Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the November 17, 2025 meeting of the city of Tusca Planning and Zoning Commission. Any written comments sent to staff were forwarded to this commission directly. At this time, like to introduce our staff. We have Jimbo Woodson, deputy city attorney. Michael Garner, city engineer. Zach Ponds, director of planning. Leotaa Coin, principal planner. There are nine members of the planning commission, all who are appointed by the mayor for staggered terms with the exception of the city council represent who is appointed by the city council. I ask the [clears throat] commission members introduce themselves and state the occupation. Begin with Mr. Ramsey.

Steven Ramsey, business owner. Dena Prince, attorney. Porsche Clark, 311 manager. Kim Harrison, general contractor.

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

time. Once the commissioners are satisfied, they received all relevant information. We will then close for further discussion by the public at which time the commission members will discuss the matter and then vote. After the vote, you are free to leave. These proceedings are video recorded and broadcast live. All in-person public comments should be made at the podium into the microphone. Jurisdiction [clears throat] and all matters pertain to the following items. This commission serves as the final authority. Subdivisions located within city limits. Subdivisions located outside the city limits but within the city's planning jurisdiction. and developments with a special district and a approval letters for developments in the historic buffer zone. As to all remaining agending matters, including annexations, reszonings, planned developments, street vacations, this commission serves as a recommending to the city council. In that regard, our decisions are in the form of a recommendation to be presented to city council. City council will make the final decision on those matters.

[snorts] Subdivision approval requires the affirmative vote of six members of the planning commission. All matters which are recommendations to city council require majority vote for an affirmative recommendation. At this time, I'd ask any members of the commission have any conflicts of interest as to any agenda matters tonight? If so, please state for the record. I would ask staff to confirm on the record that proper notification has been given to all parties in interest as required by law as to all matters before this commission tonight. It has.

Thank you. With that, we will begin with the approval of the minutes. As the planning and zoning commission has received the synopsis of the October 2025 meeting, I move we dispense with the reading of the minutes on the same unless there are any deletions, additions, or corrections. All those in favor say I. I. I those opposed eyes have it. Miss Coin. [clears throat]

Good evening, commission. We're jumping right into unfinished business tonight. Uh this is reszoning petition continued from last month. Z2425 Longleaf Engineering petitions to reszone approximately 18 acres located at 11251 19th Street from MR1 to MR2 Council District 2. You can see we're southwest of Central High School here. You can see that lot today has a single family home and a shed on the property. You can see it's zoned MR1 surrounded by MR2 um and close to some GC general commercial. Uh the applicant would like to reszone from MR1 to MR2 to construct a duplex on the property. Here is that uh property today in that existing home. Just a few different angles here. Uh here is the revised site plan. Now, you can see it's just some changes to the the parking configuration um from last month. Um and here's the letter submitted by the applicant kind of explaining some of the the issues they ran into when trying to reconfigure the site plan. Um I'll I'll sit here for a sec so you can read that. All right, moving into framework. Uh this property is identified as multifamily residential RH. Uh this request does conform to the plan as well as the use. You can see that identified here. Here are permitted uses. Uh just to note, a duplex is permitted in MR1. They're having issues meeting the the lot standards for a duplex in MR1. Um that's why they're looking at that reszoning tonight. Uh we did receive one public comment last meeting. We did not receive any additional public comment um since October. Do you have any questions for staff? M. Thank you, petitioner. [clears throat and cough]

Good evening. Tom Sims with Longleaf Engineering, 1927 7th Street, Tuscaloosa. I know we met on this uh last month and I think the consensus was that we would try to see if we could get all the parking in the rear. uh that that seemed to be the hold up with the two spaces in the front and where there was also some discussion about maybe even coming off 19th alley as an access point. So, we investigated both of those options. 19th Alley currently is a uh has an elevation difference from the rear of uh of the yard on this lot to the street. And it has such an elevation difference, there's actually an existing retaining wall there. It's uh it's probably around 4 feet tall or so concrete wall.

Um, additionally, and I'm not sure if this is something the city had approved before or whatnot, but there's also a uh a private access gate back there uh across 19th alley um for the I guess that's apartment complex or something there. So, not building that.

Yeah, I didn't mean to get anybody in trouble, but that those are the two things that we uh that we encountered when trying to come off of 19th. And then and then looking at trying to put all four spaces in the rear. You can see the the bottom dimension there on that drawing with with the 20 foot. that would basically push all the uh spaces right up against that existing retaining wall and not really leave any uh enough room to back out and make that turn back towards the street from that rear parking. In addition, um you know, would basically take up the entire rear yard. Uh, one other thing that I just wanted to point out that that we didn't uh, talk about previously, there seems to be some additional room there on 19th Street between the back of curb and the property line, which gives it a little bit more uh, green space, landscaping area that you would normally have. Typically, you know, we only have maybe 12 14 foot between the curb and the property line. So, there's a little extra green space in the front here that may help kind of, you know, offset our thoughts on on front parking a little bit. And, you know, talking to the property owner, she's also willing to maybe do some additional landscaping as sort of a screening for that parking between there and the rightway if that that helps.

Do you have any pictures of the do you have any pictures of the the alley and the retaining wall? I don't. It's It's available on the Google Maps. So that street view will show it. It's not their job. It's your job. [clears throat] Tom, how many how many how many feet are you talking about green space? There's about 26 feet from the back of curb to the property line and then of course there's an extra uh you know five or six feet from there to the uh proposed parking area. And your parking pad in front is what?

It's two spaces wide. So it's 18 foot. Talking about five or six feet green space between the property line and and the spot. Yes, sir. [cough] Like [clears throat] I said, there's a a pretty significant grass area there already. So So this the lot. Is it the first lot with the fence? Uh, it's the second lot from there. Is the blue house the one that's going to be retained or am I or are we looking at this property that's closest to us?

I'm I'm having a little bit of hard time. Can Can you navigate up the street just a touch? This is from 12th Avenue. Yeah. Okay. So, we're looking at See So the blue house is is not the subject house there. There's the Oh, okay. I see now. Right. Yes, ma'am. Right. Go back. Go back. Yeah. Uh Leo, real quick where you were. [clears throat] Yeah. Here's one of the concerns we talked about why we want the parking in. Turn the camera to the right in front of the blue house for me. Right there. That's what we I think as a body were worried about is

front parking. This that's not even a parking pass was parked out there. Um, is there just no way to keep people from parking on grass in front of houses? No, we have regulations against that. We have regulations against that. Code enforcement handles those situations. Are these people, that white Cadillac and that other white car, are they in violation in this picture? Yes. But a lot of times we rely on 311 and people saying, "Hey, we've got issues." Yeah. Yeah, exactly. I mean, yeah, they're not reporting over here like they would be in

district. You're talking about the the house one 1122 is right here. The yellow one. The cream colored one. The green colored. Yes, ma'am. And you're talking about parking basically where that bush is. [clears throat] So that would be about right. Yes, ma'am. So So you're you're asking kind of for a for an upzoning. You're asking for higher density.

Hey Stephen or Mr. Ramsey, can you speak in your mind? You're asking for higher density. You're asking for an upzoning and you're and you're you're well, what are you doing? What are you doing to improve the city? the for the trade-off on higher density. I don't necessarily know that we're asking for higher density. We could do the duplex in the current zoning as well. We just have some setback issues. So, I don't think it's a it's not it's not allowed with the setback. I mean, that's that's a zoning requirement. I mean, right. It's not allowed. So, you you can't do it. You got to come here and we got to vote for it. Right. Sure.

