Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

How are you? Sorry.

Okay. We'll call to order the uh January 2026 meeting of the Homewood Planning Commission. If we could please start with a roll call. All right. Mr. Henard here. Miss Wilcott here. Mr. Harwell, Mr. Ruspento here, Mr. Underwood, Mr. Stamps here, Mr. Sims here, Mr. Gulas and Mr. Roberts

here. Thank you. Um, all right, we're going to move on. Um, Mr. Goodwin sent around the minutes from the December meeting. Uh, I had a chance to look at those. That look good to me. Unless someone else had any concerns, I'd entertain a motion to approve those. I'm going to make a motion to approve. All in favor? Opposed? The mean the minutes pass. Um communications. U Mr. Hener, do you have any communications as vice chair? I do not.

Uh I have none as chairman. So um also there's no new business or sorry, no old business. So we're going to move on to new business. U and the only case we have tonight is case TX 260102 relating to a text amendment to the uh to article four uh of the zoning ordinance relating to uh the Green Springs Urban Development District uh specifically the definitions under section GG. Uh so uh Fred what what is who is going to explain or do I need to explain what

I don't know I I'll tend to either defer to Sherry or you know we we discussed the overview the the emphasis for the uh requested change u stemming out of discussions associated with the previous approval by the city council of the Valvaline instant oil facility that was also approved by the planning commission back in October. But, uh, it's my understanding coming out of those conversations and discussion in the review of that plan that city council expressed concern that, um, that the simmer facilities were not in keeping with the vision uh that they had for the Green Springs quarter. Uh and so I think u there's a desire on the part of the city council to consider the possibility of removing uh the minor vehicle repair as a permitted use from the GIRD uh urban redevelopment district. So that's that's the purpose of the nice meeting is to consider u the removal of that classification under the burden and how that would take effect would be the uh elimination of section C article 4 section CC subsection 2 um C which is the definition not the definition the description of the uh restrictions applied to minor vehicle repair to eliminate that alto together. And then in the use permitted use chart um under article 4 under GIRD to el to eliminate u the restricted use or eliminate the R to make that a non unapproved use or not approved.

That is correct. Okay.

Okay. In uh in our discussions of this premeating discussions, uh one thing we had also discussed is because the phrase minor minor vehicle repair is not defined within the broader zoning book and that the only definition even similar to that uh type of business or that type of use is under the West Homewood District uh for a definition of auto or motor vehicle service. Um we were going to recommend as a body that in addition to making the removals or the strikes through the language of section CC2C um and the change in the chart, but also to have you recommend the addition uh recommended the city work with the city attorney uh come up with the definition of minor vehicle repair so that we know exactly what's encompassed within uh that phrase uh that that and that use that's now being eliminated. So, is there anything else I missed from the city with respect to what we're recommending or not recommending?

All right. With that, I I would entertain a motion. Um, do we want to open up for

any think this is my first rodeo? Um, all right. Well, this is a public meeting. If anyone from the public would like to speak on this case, this is your opportunity. Beverly, 617 Edgemore Drive. There are a couple of y'all that weren't here the last time I came to speak about this. That's the only reason I'm saying anything tonight. Uh just so y'all know a little history. Some friend will probably have a veteran handle on how long ago this was. About 15 years ago, the GooGoo car wash wanted to go in on Green Springs where uh Leavo had been, which is now the Smoothie King. and they came for a variance because they weren't allowed to have a front-facing exit from the car wash on Green Springs. We successfully fought that and it was denied. Um then later um that's how the Smoothie King became u on on that lot. Um, and in the in the interim there's been some changes to the code and somewhere along the line any reference to this was dropped and I don't know when that was because I don't read the whole code every time [laughter] there's changes. Um, I don't need to do that anymore. But anyway, so that was the beginning of some of this. And then when pep boys came in, they were required to put their bays opening on the car so that they did not open on the green springs. And like I say, so that's two instances of reasons why this

was in there. And it did get dropped at some point. Sure. It may have been before your time, too. I don't know. But um yeah. Okay. But the Okay. But anyway, so all that somehow just didn't happen with the valine. But um so anyway,

yeah. Well, originally they weren't supposed to be that way at all. That's why the do the car wash got turned down because we they um wouldn't give them the variance to have it there. So um and I think this will help with that because it'll just ban any of it. You won't have to worry with are they does the which way is they oriented or any of that. And I really think this is would be a positive step for um the gird and uh helping us to upgrade that which I know uh count the city wants to do. We've got a new comprehensive plan coming and it would give us an opportunity to address that all those issues on green springs. Thanks.

