Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

SPEAKER: I'm going to call the June meeting of the Planning Commission to order. We welcome everybody, to be here. And some of the items will call for a public hearing. And if you want to speak, go over to the microphone, identify yourself and your address, and you'll have three minutes and one time at the microphone. So, the first item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes. SPEAKER: Yes, ma'am. Just in looking over the minutes, we just noticed that there is an error on number item number eight with the vote count specifically shown in there. And so what we'd like to do is bring back the corrected minutes to you for next month. SPEAKER: Do we need to have a motion on that? Mr. (INAUDIBLE) OK. We're just not approving anything. OK. Alright. Do we have an update on any of the previous Planning Commission agendas cases? SPEAKER: No, ma'am. SPEAKER: Alright. New business. SPEAKER: Yes, ma'am. First two items under new business are final plat requests. These two items first item is Drake's landing. Section two, phase three. This is on fuzzy balls. This is in Drakes Landing. Planned unit development master plan. Excuse me. The request is for final plat approval of... 30 lots in the planned unit development. These lots are located and the final piece of the planning and development, located just to the northern part of the property, where you see an overview of the entire development. And so the lots involved in the central area with one 100 through 130. The last question here.

And then here is a copy of the final plat. These lots range in size from 15,000 to 246ft² to approximately 46,000ft², and they are all 60 foot in width. Those are meet the minimum requirements for the Drake Siding Master Development Plan. There is no in here that a developer is required on the outside of the development. And so they are, we've noted that and we've noted a couple of notational items we did just before the meeting receive an updated plat. I haven't had a chance to look at it, but it, the applicant thinks it meets those requirements. And we are recommending final plat approval, subject to the following comments that the sidewalks required on at least one side of the street. Install underground utilities, add a note on plat, the 25 foot wide natural undisturbed buffer, or a six foot high fence along locks 113 to 127. Remove node 18 on the plat. Change the flood node to refer to... 2025. And at this point, I believe is actually incorrect because it is not part of that update. And then amid some of the curve radius or some lots amid some of the curve radius data and those need to be added. SPEAKER: Engineering. SPEAKER: Engineering department and other utilities have been inspecting the construction and everything needs meets specifications so far. Engineering has no issues with the construction and recommends approval. The only thing that's outstanding and from my request is the asphalt survey. And shortly, and we'll hold signatures until we receive those surveys. But everything else meets meets our standards. Opelika Water says that they still need a final inspection before they will approve the plant.

But again, don't just hold their signatures until all their requirements are met. And Opelika Power is gonna service this neighborhood. SPEAKER: Alright. This plan does not call for a public hearing. So, commissioners... SPEAKER: Motion for final plat approval with staff recommendations. SPEAKER: Do I hear a second? OK. Any discussion? SPEAKER: On one side, is this because this development started back when the only requirement. SPEAKER: Yes, sir. That is correct. When this first started back in 2020. At that time, we only required sidewalks on one side of the street. If we were to come in now as a new planned unit, development would require them on both sides. SPEAKER: Any other discussion. All in favor? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries. SPEAKER: The next item is a request for final plat as well. This is a request in the Wyndham Village development. This is phase three, section two of the subdivision. This is a request from Mark Stroger. Stroger surveying, representing Wyndham Gateway, LLC. This is part of Wyndham Planned Unit development. You see kind of a bay area located on the vicinity map. It's below Gateway Drive, kind of in the south next to the existing Wyndham Village development. They're requesting approval for 39 lots, approximately 15 acres. The lots are part of the overall 523 lot development of these lots were originally approved as 65 foot lots, but the applicant

has shown them all in this phase as 75 foot wide lots, including in the preliminary plat. We are recommending final plat subject to the following that the utilities be underground. The Alabama Power transmission transmission line area. The rear of the lots needs to be addressed concerning ownership, maintenance, including fencing and structure restrictions at a portion of the drainage easement missing on lot 289 flood mode referred to should be updated to the most current, and note 13 replaced Windows Village Drive with Window Village Court. Here is a copy of this. Again, these lots are compliant with the planning. SPEAKER: Engineering. SPEAKER: Engineering has been inspecting the construction along with the other utilities, and everything meets the standards required. The only thing, again, the only thing we're expecting is the asphalt documents. We've received bonds and everything else with this. So, we recommend approval and we'll hold signatures until we receive the asphalt survey. Opelika Water also states that they still have a final inspection of the water system before they will sign the plaques. They'll do likewise as well. Opelika Power and Alabama Power will both serve this submission. SPEAKER: This does not call for a public hearing. So, commissioners, do I hear a motion? SPEAKER: Motion for approval with staff recommendation. SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: Any discussion? All in favor? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries. SPEAKER: Item number three is a request for conditional use approval.

This is a request located at 1708 Corporate Drive. The applicant is Trent Scarborough with Northstar Engineering representing East Alabama Mental Health. So, here you see the subject property is located in the C-2 zone on Corporate Drive. There is an existing facility there that serves as office and group home facility, constructed in 2003 by East Alabama Mental Health. The site serves as a temporary residence, temporary stay for individuals with mental health crisis or issues. The currently, there are five employees at the location. And then there are three that say overnight. I believe there are currently. Four rooms. Excuse me. Currently six bedrooms, four bathrooms with 12 beds. They're proposing to add an additional... Four bedrooms. That would be one bed in each room. So, take it to a total of 16 beds in the city. The site meets the existing landscaping through its initial approvals. Here you see the current building layout. You can see they're adding four units on one wing kind of existing where the building would look like. And then here's an overall site plan showing the landscaping. In reviewing this, we do recommend approval subject to the following. The 24 hour supervision for temporary residents should

be provided to residents. Should not be permitted to leave the property unsupervised, and if they become disruptive, tenants must be transferred to another facility. A maximum length of stay for temporary residents shall not exceed one month. SPEAKER: Engineering. SPEAKER: Because the limited size of this development and disturbance, there will not be a need for a site plan to be submitted for approval to the engineering department. All other utilities will be committed and permanence will be processed through the Building Inspections Department. Engineering has no comments or concerns regarding this conditional use approval. Opelika Water states that the existing building is currently served by one inch domestic service and three quarters service. If fire protection is required, there is... It is available from an eight inch water main on Corporate Drive. This is Opelika Power currently serves this facility. SPEAKER: Alright, this item calls for a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to speak for or against this? TRENT SCARBOROUGH: Good afternoon. I'm Trent Scarborough with Northstar Engineering. I've also got Mr. Jimmie Dickey here with East Alabama Mental Health. We're just here if you have any questions. SPEAKER: I do have one question. SPEAKER: OK. SPEAKER: So, that's recommended some of the provisions, 24 hour supervision, temporary residents are not allowed to leave the properties. Is all that a current condition that you operate on? SPEAKER: Yes, sir. That's all, this is, this facility in particular is for folks that are seeking kind of stabilization from crisis. They don't leave the facility until they're discharged and and stabilized. And we have staff there 24 hours a day. SPEAKER: Alright. Do I hear a motion?

SPEAKER: Motion for approval of staff recommendation. SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: Any discussion? All in favor? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries. SPEAKER: The next item is used as well. This is for a request for a fast food restaurant. This is located at Fort Scott, West Point Parkway. This is the Culver's restaurant. The applicant is Bradley Pritchard, representing Opelika Custard Re, LLC. So, this is the site located on the corner of West Point Parkway, Fox Run Parkway in front of Penn's Crossing, which is what most people know of as Winn-Dixie Shopping Center there. The site is kind of long been vacant. The applicant is proposing a fast food restaurant. The... You can see the site. Which would be they're showing the 4,388 square foot building, and the site is approximately 1.87 acres. It's zoned C3 in the Gateway area. The applicant exceeds minimum building setbacks. We noted and worked with the applicant some time. This is in the Gateway corridor. We do have restrictions on where how fast food restaurants can be ordered, particularly the order boxes and the pickup windows. We don't want those to be the primary visual impacts that people see as they're driving by. And so they have worked to kind of locate it in a way that would limit the view of those, because it, and this is somewhat

of a difficult site based on kind of a, the need for traffic flow and the general layout of the site. Here you see the landscape plan. They do show the required amount of landscaping. And here is an elevation of what the building would look like. So, the front elevation here you can have the north side. This is the main side that would face Southern Union. The south side. The back side would face the Winn-Dixie parking lot is at the bottom. And then the west or the rear elevation, which would also be where the drive-thru order window would be or order box would be does face towards Fox Run Parkway. Excuse me, West Point, Fox Run Parkway. But they have provided some additional landscaping on that side to kind of help screen that from the future. More elevations with typical finishes and colors. Life plans and then just kind of general information. I did wanna point out, if you notice here on this Fox Run Parkway side, they do use some trees to kind of screen that quarter box there. So, it's not completely hidden, but it is not as prominent as it would be. In reviewing this, we feel it does meet the requirements of conditional use approval. We are recommending that approval of that use subject to the outdoor poles and lighting fixtures, be directed downward to prevent spillage of lighting and all utility meters. Air conditioning units rooftop mechanical be screened so as not to be visible from public right of way. SPEAKER: Engineering.