Okay. [clears throat] Now, what are you doing to other words? You're asking to double the density of this property and the other properties are not duplexes, right? I mean, they're all single family. [snorts] So, are we are we getting ready to are we getting ready? Look, the whole neighborhood goes duplex and everybody's in in alignment with that. That would sound good. But what if you're what if you're next door and you're living your wonderful life and and somebody builds a duplex and and now they've got double or triple the cars because they have guests and and now we've got them in the front yard, we got them in the backyard, we got the alley blocks and and you're tell you're telling me that that that was too big of a hill to climb and I'm just wondering if it is if I'm just wondering if it is if you're getting that that

I I understand I from a compatibility issue though there are apartments to the north and south of this property. So, I don't think this is way out of line from But the apartments have the apartments have parking. Sure.

Um and you're you're you're saying there's no choice but to park them in the in the front yard, which is which is going to look like the yard next door. And so I'm saying that one of the things that we've we've been very successful in doing is we have we have formulated plans where the [clears throat] land the property owner gets something. They get higher density which gives them the opportunity to raise revenues and the city gets something and they get cars out of out of the yard. But I can't tell me. All right. So you're not going to do that. What are you going to do to improve this site for the city of Tuscaloosa? Because because they're granting you you're asking to be granted double the the density on this site, which is double double the revenue.

Understood. I I just I wouldn't say that this is not uh something that uh the owner is trying to do for for an investment. She wants to live here. It's a family property. They want to expand the house so that they can have uh both two different related families in the same same venue. So from that standpoint, it's not, you know, it's not something they were just trying to get around the rules just for for that. Um, and again, you know, we looked at the options. We we we really tried to configure it uh the different ways and and our only suggestion was the the landscaping. Okay. Thank you.

So what type of landscaping? Like hedges or

Yes, ma'am. I think she's open to whatever that, you know, the city might want to see there. I I know it's just more of a screening issue and and we saw the same picture with the cars in the house next door in the front yard and we were aware of that. Uh um so but having some designated spots that are actually, you know, have have a parking surface with with landscaping around them would probably be a much cleaner look than what you're getting next door. I guess my concern with it is it's just it's it's a lot. It's it's it's trying to put a basketball through a garden hose here. To be honest with you, in my opinion, I think that I don't the parking for the the the back to you got two cars pulling there. They if they can they either going to back cross the line to get out on the other lot or they're going to have to back up all the way. I just I don't narrow those parking places. I don't see the last car being able to back out without the first car being in there. It's just too tight.

Yeah. Just It's to me, this one just doesn't [clears throat and cough] Is there a street parking time on the Is there is there a yellow curb? What's the street situation? I don't think there's designated street parking there. It doesn't look like there's a yellow curb. Pardon me, Zach. Did you But there is. There is or is not a parallel. I mean, it's not designated parking, but it's not restricted from parking, but you can park on the right. [clears throat] Can you go back to that pick of the street? I mean, if lot six elects to ever put a fence up on that lot, you won't be able to get those cars out,

right? In my opinion, if you got two cars, we we have the depth that you would normally have in a driveway situation there. So, I would think we would be able to navigate it as far as coming out of a

you know garage or something. It's about 40 feet there from front to the the back property line. You know, Mike, over in district U, I guess it's district four, you know, how we we actually if if someone built bay parking in the city right away, they got credit for for 50%. You know where I'm talking about? What about I mean, could could you could you in theory put bay the sidewall doesn't start till looks like about 20 ft? I mean, you you could almost maybe get three parking three here. If he couldn't get four in the back, he might not be able to get four in the front. But but if he doesn't have this this wall, then maybe he could. You could almost get bay parking. I mean, what's going on with the sidewalk, by the way, starting way back there? What's is that because there is a parking pad underneath the grass or something? My guess [clears throat] is that that sidewalk probably stops at the public rightway.

Yeah. Based on looking at uh Tom's drawing, I guess. What in other words, next door when they were parked Cattywonas, you could have some organization if at least they were in other words, if at least if they if they had parks, they would at least park in the designated alignment and not just pull up in the front yard sideways here, there, and yonder. That might be a win. But it'd be the only one. I get it. It would be It would be the only one and I understand that.

Well, the I don't think the zoning allows you to uh count or credit the parking that's in the public rideway. Um the the the duplex requirement is that you have two parking spaces per dwelling unit and they have to be on the property. I don't know if there's an opportunity for a zoning board of adjustment variance or anything like that. That's the way the code's written. [clears throat] I think in I think in one district we actually changed the code to allow someone someone would would build it. Say they built six spaces in the city right away, they would get credit for three towards their part. That's over in the that's over in the box. Other words, we we wanted to encourage them to build spaces, but we didn't want them to use them to meet their requirement because they weren't on their property. So, we gave them a 50% credit.

That's correct. Yeah. Any other questions for petitioner or any questions of staff? [clears throat] Anyone care to No one did sign up for this? Leota. Who have any any sign sheets for anybody? Okay. Anyone care to speak for or against this petition request? All right. Having heard none, we'll close to public and we'll discuss. I think the challenge we had is still the same challenge. Parking cars in the front yard. It's pretty much that simple for me

because because they've shown that it's okay in this zoning that we can approve. We don't have to. It has nuances.

This has [clears throat] seems like it's going backward. You're not house will get bigger, right? Parking will get smaller, but there'll be more. Seems to me like it should be all spirit of code, but I don't think I think in the front yard I'm shocked neighborhood my neighborhood if you decided to do a duplex you would have you would have a ride

what what was the Can I ask staff what was the comment from last uh the person that reached out they lived lived north of the property near the the newer apartment uh complex here and they had concerns about the construction process, issues with parking, garbage, construction noise, um those sorts of issues. Thank you. A duplex can mean many things too. I have I have five bedroom. I have one bedroom duplex. Okay. So So what is this? Because I mean, have they said what they're going to do? I mean, is it? [clears throat]

Yeah. Because I mean, like I said, I have you can build up to five in certain areas of the city if you do certain things. Again, you you park in the rear and you Yeah. So, we don't know whether the duplex that will be added will have an additional three, additional two, additional one. Right. Well, should we ask the developer? Is is the petitioner here? I made it.

She was going to add three bedrooms on that addition. This be an addition not be an addition to the house, right? to the duplex itself. The the extension of the duplex, the striped area in the rear there. All right. So, so the duplex is the house that's retained plus the addition because I was thinking that a duplex would be what was added.

Uh, no, ma'am. It would be converting the existing structure plus [clears throat] the addition into a duplex. So, there' just be the front unit and the rear unit. So, the parking requirements for a duplex are two spaces per plex. Yes, ma'am. And it doesn't matter how many bedrooms you have. That's my understanding. Well, that's kind of strange in my opinion. Except for in the box, it would be one 1.07 to one. You could potentially have three adults, three vehicles. Yeah. And you may have one couple that just filled three. Right. Right. Just Thank you, Tom. Thank you.

I think Mr. Harris said it correctly earlier like put a basketball to a guard ho. Just think it's I think it's too much. Well, do you would we would we entertain this if they if they overcame this extraordinary big wall in the back and graded that thing and had some bay parking off the alley? I mean, to me, that's that's what's hurting it for me because because getting the cars out of the front yard is something positive for the neighborhood in spite of the fact we're not really getting run over up here tonight. Just right to right. That would make a difference.

