2023-04-27 · City Council · Transcript · Planning Commission

--- title: Planning Commission date: 2023-04-27 source: 2023-04-27_Planning_Commission.wav --- [0:02:35, 0:02:36]: [158.3, 160.8]: [0:04:37, 0:04:45]: I'm gonna ask you to do the invitation. No, okay. Tibetal. Tibetan. Mr. Thibodeau. [0:04:47, 0:04:50]: So now I can do it. [0:04:51, 0:04:53]: I'm gonna need to get through this. [0:04:58, 0:05:00]: Doomers the person. [0:05:00, 0:05:01]: If you have the answer to the time. [0:05:03, 0:05:04]: Like [0:05:08, 0:05:25]: Come on, Doom. You got that preacher for us. Doom was got it. Because he sounds just like a preacher. Uh oh. Good evening everyone. [0:05:26, 0:05:29]: We're gonna go ahead and call the planning commission meeting to order. [0:05:31, 0:05:35]: And we will start with the invocation. Mr. Thibodeau. [0:05:35, 0:05:37]: You must don't miss that. [0:05:38, 0:05:38]: Mm-hmm. [0:05:39, 0:05:40]: Okay, you got it. [0:05:41, 0:05:48]: Let us pray. Living God as we gather together here tonight to conduct the business of the city. [0:05:49, 0:06:00]: We invite you to enter in our hearts and guide our thoughts and control our lives so that we may continue to be servants of all. Amen. [0:06:00, 0:06:01]: Amen. [0:06:03, 0:06:05]: If everyone would stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. [0:06:06, 0:06:08]: And we can all say it in unison. [0:06:09, 0:06:21]: I pledge allegiance to the flag to the United States of America, to the Republic which stands, a nation under God, indivisible, with liberty, justice for all. [0:06:29, 0:06:32]: Okay. Miss Logan is gonna do the roll call. [0:06:39, 0:06:41]: I ski abdul. [0:06:42, 0:06:49]: Kathleen Nelson. Present. Stanley Dumas. Present. Harold Thoubodeau. Present. David Planchon. [0:06:50, 0:06:50]: President [0:06:53, 0:06:55]: Madam Chairman, we have a quorum. [0:06:58, 0:06:59]: Okay. [0:07:02, 0:07:07]: So we are gonna move forward with the adoption of the agenda. [0:07:09, 0:07:10]: For this evening. [0:07:10, 0:07:11]: If someone would [0:07:13, 0:07:18]: Make a motion to adopt the agenda. Madam Chair, I move that we adopt the agenda as presented. [0:07:19, 0:07:20]: May I have a second? [0:07:23, 0:07:26]: I'll second it. Harold Thibodeau second it. [0:07:28, 0:07:29]: Okay. [0:07:30, 0:07:32]: So we can now have the agenda adopted. Hold it. [0:07:33, 0:07:43]: Excuse me, could I I'm sorry. Repeat who made the motion and then who seconded, please? Okay for each item. Mr. Dumas made the motion and Mr. Thibodeau seconded the motion. [0:07:45, 0:07:47]: Take bite, take bite. [0:07:48, 0:07:54]: Okay. May have a vote in favor of the agenda. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. [0:07:55, 0:07:59]: Okay. It has been approved to adopt today's agenda. [0:08:00, 0:08:01]: Yeah. [0:08:02, 0:08:10]: All right, now we're gonna approve the minutes for the January twenty-sixth, two thousand twenty-three meeting, if everyone would review it. [0:08:14, 0:08:18]: And let us know if any corrections need to be made. [0:08:44, 0:08:52]: Okay, may I have a motion to adopt adopt the January minutes? Mr. David Planchon, I'd like to make a motion to accept the minutes as written. [0:08:52, 0:08:53]: May I have a second? [0:08:53, 0:08:56]: And I second it. Harold Thibodeau. [0:08:56, 0:08:57]: All in favor? [0:08:58, 0:08:59]: Aye. Aye. [0:09:00, 0:09:05]: Okay, and we will move to have the January twenty-sixth, two thousand twenty-three [0:09:05, 0:09:06]: Minutes approved. [0:09:09, 0:09:12]: Did you uh get that lender who made the motion? [0:09:14, 0:09:15]: Okay, thank you. [0:09:17, 0:09:18]: Okay. [0:09:18, 0:09:20]: And Miss Linda. [0:09:20, 0:09:24]: You want to continue by presenting the rest of the information for this evening? [0:09:31, 0:09:36]: Uh madam chair, we're actually ready to uh move into the agenda at this time. [0:09:58, 0:10:05]: So at this time, um Madam Vice Chair will read the uh agenda item um as a our first public hearing. [0:10:05, 0:10:06]: I'm sorry. [0:10:06, 0:10:12]: I said we will um need to go through and go ahead and read through the first item on the agenda as a public hearing. [0:10:12, 0:10:15]: Okay, so you want me to read it? Okay. All right. [0:10:19, 0:10:26]: So the first thing is the city of Stockbridge adoption of the combined official zoning and overlay district map. [0:10:26, 0:10:28]: Number O Z M two zero. [0:10:28, 