SPEAKER: The applicant will be required to submit a site construction grading plan for the drainage utility, and stormwater equipment for the proposed site. This will be reviewed by the engineering and all the other utility departments for review and approval. Once this approval is made permanent, will be issued for the construction of the site. All the access locations will be off the public and state roadway system, so there's no need for additional access controls and engineering has no other comments. Concerns regarding this proposed conditional use approval. Opelika Water states the water is available from Fox Run Parkway as well as inside the shopping center itself and Opelika Power Services location. SPEAKER: Alright. This item calls for a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to speak for or against? CLAY SMITH: Good afternoon. Clay Smith, a civil engineer with Kimley-Horn, along with Ty Lewis, owner/operator for this Culvers franchise. Not much to add. The site has vehicular access within the shopping center. Culvers is planning to add a pedestrian connection to the Winn-Dixie parking lot. It's also implementing stormwater management as well as a pretty significant storm line relocation as well. Again, Clay Smith with Kimley-Horn. Happy to answer any questions. SPEAKER: Quick question is the chain link fence that you have on the retaining wall. Is it is it galvanized? Is that the plan for galvanized chain link fence? CLAY SMITH: Yeah, it would be black galvanized chain link fence. (CROSSTALK) Yes. SPEAKER: OK, thank you. SPEAKER: OK, any anyone else?

Public hearing is closed. Do I hear a motion? SPEAKER: Motion for conditional use approval with staff recommendations. SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: Any discussion? SPEAKER: The access will be from, the access already from the west? CLAY SMITH: Yes, it will utilize that existing driveway. SPEAKER: All in favor? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries. SPEAKER: The next few items are also conditional use requests. These are from the same applicant, but we'll go through those one at a time. The first is... King Honda. This is a conditional use for auto sales display. This is located in the corner of Birmingham Highway, Pepperell Parkway and Thompson Circle. Applicant is David King, representing King Automotive incorporated zone C3, C2, and Gateway Primary. You kind of see the location of the first one down at the bottom of right, where Gateway and Birmingham Highway intersect. The applicant is proposing an extension of the current automotive sales and display from the main King Honda property. The subject property is located just south of the... Some of the display area and the unfinished King Honda used car building. Here you've got a display area kind of located towards the back, a couple pads for existing display, a fountain shown in the middle, and then there's what's called a new

welcome house in brick and a new parts delivery with glass front shown on here as well. Then you have what's proposed is some parking out here towards right at the intersection, and two new signs located on the layout as well, with the pull off being utilized for motor vehicles. We look through this, and if you look at this site, plan what you don't see on this is property lines or easements. There are some notes which appear to be the existing lines for different utilities. What I can tell based on the poles and based on some previous plans that were submitted, there appear to be different utilities running through this site. We've also noted that the property is zoned partially zoned C-2, which does not allow automotive sales. So, that would be need to be rezoned as part of the process. Then we know that some of these items appear to be in the right of way in setbacks or in existing utility easements which would not be allowed without some sort of agreement, either through city council with city easement or through approval of the easement holder such as Opelika Power. Alabama Power, or whatever utility that may be. We've also noted that some of the parking paths, while some are shown as new concrete, others are shown as gravel in the automotive sales section of the zoning ordinance requires that those be part service meeting the public works manual

requirements, and then had concerns about the truck pulled off being located here right on Thompson Circle, which right near the intersection for unloading cars being a potential conflict. And then we were unsure what the new dwelling house was, but have provided some photos kind of renderings, which here you see kind of where that new house be located. Don't have much on the building, the materials cladding or what that would be used for here, as I mentioned, is the previous site plan that was submitted last year. And you can kind of see some of these easements and where the property bonds are located. Again, while some display may be appropriate in this location, there is a need would be a need to rezone the property. Also, there need to be a lot more clarification on what's allowed there. Some of the proposed structures and uses are appear to be located in the right of way, or easements, which would violate the zoning ordinance. At this time, we're recommending denial of the uses or information or site plan that fits requirements would be submitted. SPEAKER: OK, this calls for public hearing. Excuse me, engineering. Sorry. SPEAKER: Because of the limited service of this site. A permit will not be required for the construction of this site. Engineering has no other comments concerns for this proposed conditional use. Opelika Water states that water service is available from West Thompson Circle. There could be potential conflicts with 12 inch water main for structures that are shown in the right of way along the parkway, and a 15 foot separation must be maintained between both signage and the existing water main Parkway and Gateway Drive.

This development is inside Opelika and Alabama Power territory. SPEAKER: Alright, this calls for a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to speak for or against this item? SPEAKER: I'd like to speak on behalf of the general public. SPEAKER: Can you get to the microphone? You wanna speak in front of... DAVE KING: Speak to you from here. (UNKNOWN). SPEAKER: Can we hear him? (CROSSTALK) That's OK. DAVE KING: Back surgery. SPEAKER: OK. DAVE KING: Well, I don't think anybody here was wanting... SPEAKER: We'd like to get all you have to say. SPEAKER: Mr. King, we do have the clerk position. Need those? DAVE KING: Yeah, I've got two. Are they not up on the... SPEAKER: Yes. DAVE KING: The first issue is... SPEAKER: State your name, please. And... DAVE KING: Yes, ma'am. My name is Dave King from King Honda. The first issue is well, we need to thank everybody here for letting us come to Opelika. The vacant piece of property on the north side of Dunlop. We need to put. And we just gave you a general drawing. We need permission to put probably two more buildings there and a lot of parking area. I need room (UNKNOWN) to have about 500 cars on display. So... And if I have that many cars, I don't have the capability

within my current complex of having that many cars. But if I have that many cars on the North Dunlop property and I when we originally got this approved, it was the whole piece, the piece that we're on now. And the piece north of Dunlop was approved for car use. But if we could get the North Dunlop property approved, we could obviously service more cars and get them ready for sale and have some parking area for our employees and also display. I have talked to Ledge Nettles and he's got some ingress and egress concerns that obviously have to get approved from the state. I apologize to the city. We had a lot of equipment over there. It's been cleaned up. We had an issue with some water, and when the city asked me to clean it up, I raised a little retaining wall to try to turn the water the other way. That may be an issue with the city. I don't know that it is or not, but if I could put up another two buildings just for service and more pre-delivery inspection and have the front part of that corner either available for display of cars or for employee parking until I might could get another franchise in and put another building behind it. The property is very tight with power lines coming through it. So...

As you go north up highway 280, we have 2,500, 3,000ft approximately. A lot of it is just dirt holding the world together where we would be parking some vehicles, and we did not have drawings of the buildings. I understood that we needed approximate locations of where we wanted to put those buildings. I would like to get permission today to put something there after maybe some further review with y'all. We're not even sure what would be appropriate yet, but I think if we could have some more room for used car inspections for wholesale, get ready stuff for maybe a paint booth over there. And then we also have some other issues we're gonna need some city water and sewage over there. Potentially, unless we... SPEAKER: Use septic tanks. The other area, the front corner on Proper Parkway and a lot of our dealerships, we have a soft area, which is like a garden that is heavily landscaped to display some cars. I wanted to put Parker Lewis laid out the display pads, and we wanted to put cars on each... 1 or 2 cars on each display. Plaid. The long section is for parking cars just side by side. The welcome house. I've had a lot of back surgery.

Well, I've had a lot of trouble with my back the last year, and I've had some back surgery that didn't go well. I'd like to have the welcome house available for my personal use so I could manage the garden, so to speak, with, because if I could put about 40 years cars on that corner, very highly landscaped with a pretty fountain and all I could sell 40 or 50 cars a month right there. Cindy, that would be lower-priced cars. That would really be pretty desirable in the 4000, 5000, $6,000 range. So I could turn a lot more sales and turn more tax dollars for the city of Opelika. Most of all, I'd like to clean up that corner. That corner was not an original part of the property that we purchased to make available to American Honda. I think that was Doctor Weldon's old office, and maybe a radio station. I'm not sure what it was. The lane next to the stop sign is not a parking lot. We've got on the drawing that we presented between the parts delivery. Small building and the welcome house. There is parking for customers. The lane there is for loading and unloading of transit car carrier trucks. Parker Lewis suggested that we put the lane there and helped us sort of design all that.