If you're going to if you're going to double your density, it just seems like you should do something positive to me. And if that means maybe talking with your neighbor and grading the the wall if you can, then maybe you should. But but if it's too big of a wall to overcome, then I wouldn't put it in a letter. I'd take a picture of and show it to us because I can't really tell by looking at the picture. So [clears throat] the wall is on somebody else's propert on the right public rightway. Okay. Where is it? Yeah. I mean doesn't have too

that obviously that would that would change my perspective of Steven but I mean it's a it's a matter they'd have to go in and insert another wall obviously can we see the wall again or just grade it and get the neighbor to go along with it doesn't look like it's that It could be a quazi privacy fence wall. Oh, it goes in back of the blue. There's that fence he's got there. See what I mean? Because I mean, you could count the blocks, can't you, Tim? I mean, what was it? Maybe three or

looks like it's about four foot, like you said. Yeah. Yeah, if you knock the retaining wall there down, I don't know that it would matter. I bet these people built it. The the yellow He does get taller as you go down. It's got a door. Is that a door? And what is the what is the private access gate? That's [clears throat] something that Mr. Gardner is going to be looking into because it this is an alleyway. So that gate should not [clears throat] be there.

If the alley hadn't been vacated, then the gate needs to be removed. It looks like there is a dumpster enclosure at the far end that needs to be removed. If the alley has not been vacated, then it's open to the public and those things items need to be removed. [clears throat]

You couldn't park back there. Well, there are a number of dumpsters on city right away. There's probably a thousand, but but to your point, you wouldn't have approved probably the gate if it came in front of you. It probably didn't. [laughter] There's no tell on how long it's been that way. So, my question was, but you couldn't park back there. No, you couldn't park and and it still doesn't count toward the requirement for the duplex to have two. I just meant as a practical matter that Yeah, a practical matter. the road's not wide enough to allow parking. They could put bay parking off the alley

and or they could put bay parking in the front. It might look a little odd, but it would be better than just pulling up in the front yard and and parking sideways. I mean, at least it would be organized and obviously the city has right away to where the sidewalk starts. So, hey, we Any more questions for staff or anyone else? I think we're probably at at a good point to make a decision on this. Okay, having heard none. All right, commission. Time to take a vote. Okay,

for for us we have Z2425, the Long Leaf Engineering Petitions that reszone the uh location at 11:2519 MR1 to MR2. Do I have a motion and a second? Motion. Second, Miss Hornsby. Uh, can we add a provision about the the uh landscape barrier in front of the parking? We wouldn't necess you can say it on record, but we wouldn't necessarily hold them to it if the reasoning were were to be approved. You couldn't hold him to it,

right? We're not going to put a condition on a reasonzoning, but I, you know, in good faith, I think that Mr. Sims and his group would would follow that knowing him and his past. Yeah. Well, I appreciate that they've tried to do this. Um, so I'm a little torn. I don't like the I mean, none of us like the parking in the front yard. Uh, but there is parking in the yard in the parking space across the street. Right. There's the apartment complex. I'm going to vote yes. No. No. No.

No. No. No.

All right. Commission. Moving into our cases to be heard tonight. We're starting off with a reszoning petition that is Z 2525 ABC Investment Inc. petitions to reszone approximately 02 acres located at 1515 12th Avenue from IL to GC. This is Council District 2. You can see we're just west of Central High School here um south of 15th Street. You can see that property today. It's developed as a convenience store. You can see that zoning. It's I um it's touches MFR and MR2 to the south. Uh the petition applicant would like to reszone from IL to GC um for you can see kind of their their description here. Uh this did uh kind of come to staff uh when they submitted a package store um liquor license application to city council. So you can see they are a convenience store today. Uh this is just [clears throat] a view showing that parking inside of the building and you see that site plan from when they developed the property. Uh framework is identified as a flex employment center FE. I this request does conform to the plan as well as the use. You can see that flex employment center identification here. Here are permitted uses in GC. Um, moving through these here, we did receive um, one public comment in opposition to a liquor store at this location. Do you have any questions for staff?

Staff, do we we saw this property several years ago, correct? Right. They came forward under the old zoning to reszone to BN and they were approved of that reszoning and that was to do a convenience store um, which is how they operate today. And then when we went through framework, this is now uh zoned IL, which also allows for the convenience store by right. So So they're not a prior non-conforming use,

right? It's not a non-conforming use. They're requesting to reszone. The way that this came about was they had submitted an alcohol license for a package store at this location, um which is not allowed, and so then it got bounced back to to you guys for the reasonzoning. so that he can put a liquor anage store here. So they they did they did try to put a package store. Yes, it was um they were pursuing a package store at city council level and we pulled it back because that's not an approved use in this zoning district. Okay. Is it approved in GC? Would be in GC. Okay. Yes.

So that's really why they want it, [cough] right? and they can speak more to that, but that's my understanding that in their petition. Yeah, that's why we wanted to bring that to you all's attention. We do not currently participate in any light industrial activities, nor do we have any plans to pursue such business in the future. I mean, I just wish they would tell us exactly their reason for seeking the reszoning. And just for the the record commission, this is just a a piece. They had a more detailed description in their application that was posted on the packet. I just tried to grab a piece that kind of covered it overall so the applicant can speak more to the the specifics.

And and remind me one more time. I I didn't catch everything you said, Leotaa. Why does it conform to the um plan? And uh the framework comprehensive plan and the flex employment center retail is a primary use that's listed in the plan. So, Zach, the last time that we approved this, we approved it business. Yes. Neighborhood business, I think, is what it was called. That would have that would allow liquor. That

would have allowed a convenience store, which is why they came forward. Um, I don't recall if it would allow a liquor store or not. I'd have to look back into it, but that wasn't the reason for their reasoning. that zoning would have provided they got a liquor license. Correct. Possibly. I'll look into that and double check that. So, I guess my question, did they not build it at that time when we previously approved it? They built a convenience store at that time and that was what they've been up until this point. Okay. And so now they're just trying to get a liquor license. Yes, sir. Let's ask them. Is this the ABC?

No. I think that's just a coincidence. Petitioner, please come forward.

Name an address for the record.

Good evening. My name is Sam Shoja. I'm an engineer. I live at 5000 over Brook Road, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35405 and representing the owner. In the year 2020, I think it was in December, we applied for reszoning of this property and request was approved and we thank you for that. Since then, we have gone through a fair amount of time, effort, experience, upgrading the site and the building for the proposed convenience store. Sometimes during the city comprehensive zoning program, our property was zoned back to light industrial as it was in 2020. And we gone through all this again. At that time we went and now we are here taking your time and effort for the same reason. We are in retail business of convenience store, gas station etc. And we do not currently participate in any light industrial activities nor do we have any plans to do that in future. We all probably believe light industrial probably I'm not expert but you probably are prefer not to be in that area and we went through all this to reszoning it to um from light industrial to commercial and we all we also believe that this zoning was downgrading downgrading to our neighborhood and we limit us in altering and expanding our business in the future. We all agreed on last time that we thought if we go from light to industrial it would be upzone. In other words, it would be upgrading in the in the zoning. And now you all put us back to where we were. And we are here again. We are asking to please put us to

commercial. We are requesting this property to be zoned GC. How close is it to the school again? Sorry. How close is it to the school? [clears throat]

