[I. Call to Order]
[00:00:08]
MILLER, CHAIRMAN OF THE EAST POINT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AT THIS LIGHT AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO CALL OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED JULY 16TH MEETING TO ORDER. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SOUND ROLL CALL TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM? YES, CHAIRMAN MILLER, COMMISSIONER LEVITT. PRESIDENT. COMMISSIONER WATSON, PRESENT. COMMISSIONER WADE. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER.
PRESLEY. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER. DEMERY. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER. REED, PRESENT. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, PRESENT. CHAIRMAN, YOU HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, WE'D LIKE YOU ALL TO JOIN US IN A MOMENT OF SILENCE. THANK YOU. NOW, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE ALL STAND AND JOIN ME TO JOIN IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. COMMISSIONERS. AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION
[V. Approval of June 2026 PC Minutes]
TO APPROVE OUR JUNE 2026 MOTION MINUTES. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. SECOND. JUNE 2026.MEETING MINUTES. ALL IN FAVOR? SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? NAY. HEARING NONE. THE AYES HAVE IT.
OUR JUNE MEETING MINUTES ARE APPROVED AT THIS TIME. I MAKE A MOTION. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A
[VI. Adoption of Agenda]
MOTION TO ADOPT OUR AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MR. CHAIR. YES. I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED THAT WE ADOPT OUR.JUNE JULY 16TH, 2026 MEETING AGENDA. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I. I ALL OPPOSED NAY. HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT. OUR AGENDA IS ADOPTED. EXCUSE ME. OUR FIRST AGENDA ITEM IS UNDER NEW
[VII.1. P2026V-001-04]
BUSINESS. IT'S CASE NUMBER P2026-001-04. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SOUND THE AGENDA ITEM? YES. YES, CHAIRMAN. IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER ONE UNDER NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER P2026-001-04. THE APPLICANT IS AMANDA BRODY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1865 THOMPSON AVENUE.THE CASE IS A VARIANCE FROM RESIDENTIAL FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION TEN DASH 2020 7.9 D. CASE TYPE IS A VARIANCE. THANK YOU. THE AGENDA DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. I WILL READ THE RULES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS. PUBLIC HEARINGS BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION TEN DASH 2219 OF THE EASTPOINTE ZONING CODE AND DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AS FOLLOWS. PERSONS BOTH FAVORING AND OPPOSING THE PROPOSED CASE WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT IN THE ZONING CASE OR THE APPLICANT'S DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, AND HE WILL BE ENTITLED TO SPEAK FIRST, FOLLOWED BY SPEAKERS IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL FOR A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES. THOSE WHO OPPOSE THE PROPOSED ZONING CASE WILL BE WILL BE PERMITTED TO SPEAK FOR A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES AS WELL. BY MAJORITY VOTE, THE COMMISSION MAY INCREASE THE TIME THAT THE TOTAL TIME OF SPEAKERS, PROVIDED THAT EACH SIDE IS PROVIDED THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME TO SPEAK. IF THERE'S MORE THAN ONE SPEAKER FOR A SIDE, THE CHAIR OR PRESIDING OFFICER MAY LIMIT THE TIME ALLOTTED TO EACH INDIVIDUAL SPEAKER OTHER THAN THE ZONING APPLICANT. THE ZONING APPLICANT MAY RESERVE A PORTION OF HIS OR HER ALLOTTED TIME FOR REBUTTAL. SPEAKERS MUST ADHERE TO THE RULES OF DECORUM PRIOR TO SPEAKING. EACH SPEAKER SHALL IDENTIFY HIM OR HERSELF AND STATE HIS OR HER CURRENT ADDRESS. EACH SPEAKER SHALL ONLY SPEAK TO THE MERITS OF THE PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE. UNDER CONSIDERATION. SHALL ADDRESS REMARKS ONLY TO THE COMMISSION, AND SHALL
[00:05:03]
REFRAIN FROM MAKING PERSONAL ATTACKS ON ANY OTHER SPEAKER. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY REFUSE A SPEAKER THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE IF, AFTER FIRST BEING CAUTIONED, THE SPEAKER CONTINUES TO VIOLATE THE RULES OF DECORUM. YOU'VE HEARD OUR OUR RULES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS STAFF. YOU'VE SOUNDED THE CASE, AND AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN IT'S BEEN IT'S BEEN MOVED BY BY COMMISSIONER WATSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT THAT WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-001-04. ALL IN FAVOR SOUND I. I. ALL OPPOSED SOUND NAY HEARING NONE. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN. SO FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-001-04 WITH THE APPLICANT, PLEASE STEP TO THE PODIUM. STATE YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME AND YOUR CURRENT ADDRESS. JUST PUSH THE BUTTON. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. CAN YOU OH, OKAY. AMANDA BRODY, 1867 THOMPSON AVENUE WITH MY CURRENT ADDRESS AND ALSO THE LOCATION OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST. THANK YOU. PLEASE GO AHEAD AND PRESENT YOUR CASE. I AM REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF MY FENCE FROM THE STANDARD SIX FEET TO, WELL, A HIGHER POSSIBLE, BUT I'M ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL 14. THE RATIONALE BEHIND IT IS THAT THE THE PROPOSED REGULATION FOR THE HEIGHT VARIATION IS TO NOT IMPACT UTILITY OR, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC SAFETY. I DO NOT BORDER ANY ROADS, AND THE TOP TOPOGRAPHY OF MY PROPERTY MAKES IT. SO THE HOUSES ON BEHIND ME AND TO THE SIDE OF ME ARE SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE ELEVATION, GIVING FULL VISIBILITY INTO MY YARD. IT CAN ALSO, THE VANTAGE POINTS FROM MY YARD ARE ALSO VISIBLE FROM ADJACENT STREETS ABOUT A BLOCK AND A HALF OVER, SO I'M TRYING TO BOTH MITIGATE, YOU KNOW, ATTEMPTS OF THEFT AND ALSO COYOTES, WHICH HAVE JUMPED MY FENCE TO GET INTO MY YARD AS WELL. AND SO I'M HOPING FOR A REASONABLE ADJUSTMENT. AND THE DESIGN THAT YOU'RE SEEING IS MY ACTUAL BACKYARD. THE FENCE TOWARDS THE BOTTOM IS SIX FEET. AND THEN I USED AI TO GENERATE A PROPOSED IMAGE OF WHAT I'D LIKE TO ACHIEVE. SO I'M THINKING ABOUT MY NEIGHBORS AS WELL BY, YOU KNOW, NOT PUTTING A UGLY 20 FOOT FENCE UP. YOU KNOW, I DO THINK THIS IS SOMEWHAT ESTHETICALLY PLEASING. IT WOULD ALSO INCREASE THEIR USABILITY OF THEIR YARDS BY INCREASING PRIVACY AND ALSO DIMINISHING ALL OF THE SAFETY CONCERNS THAT I HAD NOTED. AND THAT IS MY PROPOSAL. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROPONENTS HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ZONING CASE? ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROPONENTS SEEING NONE. ARE THERE ANY OPPONENTS HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE ZONING CASE? ARE THERE ANY OPPONENTS? YOU DO HAVE, MR. CHAIR. EXCUSE ME. IF THERE'S A IF THERE'S A PROPONENT, PLEASE STEP TO THE PODIUM. YES. MISS ME? THANK YOU.HELLO. KEISHA CHAPMAN, 3400 PRINCE GEORGE STREET. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT THIS IS A VERY NICE DESIGN, AND THANK YOU FOR BEING SO THOUGHTFUL ABOUT THE EXECUTION. IT'S REALLY PRETTY. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MISS CHAPMAN. AGAIN. THANK YOU.