0:10:30]: Two three zero one. [0:10:31, 0:10:43]: Consideration of amend read the whole thing. You can read all the way through. Okay. Consideration of amendments to the official zoning map and overlay district map in accordance with the resolution and refer referendum annexation method. [0:10:43, 0:10:47]: voted upon during the November eighth, two thousand twenty two election. [0:10:48, 0:10:51]: There are approximately two thousand two hundred and two. [0:10:52, 0:10:56]: plus or minus new parcels to be added to the Stockbridge city boundaries. [0:10:56, 0:11:02]: As indicated within House Bill six twelve, including but not limited to twenty-three subdivision communities. [0:11:03, 0:11:05]: And parcels primarily consisting [0:11:05, 0:11:09]: Of one thousand five hundred and seven plus or minus single family residential. [0:11:09, 0:11:13]: One hundred and f five combined commercial and industrial, etcetera. [0:11:13, 0:11:20]: The zoning and overlay district map will be combined as a single document. The previous zoning map and overlay district map. [0:11:20, 0:11:24]: adopted on march fourteenth, two thousand twenty two will be repealed and replaced. [0:11:26, 0:11:28]: To be presented by the community development staff. [0:11:30, 0:11:50]: Number eight, the final plat case, number PL. We're just dealing with the first case, um chair. So thank you very much. So um before you, Madam Chair and um planning commissioners, uh we have the um zoning map, which has been combined with our overlay district map. As you might recall, last March when the unified [0:11:50, 0:12:00]: development code was adopted. We also adopted a zoning map, an official zoning map, and also an official overlay district map. [0:12:00, 0:12:20]: Since the annexation passed in November, the annexed properties came into the city effective January 1st, 2023. And with that, we needed to apply zoning to those parcels as they came into the city limits. So what we have before you is the proposed zoning [0:12:20, 0:12:40]: Districts and the overlay districts based on what the state annexation code requires the jurisdiction to do. It requires us to bring in a zoning from the county that into a compatible zoning district for the city. And that's what we've done here. [0:12:40, 0:13:00]: So you have also a a larger map in front of you. So please let me know if you have any questions. Again, the idea was to combine the official zoning map and the f the overlay district map so that we didn't have to look at two separate maps. And sometimes it's tough for people to look at that and not know. [0:13:00, 0:13:05]: whether they're in an overlay district or not, just by looking at the zoning. So we've tried to solve that here. [0:13:16, 0:13:19]: You may have already answered my question, but [0:13:21, 0:13:31]: I really wanted to understand who benefits from combining the maps. Is it for staff's benefit or is it for the public's benefit or [0:13:31, 0:13:51]: It's it's primarily for the public's benefit and for staffs because what we're our goal is to once this ad uh plan is adopted, then we would put this information online and make it an interactive map so that not only residents and business owners can look at their property based on the address or the parcel ID number. [0:13:51, 0:13:53]: Де ставки аз. [0:13:54, 0:14:09]: And that helps us to make sure that we're more accurate in our assessment of the zoning. And it helps to, you know, serve our customers in a more streamlined way. So they don't necessarily have to call us. They can go online and find the zoning themselves. [0:14:10, 0:14:17]: I guess my only concern um is I'm having difficulty reading it. Um [0:14:19, 0:14:26]: Not the zoning part, but the overlay districts seemed like it got more complicated than it was pre when they were separate. [0:14:26, 0:14:46]: So we haven't w what we only done are added in um we haven't added many districts to the mixed use overlay, only those that are along those major corridors where they already were located, like 138 and Eagles Landing and parts of Rock Quarry. So the map you have in front of you that you were provided is roll. [0:14:46, 0:15:06]: Rolled up next to you has the hatched the marks that show what whether a property has an overlay district tied to it in darker lines so it is easier to see. Having, you know, this is this is a a screenshot put here for you