We are not in the business of light industrial. We are not even planning to pursue such a thing. No, I don't think we're concerned about the light industrial. Um, I think we're more concerned about what I don't know if that was not intentionally done or what. It's not my business. So, please. So, they're are they non I'm now I'm confused. The way that they are operating currently is permitted in light industrial. So, they are not non-conforming. They're not non-conforming conforming use. But, but that was not that was never their intent when they asked to reszone earlier. It was to be retail when they reszoned. I mean, we look at the current when we were doing this process. We looked at the Yeah,

that part. But yeah, I don't know what their intentions were because we saw a convenience store and we made sure that that conformed to what we reszoned it to. I don't know what their plans were to expand their business at that time. And I will also further uh state that even if this resoning is approved, they are going to have to go to the zoning board of adjustment and ask for a variance to allow a liquor store if this is what they wanted to pursue because of the proximity uh to be within 1,000 ft of a residential zoning district. They're right next door to one and it would end up before the city council for liquor license. Yeah. after all of that if that were the case

that's something then I guess I'm sorry I didn't mean to jump in I guess that would be discussed later on of course he has to have a special permission but the main thing that we are requesting this would limit us in altering and expanding our business in future being in the light industrial I see so it was it was being and when we redid the maps we put it back to IIL or put it I think I if we kept his GC been spot zone.

Yes. And I think I would encourage you guys to ask what is their future because their future request for uh what they want to do as a business because maybe it is permitted in IO just like a convenience store is. We don't know what is based off of what he was put on his application. It's very unclear as to what he wants to do in the future. So maybe we could learn that to get a better idea of if GC is appropriate versus IIL. Can you bring back up the permitted uses in the GC for us? Yeah. How how does the light industrial limit you in the future? That would help me.

I mean, we went through all this trouble in 2020 because light industrial we know what is limiting. We are not in the light industrial business. be requested to be zoned commercial and I don't understand why it was put back to light industrial it was intentionally or not we are here we are requesting the same thing because we are in the retail business maybe we want to do something else if the business doesn't work or whatever or we have some other tenants or so forth so we think that light industrial would very much limit us in the type of business we are Yeah.

And I just need a further explanation of that. I'm so sorry. I'm not picking up on I want some You can't sell liquor, but are there other things that you would like to do that you could not do in light industrial? Let's take out the liquor business. Are like are there any other things like expansions or whatever? How are you limited in light industrial?

We may not be limited right now, but we wouldn't have invested. We wouldn't have gone through all this trouble of, you know, time, effort, and expanding this developing the site. It was a two-story building. We downgraded to one story and it used to be, I guess, old transmission shop. And the [clears throat] type of business we are in, it may be convenience store, it may be something else later on if it doesn't work out. So light industrial is just we are not in that business at all whatsoever. We don't have anything. We are not planning to pursue such a business. And this really I think it was a downgrade to our neighborhood also.

I think that's what we're concerned with is if this doesn't work out what is it going to turn into? I mean definitely we don't want light industrial. We are not in that business. We don't know. We may want to have some other type of, you know, retail or something in the same store. Well, the again the proximity of this to the residential area is what concerns us. And right now you're you're we you've got a classification and you're operating under that classification. Correct.

Uh I believe so. But talking about liquor store, this is something that comes a lot later on. You say you say to us that we we understand I don't think you've ever said that but we understand part of this process is for you to get a liquor license. I understand. Yes. Okay. But you also say that it could be potentially open-ended for some another another use. What we're trying to understand is what that potential other use might be.

Well, I mean it's not limiting us for the convenience store with which is light industrial I believe is is okay and we have got a business license to do that. But what I'm saying we went through this in 2020 and now if we want to have some other retail business which is not suitable for light industrial we cannot do it in the light. Should we come through this board again but yes you could at that point in time. Well I mean we went one time in 2020 and this time in 25 this about the same time. We really appreciate if y'all just give us the zone into um GC.

Mhm. I think well also other issues you know in 20 you came with a convenience store plan. Yes sir.

And we have why would you not get to ask for liquor license at that point? Because is you're say here here's where I'm going with that whole point is that you say you want a liquor license. You could have said that in 2020 and you say you want to add and grow in different areas, but we if we reszone it, we open ourselves up for many other things that could be in there that maybe aren't suitable for the neighborhood. And so I worry about changing the zoning, not because of what you're doing now, what you might want to add on, but then what it could become if that does not work out and are you're looking for additional revenue sourced the whole equation positive or negatively. Now, now you're saying you want to add liquor store and in a classification that's right next to some neighborhoods, houses or people live in and then we open ourselves up what all could be in the future beyond just the convenience store and the liquor store.

That's kind of where I'm trying to grapple with. Well, I mean, of course, we didn't know the owner didn't know he cannot have a liquor store over there. We understand is limited. We know it's a residential next door within 1500 ft, less than 1500 ft or,000 whatever. We understand that part. But what I'm saying this would really limit us and do if we have to do some other kind of business which really we have tenants or oursel operated then we should come through this board again do that for the third time.

If we change the zoning no you by you might be permitted by our right to do something. That's that's our that's our concern. Usually when we zone we kind of want to know what's going to happen not just right then but what we open ourselves up to what it could be. Well, and that's our concern here is like, okay, we're changing this so we can allow you to add a package store, which is not the most suitable thing there residential neighborhoods, but then the other things it could evolve into whether you ran it or the next person who had the facility, they could do whatever is in that classification. And that's what concerns us. It's like you start

I'm understanding. Let's I don't want to ask for I'm not asking for a liquid license or uh variance on that right now. We we went through all this trouble expending time effort taking your time in 2020 and here we are here again is asking the same thing. This would really limit us in our business of doing then if this tenant come here or is not going to work out. We go some other tennis ones which is not going to be allowed in the light industrial. Well is it would limit us. It would hurt us. We gone through all this experience developing that site really so much more appealing aesthetically to our neighborhood and you put us we are back to where we were. But you you're operating as a convenience store now and can can continue to operate as a convenience store now. And if we reszone it, once it's reszoned, we can't take it back. And if you come in and want to put something there [clears throat] that doesn't fit, we can't come in there and say, "Hey, we want to take it back." If you decide you want something else there or whatever, that's when you come back to us and say, "Convenience store didn't work. I need to put up another business there." And then we talk about reszoning at that time. There's no reason to resz on it now because you can operate your business just like you have since 2020.

I understand. I don't think has been very fair to us to come in 2020 ask your permission and we appreciate that. We thank you and now here again and then if I have to we they have to do another type of business then come through this again. I don't think that's fair. Do you you can operate your store just like you did when you came to us in 2020. If you decide to build something or operate some other business there, then you come back to us and we decide if it fits or not. Honestly, if y'all hadn't zoned to business, we wouldn't have developed that property. Honestly, we won't. I think we're kind of talking in circles here.

Maybe we should. You go down. Permitted. Permitted. Okay. I I need some help because I know but it looks I mean I'm trying to compare what is permitted in GC and what is permitted in light industrial almost the same and it is to me it looks almost the same. He can he's permitted to do everything under animal care or business services. You get to food and be beverage and even GC is conditional, but he can even come back in and be a tavern as a conditional. Wait, wait, wait. No, no, no. Hold on. Let me make sure. Yeah, a bar, restaurant. A tavern. Under light industrial. Yes, ma'am. I'm looking under IIL.

