Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'm going to call the May meeting of the Planning Commission to order and tell those in the audience if you have anything that you'd need to say or would like to say for or against. If you would come up to the microphone, state your name and address. I have five minutes to give us an explanation of what you would like to say and one time at the microphone. So the first item is approval of the minutes. Any discussion on that? I've got something that I think needs to be added as far as for the item number one. Was it number one?

Yes, ma'am.

I stepped off the dais and took myself away from here to vote. And was it number one?

Uh It was number one of last month. Herriman Plaza Hill Plaza flat.

Yeah. And Mr Whittlesey took over. So that needs to be addressed. Yes, ma'am.

We will make a Comment that you stated that you're standing and then we were also note that you left the dice and When it came back and then came back to you.

Okay, great.

Motion for approval with those changes.

All in favor. Any opposed. Any abstain. Motion carries. Update on any previous cases. No, ma'am. All right. Um, I'm going to remove myself from the guys now with the item number one.

So Mr Swetman is as vice chair. You'll take over.

So item number one calls for a public hearing on this preliminary only plot approval. If there's anyone like to speak for or against this, please step to the podium at this time. You have five minutes. And state your name and address, please.

And this, again, is the Perryman Hill Plaza plot from last month. It was not heritage. It deals with nine lots surrounding the proposed shopping center development on the corner of Veterans and Birmingham Highway. Having no one public hearing is closed. So due to the lack of a quorum on this item and our requirements and state code requirements with 30 days clock that typically goes along with subdivisions because there was a public hearing at the last meeting. This will automatically be approved 30 days from that event pending. They're pending 30 days from that event because you don't have enough of a quorum to vote on it tonight. You can't take action. The only other option would be to have a special called meeting. However, staff feels because there are very limited and minor comments related to this that there's no need to do that. We're okay with it being approved through default. In this case, there's no need to have a special called meeting cut to come back and hear this because there are very limited items on this. So with that being said, if if. You don't have any questions on it, we can move on to item number two.

OK.

This room. Can we approach?

Item number two is a request for final plant that springs at Opelika subdivision. This is a request for a seven lot subdivision on 34.47 acres subject property zone C2 in the Gateway corridor primary. You've got It's kind of on the northwest corner. of the roundabout at Gateway and Society Hill Road adjacent to the Texas Roadhouse. And there's a new hotel out there as well. This is the proposed plot. Again, you'll see lots one through four located along Gateway Drive. Those are commercial out parcels. Lot five is a proposed multifamily development that you approved two months ago. And then lot six is a retention pond for the entire area, with lot seven being the remainder of the lot that is going to be owned and maintained by the current owner of the Caps family. Lot seven is zoned, still R1, so it would likely be rezoned prior to any future development. But at this time, there's nothing planned there. We are recommending preliminary or excuse me, final plot approval. This is for final plot approval of this development subject to the landscape buffer being added to lots five and six, the ownership being added to the pond. Any utilities being underground sidewalks being required on Gateway Drive. The owner's name and address being shown. Corner markers being placed on the property and then access lot one through four be limited to the shared access easement. No direct access should be otherwise permitted. And lot seven shall not take direct access off the Gateway Drive. And that's just because it's so close to the roundabout. Mr. Connors here, if you have any questions of the applicant.

This item does not call for a public hearing. So, commissioners, do I hear a motion?

Discussion? Motion for final approval with staff recommendations.

Second. Okay. Any discussion? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries.

Item number three is a request for annexation. This is a annexation for the, uh Gun property located at 6571 Highway 431 Lafayette Parkway. So this is going up Highway 431 Lafayette Parkway, almost leaving the county limits to the north. You'll see it's this triangular piece shown on the the vicinity map here. Property of the South, I believe, is already annexed in. So this we have confirmed that this does meet the continuity requirements under the state laws. There are two currently two homes on the property. You'll notice there Quite a few applicants on this because it was some property that was owned by family and then passed down to the heirs. And so we did have, I believe, at least four signatures on the. The annexation petition for this. The properties, the current homes that are located here are served through wells and septic systems, so they don't have access currently to water and sewer, and that would probably be the case for quite some time. It's our understanding the applicant is proposing to annex so that one of the grandchildren who lives here can attend like a city schools. The property would be zoned R1 if annexed. This is in our proposed growth boundary, and so we are recommending a positive recommendation to City Council.

All right. This item does not call for a public hearing. So, Commissioners, do I hear a motion?

I make a motion for a positive recommendation to City Council. What's that recommendation? I'll second.

Any discussion? All in favor. Any opposed any abstain? Motion carries.