guys to review, but the actual document itself will be. [0:15:06, 0:15:12]: much clearer and easily to be read. Also when you put your pointer on that parcel. [0:15:12, 0:15:23]: it will outline for you the zoning and the overlay district that you are in. So it will provide that as part of the interactive map we are looking to create as a result of this approval. [0:15:23, 0:15:24]: Gotcha. [0:15:27, 0:15:28]: Are there any other questions? [0:15:32, 0:15:35]: I have a motion to adopt to adopt them. [0:15:38, 0:15:52]: Madam Chairman Stan Dumas, I move that we adopt this combination as presented. What one second, I'm sorry, this is a public hearing, so we would have to get the public's input on on this item. No problem, no problem. [0:15:54, 0:15:57]: We only do this every w once every two or three years. [0:16:01, 0:16:06]: Well you can open you you can open it up for anyone to speak in favor or opposition. [0:16:15, 0:16:17]: Thank you. [0:16:18, 0:16:25]: They they can't hear you. Y your mic is on? Oh, sorry. Okay. Are there any comments um from the public at this time? [0:16:27, 0:16:29]: Okay, since there are no comments from the public. [0:16:29, 0:16:33]: Uh may I have a motion to adopt the combined official zoning and overlay district map? [0:16:35, 0:16:36]: Oh move. [0:16:37, 0:16:38]: Do I have a second? [0:16:39, 0:16:40]: I second it, Harold. [0:16:41, 0:16:46]: Okay. May have a fo a vote now. All in favor, say aye. [0:16:46, 0:16:49]: Aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? [0:16:50, 0:16:54]: Okay, the eyes have it and we will now adopt [0:16:55, 0:16:56]: The motion. [0:16:56, 0:16:58]: For the official zoning and overlay district. [0:16:58, 0:16:59]: Thank you. [0:17:01, 0:17:08]: All right, move on to number eight, the final plat case, number PL two zero two, three, z dash zero one. [0:17:09, 0:17:13]: Consideration of a final plat for the proposed Eagles Hill Townhomes. [0:17:15, 0:17:19]: FKA Eagles Ridge Townhomes entitled Final Plat for Eagles Hill. [0:17:20, 0:17:25]: Which was prepared by Falcon Design Consultants and dated march third, two thousand twenty-three. [0:17:25, 0:17:31]: The project would be a component of the Winding Creek master plan as approved by City Council via ordinance. [0:17:31, 0:17:35]: Number OR eighteen dash four five, which requires the development. [0:17:35, 0:17:39]: To comply with the specifications of the city's previous RM dash two. [0:17:40, 0:17:42]: Multiple family resident district. [0:17:42, 0:17:44]: Townhouses zoning district. [0:17:44, 0:17:47]: The applicant proposes to develop eighty town home lots on [0:17:48, 0:17:53]: nineteen point si five seven acres at a density of four point zero eight units per acre. [0:17:53, 0:17:56]: The applicant Falcon Design Consultants. [0:17:56, 0:18:02]: The property is located on Campground Road and Highway forty two and landlots thirty three and thirty-four. [0:18:02, 0:18:03]: Of district seven. [0:18:05, 0:18:05]: Mm. [0:18:06, 0:18:22]: Okay. Yes, so um this item before you, the the code states that um all final plats are to be approved and reviewed by the Planning Commission in order for the developers to obtain building permits to start building on the property. [0:18:22, 0:18:23]: Um [0:18:23, 0:18:29]: Typically during the development phase, the civil engineer and the building inspectors will go out [0:18:29, 0:18:49]: work with the developers on ensuring that the roads are up to par, sidewalks are in, utilities are in properly in order to get to this point. Public works is also involved in this process. And before you we have the final plat again for Eagles Hill, formerly Eagles Ridge, [0:18:49, 0:19:09]: who was uh it was I think we when we annexed we realized there was another Eagles Ridge within this the county and was going to be in the city limits. So the name was changed to Eagles Hill and currently the applicants are asking for AD lots, townhomes, as part of the master plan as was mentioned earlier. [0:19:09, 0:19:20]: to the single family homes and the townhomes that are directly across the street on Campground Road. And if we just require an approval for it. But it is not a public hearing. [0:19:22, 0:19:24]: All right. Are there any questions about this? [0:19:26, 0:19:27]: Okay. [0:19:27, 0:19:42]: I I have a question. I really don't know enough about it. Uh what what was presented to us on this