C. It's both of them are C's. GC and IIL are conditional uses. Yeah, I think you're looking at the HC. Oh, I see. I was looking. I don't think so. You can do a brew pub and a brew pub. Otherwise, it to your point, there are a lot of uses that coincide with IIEL and GC. And I think we're just beating a dead horse at this point with not with there's no clarity into why he wants to reszone to GC, right, from a specific use standpoint. And I think we've passed the kind of 10 minute mark of the petitioner's, you know, moment to speak.

We have asked a lot of questions. I think any other questions for petitioner.

Thank you, sir. We're going to let someone has signed to speak in opposition. Let's hear what they have to say. Mr. Chairman, we have one person who signed up speak. Mr. Jane Burus. Come on up. Okay. I'm Jane Burus and I live at I'm have the property at 11:24 16th Street which is adjacent. There's one lot between me and the proposed zoning re doing and I represent Mr. Alex Burrell who lives next door in between my property and the proposal of changing from the planning board.

Where is he? He's the one that emailed I beg your pardon. Where is Mr. Bar? He is deceased. He didn't email us. He sent us Leota sent us an email on his behalf. Before he deceased, he called him. Let's let her finish. He's got a connection. [laughter] Sorry. Continue, please. Okay. He's not with us any longer. [laughter]

Um, so, uh, I'm representing Mr. Burrell, who lives between me and the proposal to change in the planning board. I also represent Russ who lives across the street from me. He has talked to the uh zoning board head personally and told of his opposition for both Alex and himself. He Russ lives across the street from both of our properties. I am all three of us are greatly opposed to a liquor store going in there. It's too close to the central high school. [clears throat] It's surrounded by student parking. I mean student apartments, excuse me, and they don't need another outlet to buy liquor when there's so many available. I

was going to say, do you think we're going to corrupt students? I think so. And particularly the college uh people are living in the close proximity of the apartments. That's not a good influence. So uh for the availability of like liquor so close well there are six stores within 400 ft I mean aren't there that offer it there's plenty uh already available they don't need another outlet for securing liquor

uh the the thing is that I live there personally from from um 65 to 72 with two small children. It was a nice quiet neighborhood at that time. Uh when we moved for zoning purposes for the school districts, uh we started renting that property to university students and it was still a quiet neighborhood. It was um for probably 10 years or more, 15 maybe that we rented to students. Then we rented to a local family that was the tenant for over 20 years until there was a a fire and it burned the house. So I still own the lot. I at some time may decide to build back there and I would not want a liquor store two dose down from me.

But you know 15th Street is a business corridor. I mean it's it's a I mean it's look look around. That's right.

I mean look around look around you. You're surrounded by all flat roofs and trucks and trailers and I mean it's almost residential almost looks out of place from this area. I mean it it seems inevitable honestly and we got the same thing Forest Lake but maybe not as we don't have as much commercial surrounding it but this this is this looks like an inevitable business development um in highest and best use. What what's it look like on the map? What's it what's it what is it? So it is it is line industrial and that's what he's asking.

He's asking [clears throat] for No, but he's asking for GC. Hers is multif family. This is his first,

you know, I may be in the minority here, but I I I hope we never put another Junior Food Mart on 15th Street. I mean, I'm kind of I'm kind of glad to see one off of 15th Street. They just most of them are not all of them. Some of them are very nice. Many of them are just eyes because they're non-conforming uses and they're not doing anything to them. And I don't want to ever seeing those. I'm glad to see something off of 15th Street to be honest because they are going to drink is what they do. But I hear I'm I'm concerned.

But you think But you think you would go back and build a home there and it's possible. I'm older and that would be closer to my doctors and my at one time we went to Calvary Church and it was right down the street. We had a pizza business on University Boulevard which was right there too. So we were close to our business as well. But um I'm concerned about Mr. Bale. He's elderly and if there's a lot of noise there keeping him away from the liquor store that the traffic would bring, it would not be. That's not change, right?

Well, it will if it the noise is a factor from having a liquor store right there next door. Yes. Anything else for Burus? Any other comments? I guess not. But I certainly You're opposed. As well as Mr. Burrell and Russ across the street. And there's a Mr. Burell who's still alive? Yes, he is. Okay. Okay. Good.

Yes. And he he maintains my vacant lot. So it's not store. That's not Alex. Alex has passed on. Correct. No, Alex is I talked with him before I came here tonight. And that's my understanding that the convenience store has never opened. So I was just wondering if this store is not open. That's what I was told today by Mr. Bar. That would be interesting. that and I assumed that it was in this was an intended thing to go first to get it to go to re store and then to what he really p is it is this this business is an operation today and the hours are what I was going to ask petitioner one of

Thank you Mr. Carl, what we Thank you, Miss B. Thank you. Can you come back up, sir? I got a Can you give us the hours of operation currently for your business? For the business usually uh 7:00 in the morning till 11, 12 or something whatever you know the neighbor 7 days a week. Probably so. Yes, sir. Probably. So, yes. Convenience store usually are open at 7 days a week. Currently open. Is it open [clears throat] for business? Is it currently open for business? Yeah. So, what hours do you work? The hours they work usually on other stores that we have, but this one does not have a gas station. So, usually come from 7 till 10

11 at night. Thank you. But the main concern really why did we have to go through this trouble of we kind of yeah we're just

the main thing is that I'm not expert in what goes in the light industrial and you know probably better. I'm pretty sure you know better but it would really limit us in doing this business because it would slow us down again. If you have to get another tenant in there, they they will not be interested in it. And you know what we have to go through to get it? I don't know, for example, like a clothing store. If you want to do that and it convenience store doesn't work, is it allowed in the light industrial is better looking than anything on 15th Street? Let Let me ask you a question. Yes, sir.

When this picture was taken, was this building was this were you in operation? No. Uh I think they recently just got the business. They were getting ready to open up. Of course they went applied for liquor license. It's shut down. That's out of question. We are not really asking for a liquor license. We are just basically asking to put us back to a GC or neighborhood B. Yes. Give me a yes or no. Yes. Okay. Wait. Not yet. As my understanding. Wait, wait, wait a minute. I'm gonna ask you one question. I want a yes or no. Yes. Is this Are they currently operating out of this as we did they did they open up today?

I believe they got the license and certificates to do I don't want you to believe. I said yes or no. I don't think he knows. He's the engineer. They they were in the process of stocking up the store and stuff like that. I I'm not sure as the latest Okay. point right now, but I know they got the licenses or business licenses to do that. So, Mr. point. You're you're the engineer on the project. You're not the owners of the property. No. Oh, but as as I heard last time, the owner said they've got the business license to do business. And they were in the process of it's probably the store was last time I looked at it, it was stocked up,

but it's not completely ready to open when I saw it last time. Since 2020? No. recently they got the business license to do that. Well, business license and what we did was they're different. They're different departments and we don't get involved with the business license of the operation. Thank you. I I think I'm just very confused on why aren't the owners here? Because it's not you're you're here talking about the zoning and the engineering piece of it, but we're more concerned about the operating the business and what who's going to do what and what are they going to try to do. You going to ask him to come back next month or tell us? I mean, I don't That's

I feel like I've seen an Abbott and Castello routine here. What did you say? I said I feel like I've got a Abbott and Castella routine. I've asked questions and I can't get answered. Who's on first? I don't know what's on second. I need some answers and you're not giving them to me. So, I don't think they're open right now for business, but they have got the Got it. Thank you. L business licenses to do that. They were stocking up the [clears throat] store. Last time I seen the cool, they got the coolers going. They got all the shelving. It takes time to stop. I guess from my standpoint, this thing was approved previously in 2020 and now they're just starting business.