APPRECIATE ALL THE PROPONENTS. AND I WANT TO ASK ONE MORE TIME IF THERE ARE ANY OPPONENTS TO THIS. SEEING NONE COMMISSIONERS AT THIS TIME, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PRESLEY THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-001-04. ALL IN FAVOR, SOUND I. I ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. HEARING NONE. THE AYES HAVE IT.
THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SIGN YOUR RECOMMENDATION? THANK
[00:10:02]
YOU. IN REFERENCE TO THIS CASE LOCATED AT 1865 THOMPSON AVENUE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED R1A. THE CURRENT ZONING IS R1A. AS YOU SEE ON THE ZONING MAP. THE FUTURE LAND USE FOR THIS AREA IS TRADITIONAL URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH PROVIDES FOR R1ARLR1ART R2, AND R3 IN THE AREA IS COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL OF THE REQUEST FROM SECTION TEN DASH 2020 7.9 D FENCE HEIGHT. THERE WAS NO HARDSHIP PROVIDED IN THE PRESENTATION, ALTHOUGH I DID HEAR ONE IN REFERENCE TO THE TOPOGRAPHY THIS EVENING. STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF. THIS CASE IS ASKING FOR A 14 FOOT INCREASE IN REFERENCE TO WHAT THE STANDARDS PROVIDE. THANK YOU. AND THAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL.COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS? WOULD YOU LIKE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, PLEASE, MR. CHAIR. YES, IT WOULD BE BETTER IF YOU STEP FORWARD. HELLO. HI. I DO I DID HEAR YOU SAY THE HEIGHT THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING, BUT IT DIDN'T SOUND DEFINITIVE. SO CAN YOU TELL US EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR? I'M ASKING FOR UP TO 20FT, WHICH IS THE 14 FOOT VARIANCE. BUT IF THAT WAS TOO HIGH, I JUST WANTED TO LEAVE IT OPEN FOR ADJUSTMENTS. LIKE BASICALLY, IF YOU WOULD PREFER 16 FOOT, I WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT IF THERE WAS SOME REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION THERE. BUT THE INITIAL APPLICATION IS FOR A TOTAL OF 20. OKAY. I NOTICE IN ONE OF THE PICTURES THERE IS A. DIFFERENT FENCES THROUGHOUT. DO YOU HAVE A PICTURE OF, SAY LIKE THE BACKYARD OR THE SIDE OF ANY OF YOUR NEIGHBORS? YEAH. AND WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS SOME UNIFORMITY. UNIFORMITY IN WHAT CAPACITY STYLE DESIGN WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY. SO IF YOU LOOK THE BOTTOM, I GUESS BOTTOM RIGHT FOR YOU, THAT'S THE CURRENT FENCE, MOST OF THE FENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ALL OF THOSE VANTAGE POINTS ARE DIFFERENT. NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ALL USE THE SAME DOG EARED STYLE FENCING AND IN WOOD. SO THE ONE THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S UP TOP WITH THE TWO DIFFERENT COLORS, THE ONE ON THE ON MY LEFT, THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. OKAY. THAT IS THE CORNER OF PEARL AND LINWOOD. SO THAT'S A NEIGHBOR. YEAH. SO IF YOU LOOK IN THE MIDDLE WHERE I HAVE THE, THE VANTAGE POINTS OF EACH OF THE IMAGES, YOU CAN SEE WHERE MY HOUSE IS IN PROXIMITY TO THAT TOP LEFT IMAGE, THAT CORNER IS THAT, THAT VIEWPOINT. AND SO THAT'S THAT NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. MY FENCE LINE IS ALL CONSISTENT IN TERMS OF STYLINGS AND FALLS IN LINE WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS THE SAME STANDARD DOG EARED WOODEN FENCE. OKAY, SO.
DO YOU KNOW THE HEIGHT OF YOUR NEIGHBOR'S FENCES? THE HEIGHT 66FT? AND YOU WANT TO GO BEYOND BECAUSE OF COYOTES, BECAUSE OF PRIVACY IMPACT AND ALSO, YEAH, SAFETY IMPACTS AS WELL. THE, THE VANTAGE POINTS INTO MY BACKYARD BECAUSE OF THE ELEVATION ARE VERY SIGNIFICANT.
SO BEYOND MY NEIGHBORS, YOU CAN SEE INTO MY BACKYARD FROM THE ADJACENT STREETS. SO YOUR PROPERTY GOES, IT SLOPES UP, SLOPES DOWN, DOWN. SO THEY'RE ABLE TO SEE. CORRECT. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM FROM COMMISSIONERS. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS I HAVE A DISCUSSION POINT. IS IT THE DENIAL IN BASIS OF SETTING PRECEDENTS FOR FUTURE USES? THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. YEAH. AND I'LL SAY THIS IN ADDITION TO STAFF'S RESPONSE IS THAT EACH APPLICATION HAS TO BE REVIEWED AGAINST THE CRITERIA. RIGHT.