So I guess I would respectfully ask you to approve both the North Dunlap property and the corner property, and I'm willing to update drawings for anybody here to help us with the landscaping. I had Rex Ponder, who most everybody here probably knows. Laid out the landscaping for our current location, and we're just very proud to be here and be a part of the city of Opelika. It's a long way from where I started. And we started in it, Gary. From the days of old. And we're just happy to be here. If anybody has any questions, I'll be happy to address them. OK. SPEAKER: Anybody else who would like to speak for or against? SPEAKER: I need that little welcome house to in case I need a wheelchair. I hope I don't say a prayer for me. But it hadn't been a good year. You don't want any back surgery, I promise you. You don't. Well, you helped me sit down in church the other day, and I appreciate you being so kind to me. SPEAKER: Anyone else? (UNKNOWN) and close. So I hear a motion. Motion? Motion.

But I'm not sure what the recommendation was. Well. That's what I'm trying to get us where we can figure out how he can furnish us what we need in order to close what he's trying to do. Don't take this the (INAUDIBLE) So, we have a question that we have a second. SPEAKER: Half-staff recommendation now. So but most people are not. SPEAKER: Well, let me rephrase that. I make a motion to approve with no say but is there a second? SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: Any discussion? Yeah. What? All. This means I'm not talking about the second. I'm talking about the first thing on the corner of Temple Parkway and Gateway. SPEAKER: Yes, sir. So, what we would need to start with would be a, you know, that show the property lines on the property and the easements on there, which in those easements and property lines, I believe there are going to be quite a few violations between what there what is those what is allowed there? We would need to rezone, portion of the property from C2 to C3 through the city council. We do that. They need to submit a landscape plan, meeting all the requirements they would need to amend or

seek variance for some of the parking areas if they want to keep them as gravel. We would need to see elevations and figure out exactly what the use of the new welcome center is. And the new parking, the parking will probably have to be added to meet that site. Currently, that area that is right there beside it is shown as an offloading for our site. I have concerns about that being located right there at the intersection of Thompson and Federal Parkway. New traffic concepts through there. And then, the signage would have to be brought into compliance and be added onto the property where we allow us, would we be able to display which looks to be fairly pretty well into the parkway? SPEAKER: Is this something that you and his people and the architects and engineers can put together? And then you can map all this out? SPEAKER: We would work with them if they so choose to, to figure out what could be done, and if there could be quite a few pounds. Quite a few changes that would likely have to happen in this drawing to make up. SPEAKER: I think you indicated that you were. SPEAKER: Yes, sir. I mean, I think if if if that's the case. What? Because of how substantial those changes would need to be, we would probably need to sit down and he would need to come up with largely a new site plan to meet those requirements. SPEAKER: Alright, Madam Chair, would be appropriate for me to make a motion to table this?

SPEAKER: How long does it stay on the table? SPEAKER: It would stay on the table until y'all choose to act on it. You would need with conditional uses, there is a requirement. You act on them within 30 days of the public hearing. So let me check the... The next meeting would be July 22nd. So you can table it for one month without the applicant's consent. Anything beyond that would require the applicant consenting to pay for. SPEAKER: It for a month. And maybe that would be a few times so that we could get everybody together and get this thing moving in the right direction. So I'll make a motion. Second. SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: Alright. So we hadn't voted on the first motion. SPEAKER: The motion to table supersedes any other motion. SPEAKER: OK. Alright. OK. So we've had a motion and a second to table this. Is this all of the King Honda or just this particular item? This item right here. SPEAKER: Application. SPEAKER: OK. Any other discussion? All in favor of the motion to table this item? This particular item? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries. It'll be brought back in July. SPEAKER: I'm sorry about that. Even though I came up with a bad back. Are y'all taping in both? SPEAKER: No, just this one. SPEAKER: The one on Pepperell Parkway for now. SPEAKER: The one on Pepperell Parkway? SPEAKER: Yes, sir.

SPEAKER: So, what do we need to do in reference to the second? SPEAKER: We haven't gotten to it yet. SPEAKER: We'll go to that now. What? So I'll introduce that one now, and then we'll they'll go through that as well. As Mr King referenced, the next conditional use item is also kind of a similar request. This is for a conditional use for auto sales play and the C3 Gateway Quarter primary. This is located at the corner of Birmingham Highway and Dunlop Drive. So here you see the site plan that was submitted. This is showing a couple different parking pads. There's the, I believe this the central parking area is where that current Waller Foundation is located. They have a proposed shop on the metal shop on the far east side of this development, with some parking asphalt there, and then a proposed gravel parking lot next to Dunlop Drive, exiting close to Lynch Avenue right near where the current retaining... Excuse me. Protective barrier. There is also noted on here a 14 by 48 LED board. So in reviewing this as well, again, the use itself may have some merit. As far as the display, we don't have much information on what the proposed shop would look like or what it would be, what it would encompass. Mr King mentioned having a paint booth, which would be an auto repair use, and then display area. We did note again that quite a bit of this property and other things being broken is located in Alabama.

Power easements. And so it's going to be somewhat difficult to get that in it would require some approval through the utility for any structures or modifications to those easements. There is shown a proposed gravel drive that comes off of both Dunlop Drive and US 80. That would require typically all drives for commercial uses like this would require to be asphalt. And any sort of change to access would require our approval. Again, in reviewing this, we noted that the proposed sign with the billboard exceeds the size and likely the height requirements for signage based on the building located on the property. Again, the need for landscape plan and then additional information. Again, based on lack of information, we recommended denial. Here you can see a previous site plan that was worked on last year. What you'll notice is the almost as it narrows down into a smaller area. This area through here becomes almost a full easement for Alabama Power. And so, placing a building in that area would likely be extremely difficult. But would require approval from the utility. Again, our recommended recommendation at this time is denial based on the conflicts with utilities and the insufficient information. Again, if the commission would like us to sit down and work with this team, we're happy to do that as well. So kind of solution. SPEAKER: Engineering.

SPEAKER: Because of the size of this development and the two access that are being proposed, a site grading and construction plan will need to be submitted to the engineering department and utilities for approval. As Mr Mosley said, there is an access to US 280, which will still need to be coordinated through Aldot, as also engineering has no other comments regarding the proposed conditional use. Of black and water states that the water is available from a man on Belmont Drive, and Opelika Power and Alabama Power will both service this area. SPEAKER: Alright. This item calls for public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to speak for or against? OK. Did you address some things before? SPEAKER: I think I did. I basically just want to improve both areas. So they look better and respectfully and have more space and more use and sell more cars and create more tax dollars. And we did not have final drawings because I didn't know if it would even be approved. So I understand that we need to table it, and I would like to try to work out some drawings and other agreements that would be acceptable so that we could move forward. SPEAKER: So would... So if the applicant wants to table it. SPEAKER: I would still recommend the commission take action as far as tabling it. SPEAKER: OK. SPEAKER: With their consent. SPEAKER: I make a motion.

SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: I have a question. Does the auto repair shop fit into the gateway corridor? SPEAKER: It can be allowed. Yes, ma'am. As a conditional use. I don't know that it was on this application, but if we work with him, we can have that noted in the application as it moves forward. SPEAKER: OK. SPEAKER: The parking that is shown here, do we know what that parking is? That new car parking? Is that customer parking? Do we know? SPEAKER: I don't know. SPEAKER: If it's customer parking. I'd want to see a pedestrian plan for getting folks back across the Dunlop safely. SPEAKER: Yes, sir. SPEAKER: Alright. So the motion is to table it. And then there was a second. SPEAKER: (INAUDIBLE) SPEAKER: Alright. So any other discussion? Alright. All in favor of the motion? ALL: Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? Any abstain. Motion carries. SPEAKER: The next item is the first of a couple of reasons we have on your agenda. This is a rezoning for Bridgewater. This is located off of Columbus Parkway. OK. Near Logan Drive. This was on your agenda last month and was recommended for denial. The applicant at that time withdrew the request before City Council and came back with a revision to that to try to answer some of the concerns that the Planning Commission may have. So the property is zoned R1 and C3. The applicant pays for the Stanford group representing the Freeman JLP Group. They're asking to rezone eight acres here, as you

see from C3 and R1 to some notable changes that we wanted to go ahead and point out at the very beginning. This does remove the 40-foot lots which were shown in the last request last month. So here's the updated plan. And what you see is it is 141 lots. 50 or. Excuse me, 50-foot, 65-foot wide lots. These are surrounded by a fairly significant amount of open space. The other item which you'll notice on here is they've kind of gone out and shown a further bit of connections to some of the adjacent properties. And so the applicant has a contract now for the property here located along Columbus Parkway, to be able to make this connection through their property. And then they're showing a fire access lane that would potentially go to a Creek stone subdivision as an emergency access. Lots here are, as I said, 65 foot and 50 foot. The setbacks, as we mentioned last time, or as we mentioned, are ten foot for the 65-foot or the 65-foot lots in the front, three feet on the side with a ten-foot separation between homes, 20 foot in the rear, side of ten feet. Minimum lot size of 70 to 100 50 ft. The 50-foot lots are 20 foot in front, three feet on the side, with a minimum of ten feet from the adjacent

home and 20ft in the rear. These laws would be 2500ft². They have provided some samples of the homes, and I'll let the Afghans go through those. Excuse me. Did want to note that there are 12 open space slots and amenities throughout the property. There are three pocket parks located throughout the site and adjacent to some of the closer into the neighborhood. There is a amenity site located right on the entry from the new connection to Columbus Parkway. And then they show a two mile loop around the perimeter of the area, through some of the floodplain and some of the other areas around the buffer side. This open space amounts to approximately 43% of the entire site. So you wind up even though you have some small lots with the density. That's approximately 2.6 units per acre. In our staff report, we mentioned the positives that they approved here. One of the biggest issues that was not initially answered. And they come back and provided us some additional information to revise narrative would be gratitude is that they have provided some additional conditions on themselves that would be part of HUD, limiting them as far as development goes. And so what those would do is would make sure that the fire access lane, and of course, this is C code. So it's required no matter what the fire access lane be required by the time they hit 31 lots. So when they hit the 31st lot they have to have that secondary access to the development. They have proposed a requirement that when they

hit 151 lots, they would have to have a full secondary access to the property, which could come through a couple different areas. It could either be through creekstone, through an additional connection to the north through mountain, through this property or correspondence or through Scenic Oaks, which is a large collector street that comes through here. And so there are a couple of different ways, but they basically committed that once they got to 150 lots, they would require a secondary access point, full access point. And then finally they have also, stated that when they hit 50 lots, they would have the full house amenity constructed, so that they would... the beginning of entities would be in place, fairly early in the development. Based on those changes, we felt that this helps at least provide some limitation on development and what can happen before additional access is made. So we are changing our recommendations approval subject to the following that the standards and densities match. Report sidewalks be required on both sides of the street. All utilities should be underground. Single-family lots should have one tree for detached residential home, either to the right-of-way or in the front yard. Landscaping including foundation structure plannings. Planning standards for buffer yards shall apply to any single-family uses, and the C3 portion will need to be divided into the club portion. And Mr Abbott is here to answer your questions as well. SPEAKER: Alright. Engineering. SPEAKER: Yeah. So it's important for me to understand that this is a rezoning application only. I don't usually comment on rezonings.

My comment. Comments, usually come in the next phase when it comes to preliminary play. I know there are a lot of discussion items that Mr Mosley talked about that we've been working with the developer, mainly about access points, future access points, and different possibilities that could come. And that's where most of my comments will come on the next phase of the next play. There's a lot of things that could come out of this, future connection to our city as construction of Columbus Parkway, which probably would result in a new approved signal from Aldot. So that's a big investment that the city would like to see as well. We would like to see that signal on Columbus Parkway and then the road in blue that Matt referred to as Seneca's Parkway. That's an undeveloped, unconstructed roadway, but it is in our long-range transportation plan as part of an outer loop system that we have in our long-range plan that we do have right of way a flat road to other subdivision flats, but has not been constructed yet. So a lot of these discussions will possibly come in the future, with possibly some sort of agreements between the developer and the city. Wth that being said, the city, the engineer does not have any comments on the rezoning itself because that's just the initial phase that we don't really get into the weeds of until the next phase comes. So, that's that was my report. Opelika Water is kind of the same way, although they did submit their report. I'm going to say the same thing on the preliminary plat if it comes up, basically about the requirements of the homes on different size water lines that are present, then, it went 150 homes, comes in. They said, connection to a larger main must be made to satisfy the full demand of development. And that's why that 150... the developer put that 150 limit on that because once

he gets under 50, he will need more infrastructure with water to so that that that was also going to come to and ultimately a connection to be made to the 24 inch main, the South Shore Road, which is still quite a ways away to perform full capacity. So there's a lot of work that needs to be done after this is considered, for the next preliminary plan. So the preliminary plan has a lot of the meat in the bones, the technical aspects of it. And I think, this is just for you all. So, that's kind of my report in the summary of saying that the more more detail will come at a later letter phase. SPEAKER: OK. So that would sort of be with the water and the electrical all being Opelika. SPEAKER: Will certainly the fact that Opelika Power and Alabama are both zoned for this area. So they'll sort out who's Infinite supply. What happened to the access engineering? Water sewer will be determined at the next phase. SPEAKER: So, just to refresh, are we just talking about rezoning right here, or are we talking about the subdivision? SPEAKER: If you approve the zoning in this case with the PUD, you're approving a master plan. And if the subdivision matches the master plan, then you are you should approve it. So while you are approving the rezoning, you are basically giving a blessing on the subdivision as well. SPEAKER: How can we do that when we don't have engineering and water and electricity? SPEAKER: They have said that they would have to require additional infrastructure by a certain point. And so they are going ahead and saying that until they can build to a certain degree, but at a certain

point, the infrastructure is not available for water. SPEAKER: And so they will have to have water at that site. And that is something that is kind of baked into this process. So, why again, why you are approving the preliminary plat. There are not you're not approving the familiar. You're approving the general design and concept of like water is said that water will be required to be upgraded at a certain point. And so if the water is not upgraded at that point, then it can't be approved. Let me clarify one thing. The Planning Commission does not approve zoning or the master plan. It's your function to make a recommendation to the city council. SPEAKER: Well, that was... SPEAKER: To decide whether to approve a rezoning and the master plan. SPEAKER: The city council votes on the master plan. SPEAKER: On the master plan and the rezoning make a final decision. But you have to make a recommendation or report to the city council. SPEAKER: OK. SPEAKER: That's the way it is in all three zones. SPEAKER: OK. To approve the master plan in addition to the rezoning. SPEAKER: (INAUDIBLE) a master plan is required. So, the master plan has to be approved as part of the rezoning. SPEAKER: And wonder if that changes over the course of a year or two or three. SPEAKER: So, they can be certainly, you know, there have been occasions when master plans are amended. So, that also requires the approval of the city council. SPEAKER: OK. Alright, I'll say that, this calls for a public hearing if there's anyone who would like to speak for or against this.

SPEAKER: Good afternoon commissioners. I actually have a presentation prepared that I think will. SPEAKER: Give us your name. MATT: Please. Hey, Zephyr with Sanford Group. Yes, ma'am. Matt, is it ready to go on here? I think it's gonna answer a lot of the questions that you all have. We wanted to make sure that we were prepared to come back in today, because I know there were a lot of questions last meeting. And so here we go. SPEAKER: This is just the facing departments. SPEAKER: OK, there we go. SPEAKER: Here's the presentation. SPEAKER: OK, so this is Bridgewater subdivision. I'm gonna try not to be too redundant, but I had prepared to say a lot of the things Matt just said. So, I'm gonna try to skip through. But generally we're seeking to rezone from R1 and C3 to PUD. And we're asking for a positive recommendation to city council, as Mr. Gunter just mentioned. Our plan includes 541 single family lots from last meeting. Miss Cannon brought up a concern around the 40-foot lots. We've removed those all together and our minimum lot size has been increased to 50ft. We also... Mr. Whittlesey brought up concerns regarding just detail kind of what I'm bringing out to you all of what... How is it gonna work? What are the access points? And it is a little complicated, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's impossible. We're asking for something unrealistic here. So, to begin this development has active open spaces all throughout it. We have three pocket parks, three playgrounds and one wooded park, which are, what we call active open spaces. So, each one of those is present in a pedestrian shed, which allows for walkability within the neighborhood where each resident can walk to a amenity. Feasibly, that's generally in the planning world, something that we're looking to do in these larger developments. Here are some examples of what those pocket parks are gonna look like. Within the development. And so we're really trying to create a lawn type amenity for the residents to enjoy.