It sat here for six years or something. I don't know. I I I just need some answers and you can't you're not giving them to me. So maybe we need to get the owners up here to have this conversation. So Mr. Chairman, may I call for a vote? Sure. Sure. May I call for a vote? You can vote if that what you want to say. Okay. No. No. In 20 in April, April 15, 2025 was the first time they applied for a business license. And I'm not sure if they're operating currently, but they have a business license as of April 15, 2025. Prior to that, we don't have any record of a can operate. They can open the doors tomorrow as a convenience store without sell liquor, hard liquor. Right. But I don't know what they've been doing since April 2025. Sell beer and wine.

They could do that if they got their alcohol license. So they could sell alcohol, just not hardly, right? Okay. See, the reason it took so long, the building was two story and they were going to go ahead do that. Me as engineer and also Sentella engineer, we thought to be cut down. Everything you say and we've already heard. So I think we're ready to make make a vote. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions or comments from commission? All right. Thank you very much. All right. Commission, we have a reasonzoning request Z2525 ABC investments petition to reszone the 1515 12th Avenue from IL to GC. Do I have a motion and a second? Motion.

Second. Mr. Ramsey. Yes. No. No. No. No, no, nope.

All right, commission. Next up, we have a companion case as S9525 and SD0525. This is the row on 14th town homes, construction of six town home units at 2420 through 242 2414th Street. Uh this is zone DP. You can see we are just right next to 359 north of 15th Street. You can see there's three lots today. Two homes, one has been demolished as you can see in this photo here. And just zooming in um just for a little additional detail here. Uh they'd like to take this lot uh convert it to six town homes as you can see here through that subdivision. Uh onecar garages and a uh parking pad located at the rear of each town home. Uh you can see that site plan here with some additional detail. Uh no variance requests, but this is a special district petition which is why this is before you tonight. Uh like I said, this property zone DP downtown perimeter here. Again, that existing site uh that zoning downtown perimeter. Uh getting into the special district narrative here. They'd like to build six town home units each facing 14th Street. Um each unit approximately 1,700 square feet, three beds, three baths, onecar garage, and a parking pad for each town [clears throat] home. Um with additional street parking on 14th Street. Primary building materials uh will be brick and cementitious siding. Here again is the site today. Uh that site plan. And then moving into our elevations, here we have our front elevation, rear, our left side, and right side. Here are our floor plans. You can see main floor on the left, second floor on the right. Uh, and some renderings of those proposed town home units. We did not Oh, excuse me. Our architectural review

committee did find that overall this meets the development standards for downtown perimeter. They voted yes to recommend this project to y'all tonight. Did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff? Ma'am, thank you. Petitioner,

Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, Brock Quarter, 1307 25th Avenue. I think staff uh did a pretty good job explaining the project. I'm happy to answer any questions uh that you may have on it. Look good. Yeah, thank you. They look really good. Any questions for petitioner? Thank you, Mr. Quarter. Anyone care to speak for or against this petition request? All right. Having heard none, commission before us, we have case S9525, the row 14 town homes. Do I have a motion and a second? Motion. Second, Miss Hornsby. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved. Commission special district 0525 construction of six town homes in the special district located at 2420 242 24 14th Street. Have a motion. A second. Motion. Second. [clears throat] Mr. Ramsey. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Motion approved. All right, commission. Moving into our preliminary plots. Uh, starting with S9625, reservey a part of lot one and lot two, block 352, vandagramraphs, consisting of one lot on approximately 0.1 acres located at 1714 Ty Rogers Junior Avenue, Council District 1. You can see uh we're west of 359, east of Central Elementary and Westlaw Middle School. You can see that lot today is vacant and what they'd like to do do is remove that remnant lot line that runs right down the middle. So, it's cleaning that up. Uh we do have one variance request of sidewalks. We did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff?

Engineering on the sidewalk. We have no objection to that request. Thank you very much, petitioner.

Mr. Chairman, members of the board, I'm Michael McGuire. Uh it's just basically just covered everything. City water, sewer is there at the site and just removing that interior lot line. It's currently vacant. They're planning to build a a residence there on the site. Any questions for petitioner? Thank you. Anyone care to speak for or against this petition request? Having heard the commission before we have S9625 the reservey of block one and two block 32 bandograph one bear quest engineering has no issues with. Do I have a motion and a second? Second Mr. Ramsey. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Motion approved.

All right. Next up, Sime 725 reservey of lots 83 through 85 Warrior Edition consisting of one lot on approximately 02 acres located at 2131 Fth Street East, Council District 5. You see we're in Alberta, north of University Boulevard East, uh just north of the tennis center. See the lot is vacant today, though it does have two remnant lot lines running through it that they'd like to remove to consolidate the lot. They're dedicating rightaway. Uh we do have one variance request for sidewalk construction. We did not receive any public comments. Do you have any questions for engineering? We have no objection to that request. Thank you, Commissioner.

Um chairman, members of board, Mike Mcguire, it's identical situation just removing the interior lot lines as all city water and sewers there on the site as well. Look at you go less than density all over Tuscaloosa. Don't go. Any questions for petitioner? Thank you. Anyone care to speak for or against this petition request? Having heard none commission force we have S9725 reserve lot 83 through 85 warrior edition one variance request sidewalk construction engineering has no issues with. Have a motion and a second. Motion to approve. Second Mr. Hornsby. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved.

I'm wondering if you should be moonlighting as an auctioneer. Yeah. I got I got the G. Oh [laughter] man, you got the patter down. All righty. Making for lost time. [laughter]

S9825 Jax Family's Restaurants addition to Culver Road, consisting of one lot on approximately 2.2 acres located at 3605 Culver Road, Council District 1. See, we're at the intersection of Joe Malasham, Culver, and Fosters Ferry. You can see this light. Um, it's being redeveloped currently. um cleaning up those lot lines to be able to build. You can see that without contours. We do have one variance request for sidewalk construction. We did not receive any public comments. Do you have any questions for staff? Engineering. No objections to that request. Thank you, petitioner. [clears throat]

Good evening, chairman and board. My name is Richard Harwood, 13668 Sharps Lake Road, Northport, Alabama. and I'm here on behalf of Jax to give Westside hopefully their first franchise. You know, did did we not pass a regulation that if you're a certain distance from a school, you have to and it took it out of our hands because we got tired of trying to judge on these emotional, you know, if you're a half if you're a half mile from a school, don't you have to put in sidewalks and it's not up to us and in their middle world school about right down the road? We have that, but you'd have to request a variance otherwise. Pardon me? We have that in our subdivision regulations, but you'd have to request a variance if you didn't want to construct the sidewalks.

I thought we put that in because we we wanted them. Absolutely. And we didn't want it to be up for debate because I mean there are there are residences across Malasham. I mean, in other words, if we're if we're going to do that, then we may as well. We kept having this deal where you would build a sidewalk to nowhere and because there wouldn't be one on either side. And we said, "Well, [clears throat] that's not really an excuse not to build one necessarily if you're within say a quarter mile or I can't remember if it's a quarter mile or a half mile from a a park or a school, maybe even [cough and clears throat] a church. But

this one's a little little unique. Uh Culver Road is US Highway 11 and it's state it's the state's rightway. Um we we did request uh during the review process and the developers agreed they are granting us some additional right of way off of Culver Road with the anticipation that one day there may be a sidewalk project by the state. Uh if if if you're familiar north of this location up around Oakdale School, uh there was a sidewalk project done four or five years ago. Uh we're trying to plan ahead for an extension of that, but right now I just don't see a merit in them actually building a sidewalk.