AND SO THERE MAY BE FACTS OR THINGS PRESENTED IN ONE APPLICATION THAT DOESN'T SET PRECEDENTS BECAUSE SOMETHING'S DIFFERENT IN THE NEXT APPLICATION. SO EACH APPLICATION STANDS ON ITS OWN. AND WHEN STAFF DOES THEIR RECOMMENDATION, THEY APPLY THE
[00:15:05]
SAME CRITERIA THAT'S IN THE CODE TO EACH APPLICATION. SO. IT'S IT'S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE WHERE PRECEDENTS WOULD BE SET. IF YOU APPLY THE CRITERIA, YOU'LL COME OUT WITH A RESPONSE.YOU'LL COME OUT WITH A RESPONSE. THAT'S FOR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. RIGHT. BUT AS THE THE BOARD VOTES, THAT COULD. BUT I REQUEST THAT YOU APPLY THE SAME CRITERIA. I DO HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS, CHAIRMAN LOVETT, PLEASE GO AHEAD. EXCUSE ME, COMMISSIONER LOVETT. YES, PLEASE. DOES YOUR SUBDIVISION HAVE A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION? NO, MA'AM. DOES YOUR SUBDIVISION HAVE ANY KIND OF CODES TO ADHERE TO WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION? NO. THIS IS WITHIN THE CITY OF EAST POINT LIMITS. I'M ACTUALLY. I COULD WALK HERE. SO THERE'S NO SUBDIVISION. OKAY.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. BUT HAVE YOU CONTACTED ANY OF YOUR NEIGHBORS? HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM ABOUT YOUR INTEREST IN DOING THAT? THE ONE BEHIND ME, SHE'S IN LOVE WITH THE IDEA BECAUSE IT'S JUST AWKWARD. YOU KNOW, WHEN I'M OUTSIDE AND SHE'S OUTSIDE, WE'RE TOGETHER BASICALLY. AND THE ONE BESIDE ME, SHE'S ALSO IN FAVOR OF IT FOR THE SAME REASON, JUST INCREASED THE PRIVACY. PART OF THE APPLICATION PROCESS WAS THAT I HAD TO SEND A POSTCARD OUT TO, I THINK IT WAS 150 OF THE NEIGHBORING ADDRESSES. AND ABOUT, I WANT TO SAY 25 PEOPLE CONTACTED ME BACK JUST. AND JUST SAYING, HEY, TELL ME HOW IT GOES. SO ALL IN FAVOR OF IT? INTERESTED IN THE PROPOSED DESIGN AND IF IT GOT APPROVED, WANTING TO POTENTIALLY DO SOMETHING SIMILAR BECAUSE THEY LIKE THE DESIGN THAT I CREATED.
SO I HAVEN'T MET ANY OPPOSING FORCES. AND I'M VERY COGNIZANT OF THE ESTHETIC IMPLICATION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO TAKE THE APPROACH THAT I'M TAKING. I DON'T WANT IT TO BE I SAW TO MY NEIGHBORS, OKAY. THANK YOU. I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR DIRECTOR SMITH, AND THAT IS EITHER WAY THE VOTE GOES IN A CASE LIKE THIS, IS IT OPEN TO THE APPLICANT TO DECIDE WHAT HEIGHT? THIS SEEMS KIND OF OPEN TO ME. THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 20 FOOT FENCE. THAT'S WHAT HER REQUEST IS. OKAY, SO SO IT IS A 20.
OKAY. THANK YOU. I UNDERSTAND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. WHAT? SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR A 14 FOOT VARIANCE FOR TO BUILD A 20 FOOT FENCE. WHAT IS THE MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE FENCE HEIGHT OTHER THAN WHAT IS IS STANDARD NOW, WHICH IS THE SIX FOOT THAT YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT IT WOULD BE LOWER THAN 20 FOOT 16 WOULD DO THE TRICK FROM LIKE A VANTAGE POINT. SO THAT WOULD BE IDEAL. SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY A LITTLE OVER DOUBLE, BUT ALSO BECAUSE OF THE DESIGN, I HAVE THE PERGOLA ON THE TOP. I THINK THAT'S WHAT GETS ME TO THAT ADDITIONAL LIKE FOOTAGE. SO I COULD FORGO THE PERGOLA. IT WON'T BE AS PRETTY. BUT YEAH, I THINK I COULD DO 16. THAT WOULD BE IDEAL TO ACTUALLY EXECUTE ON THE ACTUAL PRIVACY CONCERNS THAT I HAVE. I HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL. YOU YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE'S A SLOPE, HOW DEEP OR HOW WIDE OF A SLOPE IS IT? I'M NOT SURE. IT'S JUST ONLY LIKE VISIBLY NOTICEABLE. I WOULD HAVE TO HAVE ACTUALLY HAD A TOPOGRAPHY STUDY, WHICH I HAVE NOT COMMISSIONED, BUT IT'S MORE SO EVIDENT BY LOOKING AT THE ELEVATION OF THE PROPERTY BEHIND ME AND HOW MUCH HIGHER THEY ARE, AND THEN THE STREETS AROUND ME AND HOW THEY LOOK INTO AND DOWN INTO MY YARD. SO I'M BASING IT OFF OF THAT. AN ACTUAL LIKE MEASURED DIMENSIONS. OKAY. THIS QUESTION IS FOR STAFF MOSTLY. SO READING THROUGH YOUR STAFF ANALYSIS, THE LANGUAGE OF OF HEIGHT HAS AN EXEMPTION FOR COLUMN AND ORNAMENTAL HEIGHTS PERMITTED TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM FENCE WALL HEIGHT UP TO THREE FEET. SO WITH THAT, I'M TRYING TO THINK CREATIVELY HERE IS LIKE, SO IF
[00:20:10]
SHE WERE TO PLANT CYPRESS TREES OR DO AN ARBOR THAT ADDS TO HIGH BY ANGLING UP OFF THE TOP OF THE CURRENT FENCE LINE AND PLANT ON IT, SHE COULD USE THOSE. SHE COULD USE THOSE THREE EXTRA FEET, BUT WOULD HAVE TO KEEP CYPRESS TREES DOWN BELOW. I'M LOOKING AT THE PHOTO ON THE REPORT WITH ALL THE NICE LITTLE CYPRESS TREES LINING THE FENCE. SO, AND WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION? THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT WOULD. IF ORNAMENTALS AND COLUMNS CAN EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE. WOULD. IF. IF SHE PLANTS, YOU KNOW, A HEDGE OF CYPRESS TREES WHICH GET VERY TALL, THEY CAN GO UP TO THREE. YOU KNOW, SHE HAS THREE FEET ADDITIONAL THROUGH ORNAMENTAL STRUCTURE, WHETHER IT'S A COLUMN, SOME KIND OF ORNAMENTAL. WOULD A CYPRESS TREE WALL ESSENTIALLY BE CAPPED AT THAT THREE ONLY THREE EXTRA FEET ABOVE THE THE FENCE. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT ON THE HEIGHT OF TREES. OKAY, I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION ON THE ON THE CODE THAT I WAS READING, I THINK THE ORNAMENTAL PORTION THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS, IS THE PREROGATIVE THAT YOU WERE SPEAKING OF BECAUSE YOU WERE SAYING THAT IT WOULD ADD ADDITIONAL FEES TO THE FENCE. SO YOU'RE ALLOWED THREE FEET ON ANY TYPE OF ORNAMENTAL FENCING. GOTCHA. AND TO YOUR POINT, MISS ANDERSON, I PLANTED THOSE AS WELL. THE BACKYARD DOESN'T GET A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF SUNLIGHT, WHICH IS REALLY BEEN IMPACTING THE GROWTH RATE. SO WHICH IS WHY I'M SEEKING BECAUSE THAT WAS MY FIRST OPTION PLANT CYPRESS HANDLE THE PROBLEM. BUT I MAY BE RETIRED OR MOVED BY THE TIME THEY MEET ADEQUATE HEIGHT. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR. DIRECTOR SMITH. ANYBODY ELSE? DIRECTOR SMITH, IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO A TEN FOOT AND JUST APPROVE WITH A CONDITION OF TEN FEET VARIANCE? SO THAT MEANS LIKE FOUR FEET VARIANCE FROM THE SIX TO THE POSSIBLE. IF THAT'S WHAT YOUR YOUR. YEAH. THAT'S MY PROPOSAL. OKAY. YOU COULD STATE THAT TO THE TO YEAH. THAT'S A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH TEN FEET LIMIT MAX ON THE FENCE. SO YOUR YOUR SUGGESTION IS AN ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION OF OFFENSE. NO LONGER NO HIGHER THAN TEN FEET, NO HIGHER THAN TEN FEET. IS THAT GOING TO BE A MOTION. YEAH. MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE MAX CONDITION OF TEN FEET. CAN I GET A SECOND? MR. CHAIR? IF YOU JUST OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE THE VOTE. I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE THE VOTE. DISCUSSION. IS THAT THIS IS TO COMMISSIONER. NOT TO EXCEED. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. THAT THAT WOULD BE THE LANGUAGE NOT TO EXCEED TEN FEET. SO JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR, THE THE YOUR WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS APPROVAL WITH A SPECIAL CONDITION OF OFFENSE FENCE WITH NO, NO TALLER THAN TEN FEET. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A PROPOSAL AND WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR HERE. DO I HAVE ANY ANY MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, COMMISSIONER? I MEAN, GRANTED, THIS IS ONE OF OUR FELLOW RESIDENTS. IS IT POSSIBLE THAT WE CAN MEET HER AND GET HER HER 16FT AND THAT WAY? THIS IS A NOVEL IDEA. I DON'T THINK IT'S NOWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY LIKE IT. TO AT LEAST MEET HER AT THE 16TH. THAT WOULD BE MAKING A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, KILLING THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR. IF THERE'S ANY INTEREST IN THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, MR. CHAIR, YOU'LL NEED TO CALL FOR A SECOND AND THEN DISCUSSION ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. IF THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILS, THEN YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR THE TEN FEET. OKAY. SO LET'S SEE. SO WE HAVE. COMMISSIONER PRESLEY.PLEASE PUT THE WORDING INTO A INTO A FORMER MOTION, PLEASE. FORMAL MOTION. I MOVE THAT WE
[00:25:05]
APPROVE AT 16FT. MAX HEIGHT. BASED ON THE SPECIAL CONDITION FOR MAX HEIGHT OF 16FT. I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE THIS TABLE UP FOR DISCUSSION. SECOND. SECOND. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED THAT WE THAT WE APPROVE THE VARIANCE WITH THE SPECIAL CONDITION THAT THE FENCE IS TO BE NO HIGHER THAN 16FT. ALL IN FAVOR? I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION AGAIN. I'LL SAY THAT WOULD MAKE ME VERY HAPPY. HEARING NO DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I. LET'S DO A ROLL CALL, MR. CHAIR. AND THIS IS. YOU'RE HOLDING ON A MAX THE THE MAX OF 16FT. THAT'S CORRECT. SO LET'S DO A ROLL CALL ON WHO'S IN FAVOR OF THE 16FT MAX. COMMISSIONER LOVETT NO, COMMISSIONER WATSON, NO. COMMISSIONER WADE, NO COMMISSIONER PRESLEY. YAY! COMMISSIONER DEMERY. OKAY. COMMISSIONER REED. WAS A YES. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON. THAT MOTION FAILS. AND SO NOW WE'RE BACK TO THE EARLIER MOTION ON THE FLOOR BY COMMISSIONER WATSON OF A TEN FOOT MAXIMUM. DO I NEED TO OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION AGAIN? NO. THERE WAS ALREADY DISCUSSION. WE JUST WANT TO CALL FOR THE VOTE. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE OF THE PROPOSAL TO APPROVE WITH THE SPECIAL CONDITION OF OFFENSIVE. NO. NO HIGHER THAN TEN FEET.ALL. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I. I ALL OPPOSED NAY. HEARING NONE. THE AYES HAVE IT. YOUR CASE IS APPROVED. EVERYBODY DIDN'T VOTE. AND I NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A MAJORITY VOTE SO WE CAN DO A ROLL CALL. LET'S DO A ROLL CALL AGAIN, COMMISSIONER LOVETT. YES, COMMISSIONER WATSON.
COMMISSIONER. WADE. YES. CONDITION. COMMISSIONER PRESLEY. SUSTAINED. WHAT WAS THAT? SO YOU'RE NOT OKAY? COMMISSIONER DEMERY. NO. COMMISSIONER REED. NO. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON. YES.
IS IT A TIE? THE AYES HAVE IT. YOUR CASE IS APPROVED WITH THE SPECIAL CONDITION THAT THE FENCE BE NO TALLER THAN TEN FEET. THANK YOU. IS THERE AN APPEAL PROCESS? I COULD HAVE NOT HERE TONIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS UNDER IS UNDER. NEW BUSINESS.
[VII.2. P2026V-003-04]
IT'S CASE NUMBER P2026-003-04. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SIGN THIS AGENDA ITEM? IN REFERENCE TO ITEM UNDER NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER P2026V-003-04. APPLICANT AND TO NISHA ROBERTS, PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2982 DODSON. THE VARIANCE IS FROM SECTION TEN DASH 2063RL RESIDENTIAL LIMITED SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. CASE TYPE IS A VARIANCE. THIS PETITION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN DUE TO THE APPLICANT'S SUBMITTING REVISED PLANS WHERE THE VARIANCE IS NO LONGER NEEDED. OKAY, YOU'VE SOUNDED THE CASE AND AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONERS, I STILL NEED TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO[00:30:01]
OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOTION AND SECONDED THAT WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-003-4. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I. I ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY, HEARING NONE. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-003 WITH THE APPLICANT. PLEASE STEP FORWARD TO THE PODIUM. STATE YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME AND CURRENT ADDRESS. THE APPLICANT IS NOT PRESENT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? IS THERE ANYBODY TO SPEAK? ARE THERE ANY OPPONENTS TO THIS CASE HEARING NONE. COMMISSIONERS AT THIS TIME, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-003-04. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT.THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SEND YOUR RECOMMENDATION? STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT YOU ACCEPT THE WITHDRAWAL OF THIS APPLICATION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION? OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS AT THIS AT THIS TIME, YOU'VE HEARD YOU HAVE NOT HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT, BUT YOU HAVE HEARD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. AT THIS TIME.
I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONERS THAT THIS BODY APPROVES STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-003-04. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE CASE IS WITHDRAWN.