They'll also give places for kids to play, exercise people to gather within the development. Next, we have our wooded park, which will kind of serve as the integration point between the development and the wooded open space. So, we have 60 acres that are going to be preserved of hardwoods that are really quite beautiful when you walk the property. And so we wanna allow for the residents to actually enjoy that and not just be woods beside their house, but something they can actually access. So, this will be the point where those things will connect. In that area, we're really focusing on different communal aspects so that people can get together and meet their neighbors, that kind of thing. Playgrounds as well, we think are really important that we see this as a family oriented subdivision. And so we're really trying to encourage places for kids to play and places for families to get together, get to know your neighbors. Again, being the common theme throughout this development. The next piece is I just mentioned is that open space that we're preserving, we're preserving around 65 acres. That will be trees wooded forever. We have a lot of streams within this area that we want the residents to be able, like I mentioned earlier, to access, enjoy, see and not just be Dead Woods in Opelika that no one ever gets to actually access. We are implementing a two mile trail system that will be accessed at all different points throughout the development. And then another really neat, unique piece of this property is as you're driving into the property, you're gonna have to go through a significant portion of wooded area to get to the development. So, that will really serve as a nice delineator between this more heavy commercial along two, 80 and 85 to this residential area. So, it's almost like you're passing through a like a gateway or a curtain, if you will, into the development, and it'll really delineate it permanently from those uses.

Another big proponent of this, like I said, walkability with the trail. But also we're proposing four foot sidewalks on both sides of the streets. As Mr. Fuller mentioned earlier. That is a requirement of the PUD ordinance, and we'll be having that throughout the development just to encourage more walkability. These are some renderings that the top left rendering and the top right rendering are actually photos that we took on the property. And then we rendered what these pathways are gonna look like throughout the woods. So, y'all can have a good idea of how the residents will actually access these areas and be able to take a dog on a walk, go and walk with your family, that kind of thing, through the woods. And just kind of have that connection with nature, even in a more suburban type subdivision application. Also, that's a really good rendering on the bottom left of what that entrance will look like as you're leaving the heavy commercial area and entering into the development. We also have on the bottom right some of our 50 foot homes, and then it's just a really good idea of what those typical thoroughfares are gonna look like. You have sidewalks on both sides of the road. We're showing a street tree there. We can see the architectural features of the houses themselves as well. As far as the pool and clubhouse go, like Mr. Mosley mentioned, it will be at the front of the development. We're committing in our letter that the developer, before they can final plat their 51st lot, that pool and clubhouse has to be completed. That way. We're not kicking that can down the road until the 500th house is built, and no one's ever getting to enjoy that amenity. We wanna go ahead and require that. That's built up front. That way we are experiencing exactly what we're planning on doing here. Here are some examples of what the developer has done in the past. As you can see, it's got kind of a pavilion, some small exercise equipment, a pool, and then just some meeting spaces there within the development. Kids birthday parties, retirement parties, that kind of thing within the development.

Just another third place for people to gather. This is the part that we were getting at a little bit earlier regarding utilities. So, sewer is very straightforward. Gravity sewer on site. Nothing crazy there. The water is Matt and Scott both mentioned does have some qualifiers to it. And the simplest way I could figure out to communicate it is off our main entrance. We can build 75 lots off of that water access alone. To build the whole development. We have to have our main entrance at Logan Drive, plus the South Uniroyal connection, which we've already coordinated with Opelika Water. They verified that would be adequate to serve the entire development. If for some reason the Scenic Oaks project is lagging and we can't get cooperation with adjacent property owners, we can't cooperate with the city or something like that, or if it's taking time. Keep in mind this is four years to five years down the road from now, so we have time to work out these issues. We would be able to access the Wildwood Drive point to get an additional 150 lots, which would allow for 225 lots to be built prior to that connection to South Uniroyal. So, the plan A is to connect to South Uniroyal and Logan Drive with water, and that can serve the entire development. I feel confident that we're going to be able to work something out with Scott. We've already had some preliminary conversations. I think it's very feasible. I think Scott can speak to that as well, but we just wanted to go ahead and be clear on what our objective is here. As far as power goes, like Scott mentioned, it's split territory between Opelika Power and Alabama Power. Matt, I think, did a really good job of covering the fire access part of this. I'll skip over that. The other large concern was the resident access. So, the developers maintained contracts to purchase the property fronting Columbus Parkway. And this is really, I think, a big draw to this development,

because this could be a catalyst to really revitalize this area. It will create opportunities for more development here with that intersection coming in. Scott's pointed out to me several times that is a major traffic issue area. And both of these things, this intersection and the Scenic Oaks extension is what is gonna alleviate the traffic at exit 62. So, these are the answers to those common problems that I think we're always talking about. We've already started working with, as I said, Scott Alcott on the intersection coordination. And really, we're kind of in a chicken or the egg situation here because until we can get the putt approval, we can't fully go forward in getting these development agreements and things put into place, because until we get that putt approval, it's just a concept. Once we get a putt approval, we have something behind it to where we can actually start moving forward and really, truly answering some of these questions. And keep in mind, we're being bound to whatever we're presenting today. If we're going a different route, we have to come back to you all and redo all of this. The secondary access options, we can build a fully functional paved roadway connecting to Wildwood Drive, which is in the Creek Stone subdivision. If Scenic Oaks is constructed, we can connect to Scenic Oaks, or we can work with an adjacent developer who's actually contacted us. It's the property between the... It's the property just to the south of ours. Between the blue line and our property. That property is someone has brought it to us to design. And so that's something that we're gonna be able to coordinate throughout that you'll be seeing on planning commission in a couple of months most likely. So, we have plenty of options. We can't tell you exactly what we're gonna do today, but we do feel confident that there's a solution there. But like I said, we're caught in this chicken or the egg situation where once this is finalized, we can move

forward with some answers. Since we don't know, like Matt mentioned, exactly what we wanna do, we want to be sure that we're giving the city assurances that we're not gonna overbuild off of one entrance. And so to do that, we're self-imposing that prior to the final plat of the 151st lot of permanent secondary access point must be constructed and approved by the City of Opelika Engineering Department before we can move forward. So, we are stuck until we can answer that question of where is the permanent secondary access coming from and construct it? And we're limited to 151 lots or 150 lots. Apologies. Really, the main takeaway from this subdivision is that I do have some visual. Typical lots. I think we went over this last month in pretty good detail. Really, main difference between the two is we have a ten foot front setback on the 65 foot lots. What that is for, is to allow parking in the back and kind of a drive by. More so rather than parking everything in the front, the 50 foot lots will be more so parked in the front primarily, but we will have some variation between the lots, which should give a really nice esthetic. The primary goal here is to really restore the traditional neighborhood model and create a place where people can flourish by getting to know their neighbors and having places to know their neighbors. And then I truly believe that this will be a catalyst to really attract more commercial development, attract better development in the area, and really take the next step on this small pocket of Opelika. I think this piece is the dominant that has to fall to allow for these other improvements that Opelika has is published in the long range transportation plan and other objectives that have talked about commonly here, such as traffic alleviation at I-85. If you have any questions or concerns, I'm happy to answer those a lot. I'm sorry. SPEAKER: OK, thank you. SPEAKER: Yes, ma'am. SPEAKER: So, our...

Just a question about the substitution. Where is the 31st lot that has to be done before you have to have a second influx? SPEAKER: Is this a question for me? SPEAKER: Yes, excuse me. The 31st lot that you've got to have 31 lots. SPEAKER: Yes, ma'am. We don't know exactly what lot that's gonna be yet, but it's gonna be around that intersection where the entrance is. Yes. SPEAKER: Your second access. But your emergency access point. I think that's...(CROSSTALK) the emergency. SPEAKER: Yes, ma'am. OK, so that emergency access is something that we've met with the fire department about probably three months ago. We worked out a solution to where we can cut in a driveway that is gravel that meets the specific regulations on what those roads have to be made out of. And we will cut that road. It's gonna be a long run, but we're going to cut that emergency access from Wildwood through through the city right of way through our development. And then we have to connect to public roads internally. So, that's really our hang up there. It's IFC regulation that we're meeting. And so it will be a large gravel road through the woods for fire trucks in case there's a tornado. And the main entrance is blocked, and they need to get back there and help people. SPEAKER: And then that would be converted to a permanent road at one point? SPEAKER: That's one of our options where we may go that route. Yeah. SPEAKER: And we know that ALDOT will want a traffic (CROSSTALK) signal. SPEAKER: I've had discussions with them before about the location of traffic signal, and it's kind of shifted up and down that way. The original development had it located on Logan Drive, where that Exxon is, and it got denied. And so that was kind of troubling for us. But some projects have come through since then, and they identified a location which will be approved for a traffic signal.