Okay. Thank you. [snorts] Any further questions for petitioner? Thank you. Anyone care to speak for or against this petition request? You're going to be a hero, Harwood. [laughter] All right. See how it goes, Mr. Harwood. Commissioner Fors, we have S9825 Jackson family restaurants addition to Culver. One varian request engineering has no issues with. Do I have a motion and a second? Motion. Second. Mr. Rumsy. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Motion approved.

All right. Moving on. S9925 reservey of part of lot 10 MC Fitz Farm consisting of two lots on approximately 9.5 acres located at 7312 and 7352 Undy Road. This is not in city limits. We're actually southwest of the subdivision you just saw. Um, you can see that lot today. It does have a a home towards Unity Road. You can see here they'd like to split it into two lots. Uh, you can see that without contours. And just to zoom in um for a little more detail here to see those two lots. Uh, we do have three variance requests. We did not receive any public comment. Do you have any questions for staff engineering on the variance request?

No objections. Thank you, petitioner. Commission uh Daryl Key perk test and surveying in West Alabama, 12242 Sanford Oaks Drive, Northport, Alabama. Um I think she explained everything pretty well. The only thing that um it doesn't show is this is residence. Uh Mr. Lancaster is behind me. That's that's the reason for the division is he wants to put a home there. and currently lives there on the property, but he wants to put an actual home in his name. So, any question, Mr. Chairman? Yep.

I need to correct myself. Um, the rightway dedication is actually shown on the preliminary plat that was submitted. So, the variance request that we're in favor of are just the other two. He's dedic he is proposing to dedicate the appropriate amount of rightway. I apologize for my So, we don't need the variance. He You don't need the variance for that rightway dedication. That's right. Fair enough. We'd rather not, but if it makes things go smoother, the additional rightway shouldn't be an issue. We'll always take the right away if we can get it. Well, that's kind of where it doesn't make sense to give it away, but um it doesn't it doesn't property. So,

so petitioners living in the existing home there, right? There is an existing home. It's on the right hand side would be on lot 10B. The right hand side. Yes. But um Mr. Lancaster who currently lives on that property wants to put a home back there on the lot one uh 10A. On the 10 10A. Okay. He's he's on 10B. He wants to do on build on 10A. He wants to build on 10A. Lot 10B currently has a home. Um once we do this though, that minimum building line is um it's going to interfere with the existing home. So, I don't know if there's variances for that, how we go about that in the future, but the existing home currently will be across minimum build line.

You said the existing home was located across non-conforming on 10B on 10. It's just a non-conforming use. If the house is ever destroyed, they can't build it back over the setback. Yeah. Couldn't Yeah. Couldn't build it there again. Correct. Okay. Yeah. My eyes are terrible, so I'm trying to read as you guys go, too. Um, that's the only thing I can think of that would hinder future development for that particular house. If that house got destroyed, uh, it would not meet the 10-ft setback from the side. Okay. The MBO, any questions? That's my question. Any questions?

Thank you, [laughter] sir. Anyone care speak for or against request? you know, when our chair vice chairman, we talked about the lot configuration. You know, it's creating a flag lot and the whole conversation was really around some kind of standard going forward. I'm just saying it's for the record. We need to talk about it going forward is that this is county. It's probably going to remain county. So, we have to be careful not to set a precedent that doesn't have some kind of justification for approving the law configuration. I think that's kind of where we hung our hat is this probably is not anytime soon going to be part of the city of Tuscaloos but it is worth noting that it we are granting a lot configuration variance flag lot so I just want that to be on the record stated

is the property adjacent not Tuscaloosa Alabama where we got 3541 Ingram farms on the math. The lot frontage is 66. Is that again? The lot frontage for lot 10A is 66 ft. So is that is that 66? I mean that's kind of a gray area.

Yeah. And I think that's what we're trying to establish, Stephen. I mean, we got we we we we've tried historic historically not to approve Flag Lot, but in certain cases we we have and whether this fits that case or not, but and as chairman said, this is in the county and you've got to have 25 ft. Is it [clears throat] 25 or 30 or 30? 30. County rule is 30. Yeah. So he has this this one has I mean it's it it's different from a lot of them that we see and it's got larger acreage. I mean the scale that's 1.5 acres and seven almost eight acres they're doing. So and that's

just want to get on the record. So yes I when you started talking about the u the flag lot that's kind of what came to mind. The county rule is 30. Um, which is kind of step forward to touch the microphone. Just a second. Yeah, the county rule is 30. So, um, when you started speaking about that, that's the reason I came back. But the, uh, when you guys are doing this outside of city limits, but it is inside the city's planning jurisdiction. That's I guess that's kind of where that difference comes in. Why you're here. Yes, sir.

Thank you. Again, anyone care speak for or against request? Having heard a commission before us, we have S9925, the reservey a part of lot 10 MC Fitz Farm two variance request lot configuration cap sewer rightway dedication has been granted by the petitioner. Do I have a motion and a second? Motion to approve. Second, Miss Hornsby. Yes. Yes. Sorry. [clears throat] I'm kind of torn on this because we're doing the flag lot which we've

we've not approved in the past except the special exception. I I wish we could I wish Mike I wish you and Zach could get together and see if we could come up with something on this. I I can't vote for it. No, I think I mean it's got three times the legal requirement. I'm not even sure it is a flag lot, but but but I'm going to vote yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion approved. I agree with Council F that I would like to let's It looks like a flag. Let's figure out what the litmus test is for one. Tell us it's shaped like a flag.

All right, commission. Moving into other business. Uh we have a street vacation request. That's V325 vacating. 24 acres of part of the rideway known as Jordan McGee Road. abuing unplatted land located south of 3560 Jordan Mickey Road, Council District 6. You can see we are just north of Interstate 20. Here, you can see that piece to be vacated. Um, kind of backs up to I20. Uh, you can see just that plan here showing that rideway to be vacated. And we have staff comments. We did not receive any public comments. Do you have any questions for staff?

No, ma'am. Thank you. Petitioner. Is there a petition? Anyone have any comments or questions about this vacation? Anyone care to speak for against this vacation? Having heard none. All right. Commission before us we have a here for this petition. Have we done what history? Yes, ma'am. We're at the end of the Yes, ma'am. We did this at all.