particular final plat case number PL twenty twenty three dash zero one. You you have the information on that except what we read? [0:19:43, 0:19:47]: You have the plat in your in your folders? [0:19:49, 0:20:09]: I'm sorry, I cannot hear you. We were invited to come out there and look at the area that oh no, you I think you're thinking of an the other project on Johtaco Road. Okay. Um no, this is a project that for any project that comes into the city that is getting a building permits, they require are required to have a final plat. [0:20:09, 0:20:28]: which means that the city is going to accept the roads, going to accept the maintenance and things like that. That is a separate process that's done through the city council. And they are required to go through this process in order to get building permits and start building on the property. [0:20:34, 0:20:44]: So where are we on this right now, as far as this particular piece of uh property? Have they uh w where are we with the city on this? [0:20:44, 0:21:04]: Well, they're the they're at this point where they have gone through and uh developed the property and prepped the land. They put in the sidewalks, utilities, curb and gutter, streets, um, so that they can start the building process. So they've met the state requirements and all of city requirements as it pertains to um [0:21:04, 0:21:06]: Um getting the property ready for building. [0:21:07, 0:21:13]: So basically they've met all their permits and requirements to develop the land. They have at this time, yes, sir. Okay. [0:21:15, 0:21:25]: Uh we do have someone representing the applicant in case there are questions uh for then. Mr. Romeris is here. Can he come up and tell us more about it so we have a better understanding? [0:21:26, 0:21:26]: Yeah. [0:21:31, 0:21:51]: Hello, how are you? My name is Francisco Ramirez and I am a land development manager manager for Meritage Homes. Um so for this property, as Breca said, um it's it's we're we're the the site is developed, so we have curb and gutter, roads, the entrance monuments in utilities. Uh we went through the city to get all the approvals, the permits. [0:21:51, 0:21:57]: So we are at the process where we are ready for planning so we can get our building permits to start building. [0:22:01, 0:22:06]: Have we done a traffic study for that area? Uh do you have that also? [0:22:06, 0:22:26]: All of all of the because this is part of a larger plan, all these studies had been done previously. Um Campground Road was upgraded by the county, um, it's under county jurisdiction, and they made improvements to it uh several years ago. Um so um there would be no required additional [0:22:26, 0:22:38]: traffic study as this overall development had to have met their minimum requirements for road improvements back when the original single family homes were being built. [0:22:42, 0:22:43]: All right, thank you. [0:22:47, 0:22:50]: No questions by me, Miss Nelson. [0:23:05, 0:23:06]: Final flat case. [0:23:08, 0:23:18]: PL two zero two three dashes. I'm sorry. Uh may I have a motion to adopt the final plaque case number PL two zero two three- zero one? [0:23:23, 0:23:27]: Madam Chair, I move that we adopt the flat case that's presented. [0:23:28, 0:23:30]: And I second it, Harold. [0:23:32, 0:23:35]: Okay, all in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. [0:23:36, 0:23:37]: Any opposed? [0:23:40, 0:23:47]: Okay, so moved we will adopt the final plaque case, PL two zero two three- zero one. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, uh Planning Commissioners. [0:23:49, 0:23:53]: Okay, moving on to the comprehensive plan amendment case. [0:23:53, 0:23:56]: Number CP dash two zero two two dash zero six. [0:23:57, 0:24:00]: Consideration of a comprehensive plan amendment request. [0:24:00, 0:24:05]: To assign the future land use designation of property property located at [0:24:05, 0:24:10]: Five seven six Davis Road, parcel number S zero five dash zero. [0:24:10, 0:24:11]: One zero zero. [0:24:12, 0:24:13]: two zero zero zero. [0:24:13, 0:24:18]: To high density residential to allow for the construction of a town home development. [0:24:18, 0:24:21]: Applicant four star real estate group, USA Incorporated. [0:24:21, 0:24:22]: Agent. [0:24:22, 0:24:24]: Alex Brock of Smith. [0:24:24, 0:24:26]: Gambrel and Russell. [0:24:26, 0:24:28]: L L P the property is located in land