And that's where the city constructed the northern half of the northern section of that drive. That goes to the signal of the Granbury Drive, where the true value is. That's why that was located there, because that's where ALDOT said they would approve the signal. The signal won't warrant with a little bit of traffic that goes through the true value. But adding this and other development, it will warrant a signal through ALDOT. And that's the location they approved. So, we feel confident that will be at that location. So, all those have to work hand in hand as well to get that signal. SPEAKER: Maybe that signal will slow down some of the traffic, too. SPEAKER: That's the goal. SPEAKER: Yeah, Alright. Any questions to the developer? This is separate from discussion. JAY: Yeah I do. So, my question and I think maybe and I don't wanna speak for the planning department, but for myself it seems like there's a lot of if thens, then that situations in all of this and you've shown us like the grand picture. But it seems like there's a lot of phasing. You know we get you out there, we've got a 150. Then we get to the whole thing. And depending how one thing lands will dictate how the next step goes. And I think for me that would have been helpful to understand that and maybe Matt as well so that we, you know, we're not approving so much. SPEAKER: Sure. JAY: Without information on how we're going to get there. And I think that's what I would like to see is more of a phasing plan. Like back to Lucinda's question, where is lot 31? So, what are we approving in this first phase to get there before we have to put in, you know, another access road and that sort of thing. So... SPEAKER: Jay, if I can address that? JAY: Yeah. SPEAKER: That will come in the preliminary plat. So, it'll they'll turn a preliminary plat maybe for the first 30 for the first 150 at at a later time.

They probably won't. Well they may eliminate the whole thing. But they make their final pieces as they come. So, each one will have a separate approval coming through this board. So, and that's the difficulty of this project because there are so many unknowns. But like Matt said, I think he, they self-limited themselves. Honestly, if they build 30 lots and nothing else happens, it stays at 30 lots if they can't get a you to secondary access for secondary water. It just stays there. And that's at their risk. You know you understand they can't do anything if it's, if it drops there. So, that's the risk they're taking. So, in order to mitigate their risk, they're gonna work to develop these other options too. And everything like you said everything does come through you for some subsequent approval. So, it's not like this is, you're gonna see this final five years. It will be done. So, it's like every phase will certainly come through this board. As an update I would say to. WALTERS: So, what we approve for the first 30 lots, once they built the 300th lot, the same rules still apply to the 250 to 300 lot? SPEAKER: Yes, to answer Mr. Walters question, maybe a little bit more as well, is I understand the complexity of it. Those are things that we are imposing on ourselves to protect the Planning Commission to protect the City of Opelika to give Matt. And this is something Matt and I worked on together to give Matt the ability to stop the development, because there's a lot of times where developers promise the moon and then they don't come back and do what they say, they're gonna do. What we're trying to do is give tangible mechanisms to where the development cannot proceed, unless the things that are being promised today occur. So, that's the goal. I apologize for the complexity of it. It's a complex project. (CROSSTALK) Yes, sir. JAY: So, Matt, given that the recommendation that you've

had is still that the commission doesn't give a you guys planning department is not is say they still cannot recommend approval until you have more information. MATT: We that was based on what we had last week. JAY: So, you feel like you've got enough now? MATT: Phasing plan now with that plan because it is part of their narrative that they've submitted as kind of a written write up with this. JAY: OK. MATT: With them saying that at 150 lots, they would have a full secondary access. We would not allow a preliminary plat or final plat to proceed without showing more than 150 lots without that secondary access, whether it's Scenic Oaks, whether it's Wildwood or some other connection. And there are a lot of moving parts in this area right now. So, I do wanna say that there are pieces that are for sale and actively being marketed. And so you could see multiple pieces kind of falling within the next months or year in this general area. SPEAKER: So, it's sort of landlocked. I mean, that's the thing. MATT: And it is landlocked, but there is access available there. I mean, it's not completely. There are ways that they can be meet the requirements. Now, what the best way is, I think today may not be the best way in six months, but at the same time, we're not gonna allow them to proceed without showing us that they can meet those requirements. JAY: And you have that narrative? MATT: We do. Yes, sir. And that's what I pass out to you all at right before the meeting today. So... SPEAKER: OK, so those are just questions to the developer. We need to make a motion. SPEAKER: Public hearing is still open. SPEAKER: The public hearing. Anyone else to speak to the public hearing?

Close the public hearing. A motion needs to be made to send a positive or negative recommendation to city council for the rezoning and the... (CROSSTALK) Master plan approval and the master plan approval SPEAKER: Motion for positive recommendation to city council. SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: Any discussion? All in favor? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries. SPEAKER: The next item is also part of a thud. It's a three part item. The first of those is a request for annexation. This is a request for annexation. Let me get my gear here. So, the request for annexation of 32.3 acres. It says Columbus Road. What you'll notice is the property has access from Oklahoma Road across the railroad tracks here, but actually, it's kind of behind property also on South Union Road. And so it's kind of hard to describe exactly what that is without Using a simple description. So, this property is adjacent to a larger piece of property that is currently in the city limits. And it's proposed to be rezoned to a pub. Before they do that, though, they would have to annex this 32.3 acres. And the current zoning is at being in the county as is has no zoning. And so we would recommend that it be annexed into the city. And so that would be a positive recommendation to city council.

SPEAKER: OK, so this calls for a public hearing to annex it into (CROSSTALK) the... Just for the annexation, a public hearing. Public hearing is closed. Commissioners, do I hear a motion to send a positive or negative recommendation to city ouncil? SPEAKER: Make a motion for a positive recommendation to city council. SPEAKER: Any discussion? All in favor? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries. SPEAKER: The next item is a two part item. One is future land Use amendment. The other is the rezoning. This deals with partially with the same property for the annexation, and then an additional 141.9, I believe is the correct amount. The applicant has offered Stanford Group, representing Rebecca Walton Young and Elaine Walton Price. The subject property again is located on South Funeral Road, north of Old Columbus and north of the railroad tracks. Currently, the property has a in one zoning along the frontage and then is R1 behind it. The property has a future land use amendment of manufacturing and low density residential currently. And so what we would ask is, if you do approve the rezoning, that you amend the future land use to match that, and that would be to... Future land use to a mixed use category. Bit more in depth into the request and the request

to rezone a total of 206. Excuse me. Not 206 acres. It's 174 acres. The property is currently zoned R1 and M1. M1 is manufacturing. R1 is kind of rural large lot development to HUD, and that's contingent on the piece being annexed into the city. And so what they're proposing is a residential development that would include 174 acres. It has 401 lots density of approximately 2.3 units per acre. And so what you'll see is coming in off of South Aurora. There are two drives coming in that would connect and then extend further back along the property. It's kind of a long linear property. To the south, you have the railroad tracks that kind of border it and prevent any future connection, to the north. It's Drake's landing which you approved the final plat on tonight. The development itself is proposing three different lot types with a significant amount of open space. There is a 50 foot single family detached, which is approximately 6500ft². There's a 60 foot single family lot, detached 146 of those. And then there is a 70 foot single family, and there are 99. So, 156 of the 50s, which are these lighter color in the central areas. The brownish color are the 60 foot lots which kind of go along with the exterior. And then the blue color ones are 70 foot lots and the larger lots in this section. We noted that there is approximately 75 acres in this development of open space.

And so that's why the density, even with those lot sizes, is fairly low. The density is consistent with an approximately R2 designation, if it were a standard zone. One thing we did notice, note, in here is while the density is low, the lot sizes themselves are somewhat smaller than some of those rounds. So, in this area, you largely have a lot of rural property, R-1 zoning, which has minimum lot size of one acre. Then you have a couple developments that have been constructed. SPEAKER: Over the last 5 or 10 years. Drake's landing has 60-foot-wide lots, but they are quite long and 15,000 square foot minimum close to that R2 zone. Density of 1.25 acres. East Point Crossing, which is this development below the railroad tracks is R2 zones. So they have eight-foot-wide lots, 15,000ft², and then Creekstone, which is across the street. Across South Newton Road, just up this way, is a mix of R2 and R3. So and there are lot sizes of 10,000ft². So, the lot sizes in those are somewhat bigger, bigger, although the densities are fairly consistent. Again, noting that this has more open space than in those other developments. They provided, again, some information to the master plan about landscaping buffering. We did look at making some additional connections and didn't see anywhere where they needed to add an additional stub or connection.