[VII.3. P2026V-001-05]
OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS IS ALSO UNDER NEW BUSINESS. AND IT'S CASE NUMBER P2026-005. EXCUSE ME DASH 001-05. STAFF WOULD YOU PLEASE SOUND THIS AGENDA ITEM. YES CHAIRMAN. IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER THREE UNDER NEW BUSINESS CASE, TYPE CASE NUMBER P2026-001, THAT'S ZERO FIVE.THE APPLICANT, MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER PROPERTY, IS LOCATED AT 3207 SOUTH MARTIN STREET, ALSO KNOWN AS ZERO. NORMAN VERIFY. THE CASE IS A TWO PART VARIANCE FROM SECTION TEN DASH ONE TWO, 0211 AND TWO STREAM BUFFER PROTECTION AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. CASE TYPE IS A STREAM BUFFER VARIANCE. STAFF. YOU SOUNDED THIS CASE AND AT THE TIME EXCUSE ME. AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WATSON, THAT WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-001-05. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-005- EXCUSE ME 001-5. WOULD THE APPLICANT PLEASE STEP TO THE PODIUM? STATE YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME AND YOUR CURRENT ADDRESS. HELLO, I'M BETHANNE WEINBERG. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER. AND YOU GUYS CAN PULL UP MY. OKAY, SO THIS IS OUR CONCEPT SUMMARY. NEXT SLIDE. AND OUR PROJECT TEAM I'M IS I'M BETHANNE WEINBERG. I WORK FOR GD. MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER WORKS FOR GLENN SPRINGS HOLDINGS AND WHO'S OUR PROJECT DIRECTOR IS NOT HERE TONIGHT. SO THIS IS JUST AN AERIAL PHOTO OVERVIEW OF OUR PROJECT. AND IF YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE APPROXIMATE PIPE LOCATION IS WHERE A DITCH CURRENTLY EXISTS THAT TRANSPORTS OFFSITE WATER FROM THE FORMER OWENS ILLINOIS OUTFALL AND AND SOME OF THE OFF SITE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH. AND OUR PROPOSAL IS TO PUT IN
[00:35:01]
AN UNDERGROUND PIPE TO. INSTEAD TO TRANSPORT THE WATER. AND THEN. AND THEN WE'LL FILL IN THE DITCH AND AND. WE'LL FILL IN THE DITCH AND THEN. EXCUSE ME, I'M USED TO HAVING NOTES, BUT TO, TO STOP THE GROUNDWATER FROM SEEPING AND BECOMING SURFACE WATER. SO WE STOPPED THAT PATHWAY. EXCELLENT. SO THIS IS JUST A CONCEPTUAL OVERVIEW OF OUR DESIGN. THE DARK AREA SHOWS THE HOW WE'RE GOING TO FILL IN THE DITCH. SO THAT REMOVES THE PATHWAY FROM GROUNDWATER TO SURFACE WATER. SO THEN THE NEXT POINT IS OUR UPGRADING OFF SITE RUN ON. AND OUR OWENS, THE FORMER OWENS ILLINOIS OUTFALL, WILL ENTER THE THE SEALED PIPE AND THEN BE TRANSPORTED WITHIN THE PIPE TO THE NORTH AND ENTER THE CITY'S SEWER SYSTEM AND THEN ANY ON SITE STORMWATER RUNOFF WILL JUST FOLLOW THE NEW GRADING PATTERN TO THE NORTH. AND THEN.NEXT SLIDE. THE LAST SLIDE SHOWS THE DITCH AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS, AND THEN THE STREAM BUFFERS, AND THEN THE THREE POINTS AGAIN ARE THAT WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO UNDER INSTALL AN UNDERGROUND PIPE GENERALLY ALONG THE AREA WHERE THE DITCH RESIDES NOW. AND THAT WILL NOW TRANSFER THE THE OFF SITE WATERS TO THE NORTH. AND THEN WE'LL BACKFILL THE DITCH TO TWO FEET ABOVE THE MAXIMUM GROUNDWATER TABLE, AND THEN TO STOP THE GROUNDWATER TO SURFACE WATER PATHWAY, AND THEN ANY ON SITE WATER WHEN IT RAINS WILL JUST FOLLOW THE NEW GRADING PATTERN TO THE NORTH. AND THAT IS OUR PROJECT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROPONENTS HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ZONING CASE? ARE THERE PROPONENTS HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ZONING CASE? SEEING AND HEARING NONE. ARE THERE OPPONENTS HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS ZONING CASE? ARE THERE ANY OPPONENTS TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS ZONING CASE? HEARING NONE AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PRESLEY AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT, THAT THE. THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P 2026-001-05. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY.
HEARING NONE. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SEND YOUR RECOMMENDATION? STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE FROM SECTION TEN DASH 12021 STREAM BUFFER AND SETBACK. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ARE THERE? EXCUSE ME, ARE THERE QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? MR. CHAIR, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. WELL, PROBABLY TWO QUESTIONS. AND THAT IS IS THERE ANY IMPACT TO ANY NEIGHBORS WITH. I'M HERE. ARE THERE WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? ARE THERE ANY IS THERE IS THERE ANY IMPACT WITH. YOU'RE NOT CHANNELING WATER IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, ARE YOU? NO, NO. OKAY. SO THAT PRETTY MUCH ANSWERS MY MAIN QUESTION, WHICH IS THE IMPACT TO NEIGHBORS, CORRECT? YEAH. SO IT'S ZERO IMPACT IS ZERO IMPACT IS ZERO.
RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION. TWO QUESTIONS. ARE YOU TAPPING IN ON, ON THE ON THE DOWN ON, ON THE LOWER SIDE OF THE ARE YOU TAPPING INTO THE STORMWATER? ANY YES. PART OF THIS? YEAH. SO ON THE NORTH END, THE HIGHER ELEVATION, ON THE LOWER ELEVATION. ON THE LOWER ELEVATION. YEAH. NO, NO, NO, THE SO THE TWO ENTRANCE POINTS, THERE'S THE FORMER OWENS ILLINOIS OUTFALL. WE WILL DIRECTLY CONNECT TO THAT. AND THEN THE OTHER ONE THAT WAS MORE TO THE NORTH IS JUST A FLARED OPENING TO CATCH SURFACE WATER. OKAY. SO. THE THE FLOW IS FLOWING NORTH OR IS IT FLOWING SOUTH. IT'S FLOWING. IT'S FLOWING FROM THE SOUTH TO THE NORTH. OKAY, SO YOU TAP IT INTO THE NORTH SIDE TO. YES. OKAY. AND THEN ALSO, DO YOU
[00:40:01]
NEED A ARMY CORPS ENGINEER PERMIT FOR THIS? WE ARE GETTING A WETLANDS PERMIT. YES. OKAY.COMMISSIONER, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COMMISSIONERS, AT THIS TIME, YOU'VE HEARD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND ANSWERED QUESTIONS. AT THIS TIME, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MOTION.
CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. SECOND. SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED THAT WE ACCEPT THAT THIS BODY ACCEPTS APPROVES STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-001-05. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ALL OPPOSED. THE AYES HAVE IT. YOUR CASE IS APPROVED. OUR
[VII.4. P2026RZ-001-06]
NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS UNDER NEW BUSINESS. IT'S CASE NUMBER P 2026, R-001-06. STAFF, WOULD YOU SOUND THIS AGENDA ITEM? YES. CHAIRMAN MILLER, IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR UNDER NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER P2026-01-06. THE APPLICANT IS BRTU CONSTRUCTION INCORPORATED.THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3272 BATCHELOR STREET. THERE'S THE REZONING FROM I-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO I-2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL WITH CONCURRENT VARIANCES FOR A HEAVY CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR LOT NEAR RESIDENTS. IN REFERENCE TO SECTION TEN DASH 2080, A, FOUR A AND C CASE TYPE IS A REZONING WITH CONCURRENT VARIANCES. STAFF. YOU SOUNDED THE CASE AND AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WATSON, THAT WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P 2026, RZ-001-06.
ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-001-06 WITH THE APPLICANT. PLEASE STEP TO THE PODIUM. STATE YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME AND YOUR CURRENT ADDRESS. THE APPLICANT IS NOT PRESENT. ARE THERE ANY PROPONENTS WHO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? ARE THERE ANY PROPONENTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? ARE THERE ANY OPPONENTS TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? ARE THERE ANY OPPONENTS TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? SEEING AND HEARING NONE. I MAKE THE I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER REESE. READ THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-001-06. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SOUND YOUR RECOMMENDATION? YES. IN REFERENCE TO THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT HAS MADE A REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THIS APPLICATION.
STAFF, THEREFORE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR WITHDRAWAL. GREAT. THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT. YOU'VE ALSO YOU ACTUALLY YOU HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT. MY BAD.
YOU'VE ALSO HEARD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS. AT THIS TIME. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PRESLEY, THAT THIS BODY APPROVED STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR CASE NUMBER P2026RDRZ-001-06. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I. I ALL OPPOSED SOUND. NAY, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE CASE IS WITHDRAWN. OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM
[VII.5. P2026RZ-002-06]
IS UNDER NEW BUSINESS AS WELL. IT'S CASE NUMBER P 2026, R-002-06. STAFF, WOULD YOU[00:45:06]
PLEASE SOUND THE AGENDA ITEM? YES, IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE UNDER NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER P2026-002-06. THE APPLICANT PARENT DEVELOPMENT LLC, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT ZERO NORTH DESERT DRIVE. THE REZONING IS FROM C2C CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT WITH CONDITIONS TO R-4. MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CASE TYPE IS A REZONING. THANK YOU STAFF.YOU'VE SOUNDED THE CASE AND AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WATSON THAT WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-002-06. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN FOR CASE NUMBER P 2026, R-002-06 WITH THE APPLICANT. PLEASE STEP TO THE PODIUM, STATE YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME AND YOUR CURRENT ADDRESS. CHAIRMAN, THE APPLICANT IS NOT PRESENT. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR SMITH. ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROPONENTS FOR THIS CASE? ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROPONENTS FOR THIS CASE? SEEING NONE. ARE THERE ANY OPPONENTS TO THIS CASE, ANY OPPONENTS TO THIS CASE WHATSOEVER? THERE YOU GO. A FEW. PLEASE COME UP AND SPEAK. MY NAME IS ANDREA SAINT-VIL. I RESIDE AT 2910 DUKE OF GLOUCESTER IN THE WILLIAMSBURG SUBDIVISION, AND I DO OPPOSE THE REZONING FOR. WE WERE VISITED INFORMED FOR A SENIOR LIVING FACILITY. EASTPOINTE CURRENTLY HAS APPROXIMATELY FIVE SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES. IN ADDITION, THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY SEVEN. NEAR EAST POINT AND WE IN THE COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE EAST POINT TO FOCUS ON GROWING OUR FAMILIES. WE HAVE SUPPORTED OUR SENIORS. WE HAVE BUILT SUFFICIENT FACILITIES FOR THEM, AND I THINK IT'S NOW TIME TO FOCUS ON ALLOWING THE YOUTH, THE YOUNG, THE NEW, THESE NEW GRADUATES, THESE YOUNG PROFESSIONALS, AND EVEN THOSE SEEKING TO COME BACK HOME AND RELOCATE BACK TO EAST POINT TO COME AND BUILD THEIR FAMILIES AND PROVIDE A HOME FOR THEIR SENIORS TO LIVE. I THINK THE BEST PLACE FOR A SENIOR IS TO GET BACK TO OUR BASICS, AND THAT'S ALLOWING EXTENDED FAMILIES TO GROW IN EAST POINT, WHERE WE HAVE OUR OUR COMMUNITY FILLED WITH FAMILIES. WE HAVE A YOUNG, WE HAVE A FAMILY, WE HAVE OUR CHILDREN, AND WE HAVE AN OLDER COMMUNITY. AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE EAST POINT FOCUS MORE ON BUILDING HOMES, TOWNHOMES, A COMMUNITY WHERE THEY CAN BRING FAMILIES BACK TO EAST POINT. SO I OPPOSE BUILDING A SENIOR FACILITY. I THINK THAT PROPERTY COULD BETTER BE USED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND ANY FORM, BE IT SINGLE FAMILY TOWNHOME, SOMEWHERE WHERE WE CAN JUST BUILD OUR COMMUNITY AND ALLOW US TO CONTINUE TO GROW IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION. AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SAY. SO I THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I BELIEVE THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ANOTHER PERSON TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE. ANYONE ELSE? YEAH. HELLO.
HI, EVERYONE. I'M JAMILA LUCKETT, I'M A EASTPOINTE RESIDENT. I LIVE ON POMONA WAY.
