine ways. As you can see more clearly here um in the plat without contours um starting at the top just moving south um you can see about 1acre lots or more um as we move through this property. You did see this last May um they just need some more time to get rolling before um recording that final plat. We do have two variance requests here. We received one public comment. Do you have any questions for staff

engineering on those variance requests? We don't have any objections. Petitioner, [Music] members of the commission, Bobby H. Hearnden, 2728 Lane Wallace Boulevard, Northport. Uh, this is one that you guys we brought to you back last May and then somebody in my office, namely me, didn't keep a watch on the calendar and the construction company hadn't got started yet. We've got approved construction plans ready to go. Um just the u overlook the time thing. We just like to get this renewed or reapproved.

Staff is there I can ask him but I'm going ask you is is same no no changes no uh it's the same as it was previously. Make sure. All right. And we approved it last time with a majority vote obviously. Right. Yes sir. Okay. Thank you.

Any questions for Mr. Hearnen? We do have someone that signed to speak. Let's hear them out real quick. Let's turn and let's have one person sign up. Mr. Mike Buts. Hello, Mike Buts. 11837 Grand View Drive. Uh it's lot actually reside at lot 33 there uh at the end of Grand View Drive, not Grand View Lane. just for uh clearance purpos. Yeah.

Um so yes, this has been brought before the commission multiple times now and everything and um um I would like to ask um has the petitioner or the land owner submitted any restrictive covenants to the city for this uh development for this subdivision? staff is telling us no point. No, there are no there have not been any restrictive covenants submitted.

Okay. Um and then since the land owner essentially owns uh or is in control of approximately 10 acres, uh has a storm water drainage study been conducted and the results of that submitted to the city? So the trigger for a drainage study at the preliminary plat phase is 10 acres. This would fall below that threshold. So we did not require a drainage study when this thing was approved in May. Even with the uh the county's right ofway, does that is that take in consideration of the 9.8 or does that eliminate the 9?

No, it's already existing. Sure. [Music] So you're saying that a storm waters drainage survey was not required for this for this? Like I said, the the threshold for a drainage study in our subdivision regulations is a development of 10 acres or more. This is 9.8 acres. So we did not require a drainage study.

Okay. um in relation to the the variances which I know they have been approved and stuff and we did have uh some of the concerns. I just wanted to make sure that those were kind of revisited. Um and um like that we wanted to make sure that the the street does maintain the current width and configuration um in the new subdivision uh to make sure that it's got a uniform design and appearance to both sides of the street. Uh so whatever's done on the new side, the new developed side is, you know, lines up and matches with what's on the old side. Uh if there's any new rideways uh required uh for this to go on the new side of the subdivision. Um and that a provision for control of storm water drainage uh be brought about because uh any new development. I know that in the past in other parts of uh other development in this area, there were some storm water drainage issues from prior development in the neighborhood. Um and uh I think that was even made part of the commission's meeting record back in 2019. Uh so that is a major concern for many of the residents that live uh in this part of the subdivision. Uh, as far as cap sanitary sewer, um, I noticed on the plat application that the applicant had marked yes, where it asked if there are existing septic tanks and field lines. And to my knowledge, there's no septic tanks or field lines that exist on this property. Um,

do we know whether or not this the property will actually perk for uh for septic or not?

I mean, these are questions you can ask. I mean, that's Yeah, we're we're not ignoring you. We're we're just trying to the developer can speak to these questions. Okay. Mike, you want Well, this body really doesn't address that. That's a that that's a decision or that that comes from the public health department, our environmental division of our public health department. If the property will not perk, then there will not be a structure built for it. I mean that's just that's just as simple as it is. But this this this is not the forum to answer those questions. We as the health department does. Okay.

Okay.