Yeah, it's [clears throat] that's already been completed. We can talk with them after. Okay. They need some help getting Yeah. Right. Handicap [clears throat] access. All right. Okay. Commission again vacation 0325 as you can see on the on the map there. All those in favor say I. I. Those opposed. Never mind. Eyes have it. Is that it? Nope. We got We got code updates. [laughter]

All right. I'll try and go somewhat quick on this because you've had it for about a month now. Um, so [clears throat] I sent this to you guys via email a couple of times. We sent this out to stakeholders. Um, posted it on our website for a week and through all that we've received a few comments from stakeholders and we've incorporated them in here and I'll identify it. Um, but other than that, we've received positive feedback on the proposed changes. Um, and so just a quick overview how we've gotten here. Of course, we started the new code in January 1, 2025. That was a 300 plus page document. And as part of this process, we are going to keep keep a list of possible updates. You know, it's not just something that we're going to throw on a shelf and it's good to go until we update it the next 20 years. We're going to keep a list of updates and that's my staff who's done that. That's as well as when we've gotten um you guys to say something, hey, this isn't quite working or engineers, architects, developers. So, up to this point, um we've had two code updates thus far. uh specifically related to drive-throughs and then one specifically related to town homes. But this fall 2025 update is comprehensive. It's not part of any specific topic. Um and it includes 53 total changes. However, 35 are clarifications which are just typos or things like that that were just missed and then 18 revisions. And so I'm going to go through the revisions with you guys. Um and it's just for the sake of you know time because the clarifications are pretty simple. So 253 2531 in definitions um we're just removing that it's only for mixed use or multif family development for outdoor video displays. So that's like a jumbotron or something like that. An example of that is we allow these in open space districts. Clearly there's not going to be mixed use or multif family in that district. Um, this is section 2533, advisory. Oh, and I forgot to mention, I've got it in

front of you guys. The highlighted ones are what we're going to go over. The rest is what, you know, we've you've kind of looked at already. Um, so 2533, this is zoning board of adjustment, just the membership in terms of office. We took that out on accident. We need to put that back in. Clearly, that's important. Um, and then zoning map amendments. So 2536 when areas are annexed into the city. It used to it used to say SFR or sorry R1. Clearly we've got to change that because now it's SFR1. And then we're also proposing to change within half a mile of Lake Tuscaloosa. You come in as LR so that they don't have to reszone to LR when they come into the city limits. Next up we've got development within a special district. So this is something that was in our previous code that we needed to put back. So if there's a conflict, so say a special district uh development is also in a historic district, it used to be that the historic preservation commission prevailed and so that would just go through HPC instead of you guys. We're adding that back in. Um it just simplifies the process. HPC is more restrictive than the the regulations that we have at Planning and Zoning Commission. Um and y'all can stop me if you have any questions.

So this Yes. Just noticed that it wasn't in here. It's not 2540 is not hand down. Oh yes, 2540. Oh, sorry. A caveat to that is we actually identified that after we posted it as staff that we need to put that back in. Okay. Um my bad.

2561 is in your packet. Um and that was posted online. So this is to correct the minimum townhouse lot size. Um and I'll just give you an example. So that's that 2600 square feet instead of 3,000. Um, and then I'm just going to say that's in uh lake multif family, but then we're also fixing it in MR1. You can see 1900 instead of 2900. And the reason being is we've found that um if you take the setbacks, you take the minimum lot size about 20 feet for a typical town home. You incorporate the setbacks in there um with the lot width, you get uh 1,900 square feet for MR1. Um, and we want to see here on the right hand side. We want to see developments like this where you've got your town home lot, but then you have basically your, you know, common space lot as one lot rather than when people are trying to meet that minimum lot size. They're just, you know, they're just making huge lots in order just to meet that minimum lot size. So, it really cleans it up. It meets It doesn't change anything related to how you can develop. Um it's just a cleaner end result. Um so going on this is 2584. So this kind of kind of came about from our uh uh drive-thru update. So you can see number three there. Uh we need to add that property with direct access to a street classified as a minor arterial greater not within this area don't they don't have a maximum front setback. And so, um, the whole idea is university commercial. You want that walkability. You want the buildings close to the, um, close to the street, so you can walk straight up into the front door. However, some areas not bounded in that area. Number three, are next to places like 15th Street or something like that, the old Bamable site. Clearly, you want to push that

back from the street. So, that's what that is. The old what site?

The BAM old Bamable site. neighborhood commercial. So, this just needed to be switched. The minimum setback shall be 20 feet along streets classified as collector street or greater. And then the maximum to be 20 ft along other streets. So, essentially, this is kind of what I was just talking about where um you don't want buildings closer to the street on busier high, you know, on busier roads. You kind of want to push those back and vice versa. And so, it was just written incorrect incorrectly and so we're fixing that. This is allowing um putting a P in the column for dwelling duplex to permit D uh duplexes within the R district, the um the riverfront district. So, we already allow them in RPD and in RPD. So, if someone were to come forward with that, we want to also allow them in R. Um it just makes sense in that regard. This is a big fix. So, in our D, DP, DHE, and UC districts, we had written in that no more than two bedrooms in each dwelling unit. We want to make that three instead of two. Two is pretty restrictive. Um, three is what we typically see. So, moving on to section 25101. This is a new regulation for private event spaces. So, in all districts, no private event space greater than 100 occupants shall [clears throat] be within 500 ft of a bar use or other private event space. So, something like downtown social, which is a large private event space. You can't have another large private event space within 500 feet. Just kind of just kind of spreads them out a little bit. You know, there there's queuing and things like that that are issues, parking. So,

is this the two dimes road, right? Okay.

Um, next 25105. So, this is adding sub adding this as a special exception. Um, so MR1 adding a special exception for group daycare homes. We already have it in SFR5 and MR2. We just forgot to put the S in in MR1. So, it's really kind of a clear a typo. Here is section 25105 accessory uses and structures table. So, this is removing the permitted in D and DP to not allow outdoor video displays in these districts. So, hypothetically, if there was to be a jumbotron or something like that downtown or downtown perimeter, it would likely be zoned in institutional. Um, so we're just removing that. And again, just, you know, jump in if you have any questions. Section 25106, general standards for all accessory uses and structures. So, we want to change the maximum square footage from 600 to 650. Those other two are just typos there. But the real change is the 600 to 650. And the reason we want to do that is we want to actually remove in section 25107 which is accessory dwelling units. We want to remove the 650 and just have everything like accessory dwelling units and accessory structures to be 650 instead of having to kind of bounce back between the two because 50 square feet is not significant enough. So it's really just simplifying that. 25111. So these are um providing the ability for me to if I see something like a this is for special event. So if someone comes in and they want to do a special event, have a large party or something like that on a property, uh they don't have to get a special event permit in some of these instances. However, we want the ability for me to be able to say, "Actually, hold on. even though you don't require it because your special

event is limited to less than 50 people. Uh I see this as something that could be an issue that I want TPD or engineering or fire to look at. Um so it just kind of gives the flexibility there for the city to kind of have a little bit more control over some events. This next one, material and design in section 25150. So in the downtown and downtown perimeter historic edge in riverfront districts, this essentially is we don't want you to have a we currently you could put up a 8oot privacy fence in your front yard. This is to prevent that. We already prevent it in multif family and in residential districts. We need to do that in business districts. Um section 25179. This is something that was omitted in our it was in our previous code. it was omitted in the new one. This is for electronic, digital, and video to technology signs. Basically, we're putting that back in. One of the biggest thing is the um one there. So, it can't change more than 8 seconds. So, really, it's not like a TV. It's like, hey, we've got a billboard, 8 seconds later, we've got another advertisement. 8 seconds later, something like that. So, we wanted to put that back in.

That's a safety measure. Safety for sure. Yeah. Um and then 25182. This is for shopping center signs. Just clarifying it's clearly we wouldn't allow them in public right away, but we want to put that in the code and uh clarify that a maximum of one street, one such sign is allowed per street frontage. We got to change that to frontage. Um whether or not you have an entrance. So, and that's how we had been regulating it in the previous codes. So, those are the the code updates that do need a recommendation. [clears throat]

You want to voice? Okay. Okay, commission. U heard from Mr. Ponds on these code changes. All those in favor of those code changes say I. Those opposed eyes have it. And then next up, we just need a vote on our 2026 meeting dates and deadlines. Everybody calendar there. [laughter] All those in favor of approving the 2026 meeting dates and deadlines say I. I. Those opposed eyes have it. We are