lot. [0:24:29, 0:24:34]: ninety one of district twelve and it contains twenty seven point six three five plus or minus acres. [0:24:41, 0:24:44]: And we'll now have the presentation. [0:24:45, 0:24:46]: That's my presentation. [0:25:00, 0:25:01]: Oh my god. [0:25:03, 0:25:05]: Uh uh [0:25:17, 0:25:32]: All right. Good evening, Planning Commission members. My name is Gordon Linton, Planner One for the City of Stockbridge, and I'm here to present the case for CP twenty twenty two-0 six, located at five seventy six Davis Road in Stockbridge, Georgia. [0:25:36, 0:25:56]: And these are the case facts. The applicant is four-star USA Real Estate Group, and the applicant's request is to assign the future land use destination of the property to high-density residential to allow the development of a townhome community with 170 units. The number of proposed units [0:25:56, 0:26:16]: Units per acre is 6.15 units per acre. The address of the property, as mentioned earlier, is 576 Davis Road. And the project characteristics, they have three single-family residences and a detached garage. In addition, it is a long, narrow, long-wood. [0:26:16, 0:26:29]: and narrow lot that slopes downward to the north where a stream and buffer are located. Currently, the city land use designation is Low Density Residential and the sign was posted on January 9th, 2023. [0:26:35, 0:26:55]: This is the City of Stockbridge comprehensive plan for 2018 through 2038. The future land use designation map designates the subject project property as low density residential. However, the current future land use map is compatible with the requested resulting to MFR, which is multifamily residential. [0:26:54, 0:27:02]: Therefore, the applicant is seeking a comprehensive plan amendment to assign a future land use designation to high density residential. [0:27:06, 0:27:26]: And this is the map, this is a feature land use map of five seventy six Davis Road. As you can see, the property is um low density residential and is mostly surrounded by either medium density to the east and to the west, and you also have a high density over here on the western portion as well. [0:27:30, 0:27:39]: And you also have Walmart here too as well. So it's low density, medium density, and also high density in that area, in the surrounding area. [0:27:43, 0:28:03]: The surrounding land use destination, the property to the north is low density residential with single family detached homes located along Valley Hill Road. The property to the south is Stopbrace Estates Mobile Home Park, and that is medium density residential. The property to the east is single family detached homes. [0:28:03, 0:28:22]: Which is located alongside Davis Road and Sentry Oaks, which is a duplex subdivision. And they're also medium density. And the property to the west is Pine Hill Estates, which is Mobile Home Park. And you also have Wildwood Estates, which is low density residential, medium density residential as well. [0:28:26, 0:28:46]: And this is the aerial photo of the property. As you can see here on the site, this is 576 Davis Road. And the road, and this is 576 Davis Road, the artillery road. And you also have the Stockbridge Estates, and you also have the Pine Hill Estates, and you also have the Century Oaks. And to the west is Big Oaks Villas, which is located around here. [0:28:46, 0:28:47]: Here and here. [0:28:51, 0:29:11]: The surrounded land use densities. Um, so the number units uh for all of the surrounding areas ranges from ninety-one to two hundred and thirty-three. And with the estimated density per acre is with two and a half units per acre, point eight eight units per acre, one point three units per acre. [0:29:11, 0:29:26]: And you also have four units per acre, three units per acre, and you have one with nine units per acre. And the Davis Rowe Townhomes, which is the pros, is 170 units per acre with six and a half, six point one five units per acre. [0:29:31, 0:29:44]: This is the Davis Town Home, Davis Road Town Homes. Um they also have it will also feature a dog park, uh amenity in the open space area with an open with an eight foot walking trail. [0:29:46, 0:29:49]: And this right here is where Davis Road is as well. [0:29:54, 0:30:14]: The staff analysis, the consistency with the comp comprehensive plan, the requested comprehensive plan of the subject property from low density residential to high