Um and then as far as the construction, I know this was major sticking point I think last time uh the uh the turnaround uh at the end of Grand View Drive. Um, as we discussed, you know, in previous meetings, we want to make sure that or that the developer presents and demonstrates a turnaround design that meets or exceeds the satisfaction and approval of the city engineer. Uh, that the city would not allow the final plat to be signed until all infrastructure is in place before any lots are developed. Um there is a little bit of concern about how close that turnaround is to the the Barksdale property line. Um there um and then uh I'm not sure how this how this works, but a concern over the the change in elevation of how that would actually be uh developed and sloped. Uh, obviously I don't want any rain water to flow into my yard or driveway or into my neighbor's yard. Um, and I think Tim, you had mentioned last time that a lot of this would probably wash out in the final LDP process,

but again, I just I just kind of wanted to revisit all these concerns u, and kind of get a status update to see what has transpired transpired since the last time, you know, we were here. um and brought all this before the commission. I think the main point is just to ensure that the neighborhood retains its integrity. Uh that any new development enhances all of our properties. Um and uh there are some concerns, you know, when if and when this does get start development starts um about heavy equipment in and out um worker vehicular traffic, parking up and down Grand View and Cherokee Drive. Um um any erosion or sediment control, things like that. uh keeping dirt and mud off the streets while uh development's going on, those kinds of things. So, um [Music] and um talking with some of my neighbors, they did have uh some concerns about the setbacks, particularly on I think it's number 37, 40, and 41. [Music] while those uh setbacks are so narrow where to join joins their property. Okay. All all valid concerns. I think Mr. Get back to petitioner up here and he can again address some of those issues you brought up. I feel pretty confident that nothing's changed from the previous. You're talking about 37 4142. through it.

That is correct.

So, let's bring the engineer back up. I think he can answer some of these along with our engineer. [Music] As far as the road construction, the sorry the uh the plans have been approved and the contractor will use utmost care and taking care of the integrity of the street that's there, the yards, the driveways. Uh they'll be put back or if they're damaged, we'll put them back just in the same shape that they were in. Um as far as the setbacks he's addressing on some of the some of the lots on some of the lots that have uh front setbacks are on two different streets and so the side setbacks are a lot narrower be like 10 ft instead of 30 or 35 ft. Um

I guess the question the rear setbacks on those three lots why are those why are they not reflected the other I say I say rear. I'm assuming that's the rear where it butts up against those disting on which lots for circle ones there 41 42 37 41 42 Yes. Uh do we consider those side lots? Side lot lines. Um because we got two fronts as it is on those lots on the corner lots. You're using like on 37 you're using Cherokee as your front lot, right? And then you're using that.

I mean by by code I get it. See what you're doing. You're maximizing building up somebody's backyard. Well, if um we can look at that with staff and see if we need to adjust that. I mean I think maybe that's courteous thing to do when you're building up against I understand you get by with it because of the code way it works but I mean I think you if you can look at it make that work that be happy to may be a little more pal we'll see what we can do

um Mike the this is county so the LDP process will you review this it still applies Yeah, it is in the county, but it still applies. So, you're going to you you'll maintain that.

Yeah. And we will get notified before construction starts. That's part of the condition of the approved LDP. So we'll we'll we'll do monthly inspections of the construction activity uh to document and and and in some cases we uh you know we send out a letter to the developer you know if there's deficiencies when we were mentioning mud in the streets and so on so forth our our office monitors that during the construction process

about the um curb and gutter situation up there to can't recall where we landed on that. What's what's there now? There's not any curb and gutter in this area. Not anymore. No, it's going to be what's that called? Channel. Yeah. It'll all be curbing. There's there's no no curb and gutter of any kind. This asphalt. This is all asphalt. Yes, sir. Okay. You're not going to do any kind of

and as we discussed before, there's a dedicated culdeac that the county has on old plat there between lots 35 and 34. Well, that will be vacated by the county whenever the new culde-sac is built. It's not it's not constructed. It's just was dedicated on a platform 50 something years ago. Any other questions or you any other comments you want to make, Mr. Turn? Sir, any other comments?

No, sir. Well, that being all I don't think anything new was brought up. So, I mean, I feel like that we approved this before. Obviously, we've changed and improved up some of our requirements. Um, I can't see where anything surfaced that would cause me any kind of heart. Any other questions or comments from the staff, our commission? I appreciate it. Okay.

All right, commission. Before us, we have S8325 Lake Cove Station number four, two variance requests. H Street improvements cap sewer engineering has no issues with. This is a petition we have approved before. That being said, do have a motion and a second. So moved. Second, Miss Hornsby. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved. Reapproved.