Based on that, our biggest concern with this, though, has been the lot size and width related to those in the surrounding area. At this time, you know, we felt that it was still somewhat out of character based on those lot sizes with some of the surrounding areas. It is a good development, providing lots of open space and amenity. It seems they have provided us additional information since the staff report was made about the types of amenities would be present, and the types and styles of houses that would be present. Those are in your packet, and I'm sure Mr Radford will be happy to share those. We do did say you do send a positive recommendation. We recommend against sidewalks on both sides of the street. Utilities be located underground, provide a minimum of one tree per yard on corner lots, one on each street. Provide a standard landscaping for single-family homes, including shrubs, foundation plantings, and then that there'd be no, vinyl or aluminum siding as primary materials. SPEAKER: Engineering. SPEAKER: Yes, ma'am. Just like the previous application, the engineering and technical support does not have nearly the reports that we would for the preliminary plat, which would be the next phase in this process. Although as we're analyzing this, rezoning, they're not nearly as many hurdles as we experienced the last application. And so they have they're easy to access. They do have adequate access and water access and things like that. So we don't have comments at this time regarding this rezoning. SPEAKER: Water. SPEAKER: Yeah. They're all the same.

All the comments from the Planning Commission, I mean, preliminary plat, although they were all addressed at this phase. But one thing the water did note is there are some elevations at this property; this is that does have some higher areas in here. And so there may be some areas where they either require additional boosters or units, or they may need to look at pressure in those areas because of the elevation of the property. SPEAKER: Will there be a sewer or will it be septic tanks? SPEAKER: This would be on sewer system. Sewer sewers through the site? Yeah. Sewer comes through the top of this property located between here and Drake's Landing. SPEAKER: OK. This calls for a public hearing. And are we doing a public hearing for both of these? SPEAKER: Public hearing for both. And then two separate motions. One would be the rezoning recommendation to the city council, and one would be a amendment to the future land use. SPEAKER: And the question for the rezoning is if it goes to R-1, it's going from R-1 and M1 to a PUD. So the lots would be. SPEAKER: And it includes some on-property owned properties being annexed, which would come in. SPEAKER: Yes. OK, do I hear a motion? SPEAKER: There's a public hearing. SPEAKER: Excuse me. Public hearing. Sorry. Anyone who would like to speak for or against. OK. SPEAKER: I'm here for the Stanford group. I can get through this one a little bit faster.

I know we've all been here a while, so it's a little less complicated. Like Scott pointed out, the last one. So, it's called Mayfair Subdivision. We're representing Miss Eileen Price and Miss Rebecca Young today, and we're requesting that the Planning Commission recommend approval for the subject 174.2 acres to be rezoned from R1 and M1 to PUD. This plan includes Matt mentioned, 401 single family homes density of 2.35 units per acre, which is common for the area. There's the master plan that we've seen already. Similar to Bridgewater, um, active open spaces throughout the development. We've got in this one two pocket parks, a playground, and a wiffle ball field. So we've got some renderings of those in here as well. There's some the pocket parks again, but more applied in this development setting. On this development there'll be 60 acres of mature hardwoods that will be permanently preserved. I have some pictures of those, actually, from the site here. And so again, we're trying to go for not just the woods beside your house that you drive by. A portion of but can we access these things and enjoy them as an actual natural resource and amenity to the residents? So we'll have a 1.3-mile walking trail throughout this development. The preserved areas are also primarily along the development boundaries, so we don't have any real backing up to any other houses. It gets close on the south boundary, but it's also buffered by a railroad track there. SPEAKER: Also what? SPEAKER: It's buffered by railroad track on the southern boundary as well. Yes, ma'am. Walkability. Similarly, requirement for Opelika for foot sidewalks, both sides of the road. Those will be throughout the development. Amenities are located in each pedestrian shed.

So they're walkable from each unit. Here are a couple of renderings that we created based off the images on site. So you've got the walking trails that are going to be going through the wooded areas. We also have a pond on this property that's rather large, and so we're gonna be really trying to utilize that as a premium amenity for the residents. We're gonna be building a dock that will support small fishing boats. Just a paddle, no engines or anything like that. And then a pavilion down on the water. And then we'll also be... we have some little stream crossings here and there. And so we'll be using some pedestrian bridges in those applications. Utilities. I think we went over that already in detail. Water will be accessed from South Uniroyal at the two entrance points. The developer understands that their pressure concerns and is ready to install booster pumps as necessary to maintain appropriate pressures for every unit within the development. The sewer. We have sewer running throughout the site in a couple different spots, and we have some different outfalls that we'll be accessing. But again, very straightforward on this development. We won't have any lift stations or low pressure, anything like that. The power on this site is served by Opelika Power and Tallapoosa River electric. So the main thing on this development, as Matt mentioned, is planning has concerns around lot size. So our approach here is to move away from some of the adjacent development strategy. Nothing wrong with it. Just we see that there's some dead spaces in these lots. So if you have a 60 foot lot that's 230 foot deep. Really, the only front half of that lot is being developed and used for residence, a yard, and whatnot. The back of that half is kind of dead space that's going to be owned by that property owner. Our theory here is if we can shorten up those lots and actually put on the lot what you're going to use, then we can

collect the rest of those pieces and create a space for people to enjoy within the development. So we can kind of combine all these remnant pieces that are stuck within each lot and make an amenity that's accessible and usable for these residents. So, like Matt said, we're we're not far off. I think we're a little under on average lot size as far as width goes, and then density. We're consistent with the other approach. Really the place where we're breaching is going to be lot minimum lot size, and that is to relocate that space into green spaces. The adjacent developments that we're comparing to here, they don't have a lot of these green spaces that we're showing today. So the real the real question is would we'd rather have a longer lot, a deeper lot, and no green spaces, or would we rather have a shorter, more efficient lot and these usable green spaces that can be enjoyed by the community? So again, we can redo this plan. We can make it work. We won't really lose any lots. We can meet these minimum lot sizes. What's gonna go away? Are these open spaces that we're creating for the residents to enjoy? So that's that's kind of our theory here. We're open to this conversation with the Planning Commission. We really wanna do what you all feel is in the best interest of Opelika. And so I'm excited to see what you all think and go from there. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer. Make sure I didn't miss anything. No, I think I'm good to go. Thank you. SPEAKER: Okay. Anyone else like to speak? Public hearing is closed. So we've got two motions. SPEAKER: Yes, ma'am. So one would be a recommendation to the city council, positive or negative, for rezoning, which would be a amendment to the... SPEAKER: Land use. SPEAKER: Land use. SPEAKER: OK, so we'll do an amendment to the...

SPEAKER: I would do the rezoning first because if you don't do rezoning, then you. SPEAKER: I thought we did the rezoning. SPEAKER: I mean, if you don't, if you don't amend, if you don't recommend a positive recommendation to the city council for rezoning, then there's no need to change the language. SPEAKER: OK. Do I hear a motion to rezone. SPEAKER: Motion. For a positive recommendation to City Council to rezone? Second. SPEAKER: Any discussion? Personally, my discussion is I think it doesn't fit what's out there, and I. I don't know how you make it fit out there except to have larger lots. That's just my discussion about it. Any other discussion? All in favor of rezoning? Positive. Positive recommendation to send to city council. SPEAKER: Aye. Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Aye. Any abstain? SPEAKER: So that would be a positive recommendation to city council. SPEAKER: Positive recommendation to City council. SPEAKER: So the next would be an amendment to future land use. SPEAKER: Alright. We need a recommendation. SPEAKER: It's just a vote to amend the future land use. SPEAKER: To to amend the future. SPEAKER: Mixed use. SPEAKER: OK. Do I hear a motion? SPEAKER: Motion to amend. SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: Any discussion? All in favor? ALL: Aye. SPEAKER: Any opposed? SPEAKER: Aye. SPEAKER: Aye. Any abstain? Motion carries.