density residential is necessary because the current land use does not allow the development of the townhomes. Furthermore, the proposed densities will be compatible with the with the required density for the current [0:30:14, 0:30:34]: Land use destination. In relation to the zoning of the property, the properties requested zoning is non-compatible with the list of permitted uses that are found in the comprehensive plan. To allow the proposed zoning, the applicant has requested that the property be assigned the MFR multi multiple family residential to allow the townhomes to be built. The rezoning will be currently [0:30:33, 0:30:53]: Heard concurrently with this case along with the requested variants. The suitability of the site's location, this proposed high-density residential would be compatible with the high-density residential land use designation of the big Oaks villas located to the east. Furthermore, page 45 of the Stockbridge Comprehensive Plan provides a little [0:30:53, 0:31:13]: list of permitted uses that are compatible with the land use designations, which includes multiple family residential. And maintaining the current land use designation. Maintaining the current land use designation will be allowable for the applicant to develop the townhomes due to its prop proximity from an existing townhome that is located within the area. [0:31:13, 0:31:23]: Furthermore, it is unlikely that the subject property will be developed with the type of uses that are permitted by the existing low density residential use designation. [0:31:27, 0:31:47]: And the staff recommendation. The staff report has demonstrated that the requested comprehensive plan amendment via CP twenty twenty-two-six will be necessary and devo desirable for the subject property in conjunction with the requested zoning of the property via 2022-007 to allow for the proposed. [0:31:46, 0:31:56]: to proposed multifamily units. Therefore, the planning and zoning staff recommends approval of the requested change in the property's future land use designation to high density residential. [0:31:59, 0:32:00]: Close. [0:32:03, 0:32:04]: Right and slasher. [0:32:07, 0:32:08]: Back. [0:32:16, 0:32:36]: Um I did want to make sure that you guys knew about the staff recommendation. We did have one update to it. There are two conditions before you. Um the first condition is the comprehensive plan amendment shall not be approved unless the applicant's request is rezoning via RZ. [0:32:36, 0:32:48]: E-202207 to rezone the property from rural residential to multifamily residential is approved to allow the townhomes to be built. [0:32:48, 0:32:52]: We wanted to make sure we made that additional clarification for the for the record. [0:33:01, 0:33:11]: Okay, I noticed um oh in the summary of impact concern section, there weren't any comments provided by the code compliance in the police department. Was there a reason for that? [0:33:15, 0:33:18]: And then for the fire marshal it says NA. [0:33:20, 0:33:40]: Typically as part of our um evaluation um comments from the police department or code enforcement are not required um for rezoning. They don't have any um impact on the actual land use or zoning that's being proposed before you tonight. We do put that in for rezoning just to address [0:33:40, 0:33:45]: address it um but it is not required for this rezoning process. [0:33:46, 0:33:47]: Okay. [0:33:53, 0:33:55]: Do you all have any questions? [0:33:55, 0:34:15]: Yeah, Madam Chair, I noticed that uh w we don't get any traffic studies. That's that's a lot of homes and what's considered all what's already there, and then you're gonna add a hundred and seventy more town homes. Uh that that will be heard in uh Lynt uh in the Rosona case, which will be presented by [0:34:15, 0:34:16]: Badlander. [0:34:16, 0:34:17]: Okay. [0:34:18, 0:34:19]: I I didn't hear you. What did you say? [0:34:20, 0:34:24]: That will be presented in the rezoning case by Linda as far as the traffic study. Oh okay. [0:34:29, 0:34:49]: The the item before you tonight is this particular item is for the comprehensive plan amendment, which is required before we go through the rezoning process and any variances that are attached to this property. Um so this is simply just for the comprehensive plan amendment. And then we'll talk about the rezoning in the next [0:34:49, 0:34:50]: the next public hearing. [0:34:52, 