Item number four is a request. There is a text amendment to the zoning ordinance. This is Again, relating to some of the questions we've had about package and package liquor stores. Retail tobacco vague hookah stores and then Consumable hemp products, which were recently the regulations were changed by the state. So this would add definitions for all of those, including adding a definition for beer and wine store, which is currently not in the regulations. A lounge retail liquor class two store, which is technically an ABC state owned store. Retail tobacco vape hookah store, which sells tobacco hookah or electronic smoking devices like vape. And then adds three categories for specialty consumable hemp. Which includes a, uh, specialty consumable hemp retailer, a Pharmacy consumable hemp retailer, which is a pharmacy that sells those products and then a retail food consumable hemp retailer. which is a grocery store of over 14,000 square feet that sells products. We've also added some some special development standards, including distance requirements specifically for package stores, retail tobacco, vape hookah stores and specialty consumable hemp stores. They provide a distance requirement from each other. Require minimum gross floor areas for the package stores. And then also require That package liquor stores or specialty retailer, consumable hemp products be adjacent Or tied to a Grocery store or drug store exceeding 14,000 square feet. It's kind of taking what the state's done with consumable hemp and applying it to our package stores as well because they have kind of tied those uses together a bit. And then also limits drive-through windows for these uses and exterior burglar bars, steel gates, or roll-up doors that are visible from the outside. Uh, here's where the proposed use table would look like. Basically, what it does is it? It makes a package store, which is currently not allowed in the C two or the gateway primary condition on those two zones. And makes it not allowed in the in one zone. Uh, just because then one is typically manufacturing or larger kind of areas. It adds beer and wine store, which is a store that specifically just sells beer and wine, no hard liquor, and it's not a gas station or have another primary use like a grocery store. Those type uses makes it conditional in the C1, C2 and C3 stores and in the Gateway corridor, primary and secondary. Then it adds ABC stores and makes it conditional in The gateways, as well as the C2 and C3. Makes retail tobacco vape stores conditional in C2 C3 and in the gateway primary and secondary. And then adds those consumable hemp designations for the retail specialty product. It would be conditional in the C3 zone. And then in the gateway quarter, a primary zone be conditional. Not allowed in the other zones. Pharmacy would be conditional in C1, C2, and C3. And the Gateway primary, Gateway secondary, because those, again, are where pharmacies are typically allowed. That would only be if they want to have a retail license for those particular zones. And then retail, food store, consumable hemp products, which is a grocery store that sells the allowable products. would be conditional in the C2, C3 zone, and then in the Gateway corridor, primary and secondary. What we're asking to do is asking for you to review this language and take some time and get back to us on whether or not you feel this is acceptable, see what you feel about the different uses and zones where it's allowed. We're happy to answer any questions you may have and talk through a little bit more, and then we can come back next month and discuss it in a little bit more depth.

Okay, so do we need to go through engineering who I've overlooked? For the past two things.

No, ma'am. I would go ahead because we did advertise it. Go ahead and open a public hearing, but we will have a public hearing prior to.

All right. There's a public hearing if there's anyone who would like to speak for or against this. Public hearing is now closed. and the commissioners will just take it.

If I can request just someone to table it to next month, that way we'll have time to. Motion to table. Second.

I have a question. Yes, ma'am. As we're going through the zoning ordinances, We're planning to put this in there as yes, ma'am.

So we're asking for our consultant to take a look at the language and make sure that they feel it's acceptable. I mean, ultimately. They're going to do what we want to do. Just make sure that it's done in a correct manner. So If that's something You like, we can have it make sure that it's carried through the next thing. I mean, we can always amend it at that time or any time, but So it could change. It could potentially change, yes, ma'am. There are also requirements with the federal government that could require that CBD change in the fall anyway. There's a possibility that it becomes much more difficult for retailers to sell those products anyway.

Okay. So we need to vote or any other discussion on this that we need to. I do have one quick question. Okay.

Do you have any examples, Matt, from other cities maybe similar size to Opelika that have used something similar to this?

There are some some different examples I'll find. I took this from a place in Indiana that I believe uses how for that language to take a look at it. That's right. Thank you.

Any other discussion? We're voting on to table this. Have a motion and a second. All in favor. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries.

Last item before you tonight is a request for a street renaming. This again is a recommendation to the City Council. So this is a request to rename what is currently known as Joanne Drive, located off of North Park Drive in the Northeast Industrial Tech Park to Faith Way, which is To give it a unique different name. Of course, Joanne Drive was named in relation to Joanne Distribution, which was located off the property for quite some time. There are no buildings that are currently addressed off of Joanne Drive. Now there are two properties that do have the addresses on Joanne, but they are unbuilt and they are currently still owned by the Opelika Industrial Development Authority. So there's there's no issues changing anyone's address. And so faith technologies, which is a producer of electronic components, is going into a portion of the Joanne facility. And with that, uh, They they've requested it to be renamed. We felt that What was being proposed faith way was a very, uh, It had ties to the current company, but it also was something that could be general enough to where if things change in the future, it could say that same name. So we are recommending a positive recommendation to city council for this name change.

All right. This calls for a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to speak for or against this? Public hearing is closed. Commissioners, do I hear a motion to recommend to city council?

I'll make a motion for a positive recommendation to city council.

Any discussion? All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion carries.

That's all the business we have for you today.

Eureka. Do I hear a motion? We adjourn. So moved.

Second.

All right. Thank you. Thank you.