All right, commission. Next up, we have another preliminary plat S8525 Nolan addition to Spain Drive, consisting of two lots on approximately 13.6 acres, located at 15012 Spain Drive. This is not in city limits. You can see we're pretty far north here on Watermelon Road. See that property today um already has a home on site and they'd like to split it onto two lots, putting that house onto its own uh separate lot. You can see that without contours here. Um it does not have any street frontage. You can see that access easement shown on lot one. And with that we do have three variance requests. We did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff

engineering on the variance reports? Oh, we have no issues with those variance requests. Thank you, petitioner.

Kevin Hle with Montgomery and Hinkle, Inc. professional land surveyors 203 Harbor Road East Tuscaloosa 3541 representing the Nolans. They're uh family land wanting to sell the residence and hold on to the 10 acres and that's what we're trying to obtain. Fair enough. Thank you, sir. Any questions for the petitioner? Having heard. Thank you. Anyone care to speak for or against? Having heard none commission for we have S8525 melon edition consisting of two lots rear quest engineering has no issues with. Do I have a motion and a second? Motion to approve.

Second Miss Prince. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved.

All right. Another preliminary plat S8625 brown edition to 24th Street. This is a re-ervey of lots 42 through 44. JJ Harris survey of the Mallet lands consisting of one lot on approximately 0.55 acres located at 26224 street council district 2. See we're just west of I359 here. You can see that lot today is vacant. Does have that slab of concrete on site. You can see there's three remnant lots here. They're just cleaning up those uh lot lines kind of in the middle of uh the overall lot. U you see they're dedicating some rideway as well. Um but really just a lot consolidation. We do have one variance request um for sidewalk construction. We did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff

engineering? No issues with that request. Thank you. Petitioner

Kevin Hinkle with Montgomery Hinkle, Inc. Professional Land Surveyors, 203 Hargo Road, East, Tuscaloosa, 3541, representing the petitioner on this lot consolidation, and he plans on removing the concrete, giving up right away, and securing an easement for the sanitary sewer. Any questions for petitioner? Thank you sir. Anyone care to speak for or against? Having heard none permission before us we have S8625 with one variance request. Sidewalk construction engineering has no issues with. Do I have a motion in a second? Motion. Second. Miss Hornsby.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved. All right, next up S8725 reservey of lot 9 and 10 old farmhouse subdivision consisting of one lot on approximately 6.3 acres located at 18495 John Swindle Road. This is not in city limits. You can see we're way far north here off of Highway 43. There's two lots here today. Um they'd like to consolidate those to construct a house. You can see on the plan here um and on that plat without contours just removing that middle lot line. They do have one variance request. We did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff

engineering? No issues with that request. Thank you. Petitioner.

Mr. Chairman, members of board Michael Magcguire with McGuire Associates. Um she pretty much covered it. They're just moving. He owns both of those lots and just moving removing that interior lot line so it doesn't conflict with his new house. Thank you. Any questions for petitioner? Thank you. Anyone care to speak for or against? Having heard none commission before we have S8725 one request cap sewer engineering no issues with. Do have a motion and a second. Motion to approve. Second. Prince. Miss Prince. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved.

All right. Next up, S7825 SBR subdivision consisting of two lots on approximately 10.6 acres located at and around 270131st Street. Uh this is council district 2. You can see we are just west of 359 here. Again, you can see uh those lots today. Just to clarify, this also includes uh this lot here today. Um you can see that in that plat with contours here creating two lots um with con without contours here. Excuse me. This is that proposed lot line uh between those two lots. Uh we received two variance requests. Uh we have no public comment. Do you have any questions for staff

engineering? We don't have any issues with those requests. Thank you, petitioner. Uh, Mr. Chairman, members of board, I'm Michael Magguire with Magguire Associates. Uh, it's pretty much a similar thing here. They they don't really have any plans for this property at this moment, but they they are looking into developing it. So, they wanted to go ahead and remove that interior lot line. Okay. Thank you. Any questions for petition? Having heard none, thank you. Anyone care speak for or against this petition request? Having heard a commission for S8825 two variance request engineering has no issues with do have a motion and a second. Motion second. Mr. Hornsby. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved. Anything else from staff tonight? Well,