Thank you. Robbie Patel, 606 Bristol Lane. I just prepared something. So, um I'd like to thank you guys um for entertaining this tonight. Um, I want to be clear from the outset that I'm not here to relitigate or rehash any individual project that's already been approved. I'm here because the proposal to remove minor vehicle repair from the GUD is an opportunity to raise the broader issue of a planning question and about how we implement the vision the city itself articulated for the Green Springs Corridor. When the city advanced the Green Springs revitalization project between 2021 and 2023 C leadership described a clear and intentional goal. The city stated, and I quote, "They wanted to make that area quote, make it more pedestrian friendly, add bike lanes, greenery, and more to make it more like a boulevard as opposed to a highway, and to better connect West Homewood to the rest of the city." The city went on to explain that the desire for residents, and I quote, to feel safe if their kids are biking or walking and to move towards one holistic view of the city rather than a huge division. City department heads went on to say that the project was intended to re-energize and recharge that whole area

and to make clear that Green Springs is a part of Homewood and that we want it to be a part of Homewood. Importantly, this vision is no longer theoretical. The city has already made substantial physical investment to support it. Today, Green Springs has continuous sidewalks on both the east and west side of the corridor along with bike lanes, and they extend roughly four miles in total. That represents a significant public investment intended to support walking, biking, safety, and corridor cohesion. In a professional planning terms, a boulevard, and I had to look this up, is a multimodal corridor designed to balance vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, and adjacent development. It relies on consistent frontage design, reduced conflicts, and land uses that reinforce pedestrian comfort rather than undermine it. Sidewalks on both sides of the street are a foundation foundational element of that model and they're already in place here. The question before the commission then is how we maximize the value of that investment for the community. Addressing corridor issues through peace meal code deletions risks weakening the logic of the GUD and sending mixed signals about what Green Springs is meant to become. If the boulevard vision articulated by the city remains the goal, the moment, this moment presents an opportunity to take a step back and ask whether the GUD needs clearer design standards, frontage requirements, or performance criteria that fully leverage the infrastructure that we've already built rather than

adjusting the district one use at a time in response to individual projects. I'm not necessarily opposed to the change. I'm asking that the changes ma be made deliberately and holistically so that the sidewalk safety and beautifification investments already made translate into long-term community value. Finally, if this commission believes that tonight is not the appropriate forum to have this broader discussion about how we implement the boulevard and revitalization vision for Green Springs, I would respectfully ask for guidance on where that discussion should occur. The city has already invested heavily in sidewalks, safety, and beautifification in this area. I believe it's a real value in having a structured public conversation about how GUD and related standards can be refined holistically to maximize that investment and deliver the outcomes the city has promised. If that conversation belongs in a corridor study, a work session, or a future planning commission agenda item, I'd welcome the opportunity to participate. I thank you for your time and considering this perspective.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Okay. Anyone else from the public wish to to comment? All right. Seeing no one, we'll close the public portion. Um, and and I guess one thing I'd point out and and I guess related and it's something Mr. Lebuff referenced, but also relates to Mr. Patel's comment is that we are starting initiating a a comprehensive plan um for for the entire city of Homewood which would include its various subp parts. So that will be hopefully something that's addressed you said a holistic u instead of peace mill basis through through kind of the planning process. So we we are initiating that and that's that's that's definitely on the rise and we're we're underway. briefly.

So the It's my understanding these there will be a series of workshops through the development of the plan. They'll be based on wards and so when that time comes for that meeting in the ward uh that will be a good opportunity to be able to meet one on- one with the consultants and talk with them and explain your visions and your concerns uh and of how that might be addressed as part of that larger comprehensive plan. So there will be that that certain level throughout even though it's a citywide Even though it's a citywide plan, there are plans to meet individually within each of those boards. And that would, I would think, would be a good opportunity to meet one-on-one with the consultants and and express your uh thoughts with regard to the redevelopment of Green Springs in particular.

And I definitely echo what you're saying. I think you have some great points and I appreciate where you're coming from. I I do think this comprehensive plan process is a great jumping off point for more of this green springs. This We haven't done a comprehensive plan since 2007 and it it needs to happen, you know, every 5 to 10 years. We've not been, you know, set that mark or met that goal. But, uh, this is the I really do think it's the best jumping off point for that. Wow. And, uh, I definitely echo both of you know, as a West Hollywood resident, I I totally agree with what you're saying that, you know, we have complete streets. We have other avenues that we can address some of those things as well. Chair Roberts, could I just add a little bit to that specifically to as far as the timeline for this? You know, January 28th is going to Wednesday, January 28th is going to be a kickoff meeting for that here. And then there'll be a W one meeting the following day at the senior center. And then Ward two specifically that those meetings will occur later in the spring um around April. So it is in a short term that we'll have these conversations more in depth, Robbie, and and look forward to continuing the conversation. Thank Thank you.