SPEAKER: The next item is the discussion again about our bed and breakfast ordinance. So what we've done is basically looked at the bed and breakfast regulations and we have the one that is currently on the table from January. And we have one that is proposed before you today. These two regulations are share some similarities and that they would amend where a bed breakfast use is allowed. But other than that, they would be fairly significantly different. The proposed regulation on this alternative text would require an owner-occupied residence and that the person be available on call at all times in the county. It would also... Again, same same uses or the use would be allowed in the same zones in the permitted use table for temporary uses. We talked about those where a specific, temporary event requirement is required, and it says basically that a bed and breakfast in a nonresidential zone is considered a celebration site and a residential zone, meaning a celebration in a residential zone, a celebration site or directors would not be considered a celebration site, which means it would not be available for commercial events. And then the rest of the language again reiterates that it is owner occupied residential unit. It limits the number of guest rooms from 1 to 6 bedrooms.

in accordance with the building code. And then the last part, which I think, is the other primary difference list, is accessory uses. Basically states that no other commercial uses of the property shall be allowed unless permitted within the zoning district, which means a bed and breakfast in a residential zone. And it goes on to state this, that a bed breakfast in a residential zone shall not use the structures, property, premises to host events, gatherings, parties for commercial gain, commercial events such as wedding parties, business meetings are considered separate uses that are part of different zoning classification permit, and that a bed and breakfast inn may use in a residential district may be used in a similar manner to similarly situated to other residences to host the owner's private events and against gatherings, subject to those limitations. So, because they are owner-occupied premises under this proposed regulation, if the owner wanted to host a party or dinner or something like that, they can do so provided that it's not for commercial gain or in a commercial nature. It goes on to say that bed and breakfast in nonresidential zones would be allowed to host those as the zone permitted, so nonresidential could potentially still have events. But for residential zones, it would limit those to non those at private events for the owner. One thing I did notice through this is that it does limit the way it's written now, does limit all bed and breakfast, whether commercial or noncommercial, to being owner-occupied regulation.

Owner-occupied residences and then those limited number of units specifically for all that breakfast to up to six units. Now, that's not to say that they could be classified as something else if a commercial bed breakfast wanted to have more units, but it does. The only difference between commercial and noncommercial is related to events in this district and this zoning text amendment. And so what we would ask from the commission between this and the item. Number number 11 is that you provide a recommendation on both and send them to council and allow them to make a decision on both based on the commission's recommendations. SPEAKER: OK. This calls for a public hearing. Is there anyone who'd like to speak for or against this? SPEAKER: Oh, yeah. Go for it. AMY HESS: Hey, I'm Amy Hess. I live at 601 North 10th Street, so not far from where the bed and breakfast is gonna be. My biggest concern is when they came before about the zoning originally, I was a little nervous about it. And I can't remember, I don't remember names or anything, but someone did come around the neighborhood to answer questions. A young lady came and spoke and talked to me about the zoning, and I asked questions, and I did sign her petition. But I was under the understanding that because I asked, I said, is this going to be like the brownfield house where they can have events, that kind of stuff? And I was told it's a bed and breakfast, that they might have places for people to have a meeting or something like that, but no big large-scale thing, because I was concerned

about noise and music and those kinds of. I can't hear the Brownfield house from my house. So I was concerned about those kinds of things. Had I known this was what was gonna come up, I probably wouldn't have signed that petition. So I just have a little concerns about that. I kind of enjoyed the idea of a bed and breakfast down the road, and that house wasn't just gonna dilapitate or not be used, but I was not under the impression it'd be more of a commercial type setting. So I just wanted to speak that. PHILIP BROUGHTON: I'm Philip Broughton, I've been up here a few times in the past, um, to talk about the bed and breakfast and, um, I think I speak for the majority of the people in the community that are directly impacted by this. We're not in favor of it. We prefer that you give a negative recommendation, but obviously that's something that's up to you all. We do think that it presents troubles and problems. And a good example is the wreck that happened on 10th Street and sixth on Sunday night. We think that there will be increased activity and that there will be those types of problems. We've highlighted that in the past. People have dismissed it as hyperbole. It's 100% accurate, and Sunday's events are a prime example. We are opposed to if you're adamant about approving or recommending a bed and breakfast; we're adamant that there be no events whatsoever. So I hope that you'll take that under consideration. I also think it's important that it be owner occupied, meaning if it's a business that owns it, whoever the majority equity owner is, that they reside there, that they don't have some delegate that they plug in. Lastly, I would say if you're gonna do it, that there needs to be some kind of distance restriction. I know in the past there had been. There's been so many iterations of this that I can't keep track. But there should be something that says there shouldn't be

a bed and breakfast within 1000ft from one another. So I hope you'll take that under consideration as well. I think I speak for those in my neighborhood. We're 100% opposed to it. We feel like that we've been hoodwinked this whole time and are not in favor of it. SPEAKER: Anyone else? JASON LANZ: I live at 410 North 9th Street. This is right outside my back door across the street, over at 10th. When we first started this back in February of 2024, the language that was presented to us in town hall meetings was word for word either the Charleston or the Savannah language for their bed and breakfast ordinances. Forgive me, I can't remember which exactly, but I can get with you offline and explain which one it is. I can show you that. What we have now for the proposal resembles that not in the least. The owner doesn't have to live there. The operator doesn't even have to live there. The main proposal is a glorified Airbnb plus an event center ordinance. The alternative proposal that just came out before council today, before the commission today, that makes sense. That sounds like what people think of when they think of a bed and breakfast.

The owner lives there for their own events, no commercial parties, but the ordinance that we've been fighting, the owner doesn't have to live there, just somewhere in town, anywhere in town. They don't have to be on site during the events. Now we're looking at 10 outdoor events a year, up to 200 guests, events and noise running till 11pm, rows of porta potties. This is right outside my back door. I'm looking right at this. This is what I was looking at before I drove down here. We looked at examples from Baltimore, Birmingham, Charleston, Columbus, Fairhope, New Orleans, Savannah. This proposal doesn't resemble anything that those communities have. Our closest example, Columbus, they outright prohibit events and parties at bed and breakfasts, even though that's not a strictly residential area. It's a mixed-use in the historic district. They don't even allow this. So now back in February, we were looking at some very modest language changes that would clear this up and give protections for residential zoning. That got kicked back to this commission in a manner that I still don't understand. And now here we are, once again, four months later, looking at a bed and breakfast ordinance that is anything but a bed and breakfast. It's an event center ordinance. If you're gonna recommend it, at least call it what it is, an event center ordinance in a residential zone. I strongly, I think the alternative sounds like a much better proposal if you're going to give anything a positive recommendation. Thank you.

SPEAKER: OK. Anyone else? GEORGE PURVIS: My name is George Purvis. I live at 514 North eighth Street. I've been listening to the arguments back and forth about this for a long time. What I don't know, and what I would like to find out. Since everybody in our neighborhood does not want this to happen, why you are so intent on passing it. It keeps brought up, being brought up and brought up. We keep knocking it back, but you keep bringing it up. Somebody in. There's something for somebody in this, and it's not for us. I would like you to just get rid of it. SPEAKER: Anyone else? Alright. The public hearing is now closed. So we need to decide to send a positive or negative recommendation to City Council on this. SPEAKER: This would be on the alternative, which is the more what I would classify as more restrictive ordinance. Yes or no? SPEAKER: Yes. G-9. SPEAKER: Two main issues here. One is whether the owner has to reside in the bed and breakfast. And this item says that the owner is required to reside on the premises. And then the other deals with events that are allowed. And this one says. The primary function of a bed and breakfast is a residential in a residential district. We're talking about here shall be the provision of temporary accommodations and meals to travelers,

and the owner shall not use the structures, property. Property or premises to host events, gatherings, or parties for commercial gain. So that's the item. This is the item that you're considering at the present time, which is item number nine. And there's going to be a second version which is item number 11. So the question is whether to give a positive or negative recommendation with respect. To this amendment to the number nine.. SPEAKER: To number nine. SPEAKER: Number nine. I just want to make sure. SPEAKER: Yes. SPEAKER: Comments I think were aimed at item number 11. SPEAKER: Right. SPEAKER: Comments. Correct. SPEAKER: Correct. Do I hear a motion about this? Number nine. SPEAKER: Motion for a positive recommendation to City Council for item G nine. SPEAKER: Second. SPEAKER: Any discussion? SPEAKER: So guys this one is the more restrictive one. SPEAKER: This is more restrictive or has to reside on the premises. The bed breakfast cannot use be used for commercial purposes in residential in a residential zone. Commercial zone. It can be used for commercial purposes. SPEAKER: Yeah for the whole city okay. SPEAKER: And this is not specifically related to any single site. This is a universal ordinance to cover the entire cities. SPEAKER: That's right. Any other discussion? All in favor? Any opposed? SPEAKER: Aye. Any abstain. Motion carries. SPEAKER: Number ten is on the table from last month. They were going to do some...