I'VE I'M ABOUT 41 YEARS OLD. I LIVED IN THE COMMUNITY MY ENTIRE LIFE AND I ATTENDED, YOU KNOW, THAT LAST MEETING. AND I SECOND WHAT SHE SAID. I ATTENDED THAT MEETING. AND FOR SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT HERE, THEY WANTED TO JUST. I'M AGAINST IT. THEY WANTED TO KEEP IT RESIDENTIAL. THEY WANTED INVESTMENT LIKE OWNERSHIP. WE WOULD LIKE BRINGING THAT FACILITY THERE WOULD, WE THINK, INCREASE THE TRAFFIC. WE ALREADY GOT A LOT OF TRAFFIC WITH CAMP CREEK MARKETPLACE, SO WE DON'T WANT EVEN MORE TRAFFIC. AND IT'S GETTING CLOSER TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NOW IS SAFE. SOMEONE SAID IT'S ONE OF THE BEST NEIGHBORHOODS IN EASTPOINTE, THE AREA, LIKE I SAID, 41 YEARS I'VE BEEN THERE,
[00:50:04]
NOBODY HAS BROKEN INTO MY HOUSE. NOTHING LIKE THAT. AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, LITTLE FOOT TRAFFIC TOO. AND I THINK IT WOULD LIKE LEAD TO MAYBE LIKE LOITERING INCREASE OF CRIME. AND WE JUST WANT TO KEEP THE COMMUNITY THRIVING AND KEEP IT SAFE. AND SO BRINGING IN THE RENTAL SENIOR LIVING PLACE, YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS GREAT, BUT IT'S NO OWNERSHIP. IT'S PEOPLE RENTING.THEY'RE 55 AND UP, BUT THEY GOT KIDS, THEY GOT GRANDKIDS. AND YES, THEY CAN LIVE WITH THEM.
YOU KNOW, WE ASK THE PEOPLE WHO WAS MAKING THE PROPOSAL AND WE JUST THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M A WORK, YOU KNOW, I'M AWAY AT WORK A LOT AND I JUST DON'T WANT PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, WALKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND JUST, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN BE HANGING OUT. AND IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST, WE FEEL LIKE IT WOULD JUST BE MORE CONGESTED THAT AREA. AND WE HAVE A LOT OF OTHER AREAS IN EASTPOINTE, OFF OF WASHINGTON ROAD, CLOSE TO GREENBRIAR, WHERE THEY COULD POSSIBLY BUILD THEIR SENIOR LIVING FACILITY. SO THAT'S IT FOR ME. BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR GUYS TIME. AND JUST CONSIDER THAT, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW IT'S SAFE. IT'S HAPPY. IT'S A THRIVING COMMUNITY. WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. AND WE GOT PAST EXPERIENCE BY KIND OF JUST KEEPING, I GUESS, KEEPING IT TO OWNERSHIP. WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO KEEP, YOU KNOW, UPHOLD OUR COMMUNITY AND KEEP IT LOOKING NICE AND HEALTHY AND SOMETHING THAT LOOKS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO MOVE INTO. SO THANK YOU GUYS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER OPPONENTS TO THIS CASE? GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS RONNELL SAINT-VIL. I LIVE AT 2910 DUKE OF GLOUCESTER. I AM ALSO AGAINST THE REZONING FOR THE APARTMENT FOR THE SENIOR LIVING FACILITIES. I BELIEVE THE PROPERTY WOULD BE BEST USED FOR HOMES AS WELL. YOU KNOW WE DO NOT HAVE HOMES CURRENTLY AFFORDABLE FOR PEOPLE LIKE FAMILIES RIGHT NOW, BUT BUILDING AFFORDABLE TOWNHOMES WILL ALLOW FAMILIES TO MOVE IN, THRIVE, PAY THEIR TAXES, BUILD EQUITY, BUILD, POSSIBLY BUILD GENERAL GENERATIONAL WEALTH, ALSO FREQUENT THE THE RESTAURANTS IN TARGET STORES, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH TO PEOPLE THAT'S MOVING TO INVEST IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE DO HAVE A LOT OF SENIOR LIVING FACILITIES AROUND EASTPOINTE, ESPECIALLY TOWARDS THE GREENBRIAR WAY. BUT I, I JUST BELIEVE THAT REZONING, REZONING THE PROPERTY FOR SENIOR LIVING FACILITIES IS NOT THE BEST USE. ALSO, YOU WANT TO LOOK AT THE SAFETY. YOU KNOW, IT'S YOU HAVE THE AIRPORT GOING THIS WAY, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE TRUCKS COMING FROM CAMP CREEK IN IN OFF 285. IT COULD BE A SAFETY HAZARD FOR THE SENIORS WHO ARE WHO ARE STILL DRIVING. IT'S A IT'S A VERY BUSY. IT CAN BE A BUSY, BUSY AREA. SO JUST KEEP IT. I KNOW IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED COMMERCIAL, BUT IF IT'S REZONE, REZONE IT FOR HOMES, AFFORDABLE HOMES FOR PEOPLE WHO WHO WANTS TO INVEST IN THEIR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU SIR, ARE THERE MORE OPPONENTS TO SPEAK? YES. MY NAME IS SHARONDA MOSLEY AND I RESIDE AT 3260 CALVIN COURT. WE'RE ACTUALLY LOCATED IN GRANT ESTATES AND WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO CREATE THIS PARTICULAR, I GUESS JUST TRYING TO REZONING. IT'S RIGHT BEHIND MY NEIGHBORHOOD. AND ACTUALLY IT WOULD AFFECT SOME SOME OF OUR OTHER NEIGHBORS BECAUSE IT'S A HOME BEHIND IT. AND SO WE ALREADY HAVE ENOUGH THROUGH TRAFFIC AS IT IS AND WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE. AND SO EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE ELSE HAS SAID, I AGREE TOTALLY. I FEEL LIKE IF IT'S A HOME BEHIND THAT, IT NEEDS TO BE OTHER HOMES. AND SO I JUST THINK THAT IT'S ENOUGH THROUGH TRAFFIC AS IT IS. AND ANOTHER, ANOTHER ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS, SHE WAS COMPLAINING ABOUT THAT. THEY WAS NEVER GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE WHAT THEY WERE TRYING TO DO WAS TRYING TO OPEN, OPEN IT UP. I CAN'T REMEMBER THE ROAD, BUT THEY WERE TRYING TO OPEN IT UP THROUGH HIS NEIGHBOR BEHIND HIS HOME. AND SO PLAY IT AGAIN.