Any further discussion? Mr. Chairman, a question comment the ordinance tested a nonconfirming news cannot be enlarged, expanded, or extended. I'm not sure what extended means. And could somebody here tell me what what that means to we've already said enlarged and expanded, but what does extended mean? Just synonymous.

Yeah. Unless got something. You think in terms of expansion, but unless you're extending the the use of Yeah, it's usually extending the use

in another nonconforming way. So, if if you had um if you sold widgets and your widget company was a non-conforming use and you decided to sell add on to the business, make it larger to sell more widgets, giving you a manufacturing of widgets. Perhaps you're extending the use and also prolonging the use because you're letting you're adding additional nonconformity. on top of what's existing.

I I think a good example that came to mind as you mentioned that express oil used to be just that express oil but then tire engineers also went in with them. So now you have a combination of oil changes but also the selling of tires itself. So that's sort of like an extension of what was originally an oil change business that's now sort of expanded. Even though the footprint of the building, I'm thinking of the one on Rocky Ridge that I'm familiar with, did not actually expand. The footprint didn't expand, but the use inside that building increased when they took on the selling of tires beyond just changing oil. So that might be

Yeah, [snorts] that's a good that is a good example. Just a comment here is that and I would I would be more comfortable with this if in fact we were doing this after input from the master plan. So I would just encourage the council as it considers our recommendation to have your deliberations have the council's deliberations after input from the community through the master plan and probably more importantly after we have a really good definition of what we're talking about because to a certain extent you know we're taking a leap of faith about what minor repair means But we don't know for sure and it be nice if this was buttoned down a little bit better. But I would just hope that the council in fact would do that as [snorts] a part of their deliberation and consideration. And I sense that's the intent as expressed earlier that there would be a definition of minor repair that was clarified before any action by the council was chosen. Thank you Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I think I wasn't here for the city council meeting where this kind of the impetus of this came from, but my understanding was is that obviously we're we're in a comprehensive plan process or beginning that. But but um there was more of an emergent view that this sort of thing should not continue. We shouldn't have any more toothpaste out of the tooth before we get to the end of that process. um might not be articulating that very well, but I think this was an attempt to kind of plug a leak. Um u I would agree with that, not so much as build wall

and at the last planning commission meeting where we talked about the valvalene. Um I brought that up as as the gird was not originally did not have this minor vehicle repair in it. That was the intent, as we discussed, to kind of move on from it being a highway corridor with vehicle repair to something more. And so taking this out is really returning to the original intent of the document of the GI. And uh definitely definitely support that. And preventing additional, you know, vehicular service and repair from coming to the corridor, which is not what I nor Beverly and some of the other residents that have voiced their opinions. Mr. Patel want with that. I'd like to make a motion to approve as stated with the uh deletions that are that are stated here and the addition of the West Homewood code language

or something similar there too. have a motion. Yeah. All right. Let's clarify that. Yeah. All right. So, is is the motion then to recommend the deletion of minor vehicle repair as a permitted use in GIRD and that city council consider the addition of a definition for minor vehicle repair similar the definition for auto or motor vehicle service that is defined in the west homewood district. Is that the motion? Okay.

Okay. That's what is that enough for you? Yeah. Does that clarify enough? Yeah, I want clarification. Yeah, we want to make sure that it's clear. Record's clear. Okay. Okay. So, the motion was made by Mr. Henigu. Was there a second? Second. All right, Mr. Stamps. I'll Mr. Sims. Yes. Mr. Hener. Yes.

Mr. Underwood. Yes. Mr. Ruspento. Yes. Miss Wilcott. Yes. And Mr. Roberts. Yes. Um so that will go forward to city council with a six um zero recommendation with one extension. Okay.

All right. Well, moving along. Uh any communications any additional communications from staff? just what we previously said with regard to the upcoming comprehensive plan and the meetings that are scheduled and I think you have handouts of those meeting dates but just to encourage the plan commissioners to attend those if at all possible. Thank you. Um all right well with that uh I've got nothing further so we'll uh we'll adjourn the meeting. Thank you.