YEAH. RED WINE. SO THEY, THEY SAID THAT THAT WAS NEVER GOING TO OPEN. AND SO THEY WAS COMPLAINING ABOUT THAT AND THAT. AND HE WAS SAYING THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE LIKE 200FT FROM HIS HOME. IT'S JUST IT'S JUST A BAD IDEA. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO OPEN IT UP, IT NEED TO BE OTHER HOMES. SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER OPPONENTS
[00:55:01]
TO THIS CASE? HEARING NONE, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT THIS TIME TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOTION MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PRESLEY, THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-002-06. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. STAFF, PLEASE SEND YOUR RECOMMENDATION, MR. CHAIRMAN, IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THE AGENDA, STAFF HAS RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT TO WITHDRAW THIS APPLICATION. STAFF ACCEPTS THE WITHDRAWAL AND OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, YOU'VE HEARD THE YOU HAVE NOT HEARD THE APPLICANT? ACTUALLY, YEAH. YOU HAVE NOT HEARD THE APPLICANT, BUT YOU HAVE HEARD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON P2026-002-06. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WATSON, THAT THIS BODY APPROVES STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR CASE NUMBER P2026-002-06. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE CASE IS WITHDRAWN. OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM[VII.6. P2026U-001-06 and P2026VC-001-06]
IS CASE NUMBER. IS IS ALSO UNDER NEW BUSINESS. IT'S CASE NUMBER P 2026, U-001-06. AND CONCURRENT VARIANCE P 2026, VC-001-06. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SOUND THE AGENDA ITEM THIS IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER SIX UNDER NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER P2026-001-06, AND CASE NUMBER P 2026VCI001 .06. THE APPLICANT IS STEPHEN BRIDGES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1240 OAKLEE DRIVE. IT'S A USE PERMIT FOR A PACKAGING FACILITY PURSUANT TO SECTION TEN DASH 2150.6, WITH A CONCURRENT VARIANCE TO OPERATE WITHIN ONE MILE RESIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO SECTION TEN DASH 2079 D, THE CASE TYPE IS A USE PERMIT WITH A CONCURRENT VARIANCE. STAFF, YOU'VE SOUNDED THE CASE AND AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WATSON, THAT WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P 2026, U-001-06 AND CONCURRENT VARIANCE P 2026, VD-001-06. EXCUSE ME, VC 001-06. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN FOR CASE NUMBER P 2026, U-001-06 AND CONCURRENT VARIANCE P 2026, VC-001-06 WITH THE APPLICANT. PLEASE STEP TO THE PODIUM, STATE YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. CHAIRMAN, THE APPLICANT IS NOT PRESENT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY PROPONENTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? ARE THERE PROPONENTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? SEEING AND HEARING NONE. ARE THERE OPPONENTS TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? ARE THERE OPPONENTS TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS ZONING CASE? HEARING NONE. COMMISSIONERS AT THIS TIME, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER REED, THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE NUMBER P 2026, U-001-06 AND CONCURRENT VARIANCE P 2026, VC-001-06. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY.HEARING NONE, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE SIGN YOUR RECOMMENDATION, MR. CHAIRMAN, IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER SIX UNDER NEW BUSINESS,
[01:00:01]
STAFF RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION. STAFF, THEREFORE RECOMMENDS TO ACCEPT THE WITHDRAWAL. COMMISSIONERS. YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF WITHDRAWAL ON P2026-001-06 AND P 2026, VC-001-06. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WATSON, THAT THIS BODY APPROVED STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR WITHDRAWAL FOR CASE NUMBER P 2026, U-001-06 AND CONCURRENT VARIANCE P 2026-001-06. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE[VIII. Announcements]
IT. THE CASE IS WITHDRAWN. OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS ANNOUNCEMENTS. STAFF, DO YOU HAVE ANNOUNCEMENTS AT THIS TIME? YES. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OUR PROJECT MANAGER, MISS YASMIN EDGE, COME UP AND GIVE US A SUMMARY OF WHERE WE ARE ON THE ZONING ORDINANCE REWRITE PROJECT. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. SO YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM ME PROBABLY LAST WEEK WITH AN UPDATED PROGRESS STATUS REPORT FOR THE ZONING ORDINANCE REWRITE. IF NOT, YOU CAN DEFINITELY GO ON OUR WEBSITE WHERE I REGULARLY POST THE UPDATE ON A MONTHLY CADENCE. BUT IN TERMS OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE PROJECT, WE ARE ON TRACK CURRENTLY BASED OFF OF THE PROJECT TIMELINE THAT WAS PROPOSED BY THE VENDOR. IN TERMS OF SOME KEY MILESTONES AND DATES, WE HAVE OUR UPCOMING COMMUNITY ADVISORY GROUP MEETING ON JULY 22ND AT 6 P.M. THAT'S GOING TO BE IN THE CITY'S ANNEX BUILDING. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE A PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE, WHICH IS AN ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO COME OUT AND LEARN ABOUT THE PROJECT AND ALSO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE IN THE COMMUNITY. THAT'S GOING TO BE ON AUGUST 4TH, AND IT'S GOING TO BE HELD HERE IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. AND THEN FOLLOWING THAT, WE HAVE OUR STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING WHERE WE'LL BE GOING OVER A MATRIX THAT THE VENDOR CREATED, WHICH BREAKS DOWN THE FEEDBACK, AS WELL AS THE WORK THAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING TO REVIEW THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. WE ALSO RECENTLY JUST FINISHED OUR PUBLIC KICKOFF, WHICH WAS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WORLD GAMES EVENT THAT THE CITY HOSTED ON JUNE 27TH. WE WERE ABLE TO GET SUFFICIENT FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC, LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT WE WERE DOING THIS WORK AND ALSO INTRODUCE THEM TO THE VENDOR, WHICH WE FELT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT. FROM THAT, WE WERE ABLE TO, LIKE I SAID, GET SOME REALLY GOOD FEEDBACK IN TERMS OF DIRECTION FOR RECOMMENDATIONS MOVING FORWARD THAT WE CAN PRESENT TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE. I THINK ADDITIONALLY, WE'RE JUST WANTING TO DO MORE GRASSROOTS EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE MORE OF THE COMMUNITY IS AWARE. SO RIGHT NOW, WE DO HAVE A CALENDAR WITH ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT WE PLAN ON REACHING OUT TO SO THAT WE CAN ADD OURSELVES TO THEIR AGENDA, SO THAT THEY CAN ALSO BE ADVOCATES OF THIS WORK, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT ANYONE IN THE COMMUNITY TO FEEL LIKE WE'RE WORKING IN A VACUUM, OR THAT WE'RE NOT BEING INCLUSIVE IN TRYING TO GET AS MUCH FEEDBACK AS POSSIBLE TO PUSH THIS FORWARD. BUT CURRENTLY WE ARE ON TRACK WITH EVERYTHING. YOU CAN AGAIN, GO ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. IF YOU GO TO PLANNING AND ZONING, THEN GO SPECIFICALLY TO ZONING. GO TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TAB.YOU'LL SEE THE CURRENT PROJECTS PROJECT STATUS REPORT, AS WELL AS A LINK TO THE PROJECT'S WEBSITE, WHICH THE VENDOR IS REGULARLY UPDATING AS WE CONTINUE TO MAKE PROGRESS. SO LIKE I SAID, WE'RE ON TRACK. WE'RE OPEN TO CONTINUE TO ENGAGE YOU GUYS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. SO IF YOU THINK OF ANYTHING OR ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO INCREASE OUTREACH OR AWARENESS, DEFINITELY LET ME KNOW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS EDGE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS? HEARING NONE. ARE THERE ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE BODY ITSELF? ALSO HEARING NONE AT THIS TIME. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND, IT'S
[01:05:03]
BEEN MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LOVETT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PRESSLEY, THAT WE ADJOURN. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT.* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.