0:35:03]: I didn't hear the last of what you said. Then we would hear more about the project overall as part of the rezoning, which is part of the next public hearing, which we would need to get um any comments from the public on. [0:35:08, 0:35:10]: Right. Any other questions? [0:35:12, 0:35:12]: Yeah. [0:35:13, 0:35:33]: All right. May I have a motion to adopt the comprehensive plan and we'll need to open it up. You have two options. You can either um have the applicant come up and say anything, um, and then you could have folks who are gonna speak in in favor of the request. Okay. And then folks who wanna speak in opposition of the request before a yes, please may I have the applicant [0:35:33, 0:35:34]: Come and speak. [0:35:46, 0:35:47]: Good evening. Oops. [0:35:48, 0:36:08]: Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the Planning Commission. Uh before I begin, just one point of procedure. Uh since items nine, ten, and eleven uh are all concerning the same property and the uh same development, do we want to take those in order or one at a time? We are taking them one at a time. It's a vote for each one. [0:36:08, 0:36:22]: Okay, so I'll have ten minutes for each No no no you can do it one time. Um but but remember this is for the comprehensive plan amendment, not the rezounding. That's the rezounding is next. That's why I just wanted clarification if I need to come back up here three times or [0:36:23, 0:36:31]: Yes. Yes. But not to do not to present the same thing the whole time, but come up in in favor of understanding I'll present just the comp plan this time. Sounds good. [0:36:32, 0:36:45]: Um but a lot of the facts may overlap, but so you know. And before I begin I have one handout. This was uh emailed to uh planning staff earlier today, but it is the letter of support that we've received from a uh adjacent neighbor. [0:36:53, 0:37:06]: Again, good evening, Madam Chair and Planning Commission. My name is Alex Brock with Smith Gambrel Russell. I'm here on behalf of the applicant of Fourstar USA Real Estate Group. Joining me tonight, I have Jack Burke and Reyn Ghiazzoni with Four Star. [0:37:07, 0:37:11]: Uh and we are here to discuss our application for a comprehensive plan amendment. [0:37:12, 0:37:32]: To uh change the land use designation from low density residential to high density residential. Uh and before we get into what we are proposing, I just wanted to kind of go through uh what brings us here tonight, because this has been somewhat of a long journey for us. We originally submitted this back in October of last year. Um [0:37:32, 0:37:42]: And we began discussions with the city uh approximately August of last year uh on this development. And and the plan that's before you tonight has gone through a number of changes. Um uh [0:37:43, 0:38:03]: To come to what you see here tonight. Initially, we had considered a townhome development of 252 units. That would have been a density of 9.11 units per acre. That was lowered to 235 units. The 235 unit plan was submitted with the application in October. After meeting with uh planning staff as well. [0:38:03, 0:38:23]: Well as uh other stakeholders in the city. Uh we went back and revised our plan to drop the units even further. Uh we're at we're now at 170 units, so that's been a reduction of uh over 30 percent. Uh so what we have now is two-thirds of what we initially proposed. And we've also made another number of other [0:38:23, 0:38:43]: Uh changes to the site and upgrades. Uh we've included the addition of a clubhouse, uh, 10-foot sidewalks along Davis Drive that connect to the internal community, uh, increased guest parking throughout, uh, and others that I'll mention through the course of my presentation. Uh some amenities were uh [0:38:42, 0:38:53]: included from the beginning like the playground, the dog park and the the nature trails that we have at the rear of the property. Uh but let me skip to the comp plan amendment. [0:38:54, 0:39:13]: Again, we are requesting uh a comp plan amendment to high density residential, and that is to facilitate the uh proposed multifamily residential zoning, which would allow the town home use. Uh it also allows the uh proposed density that we are requesting, which is six point one five uh units per acre. [0:39:14, 0:39:34]: The current land use, low density residential, does not allow townhomes. And there's also a little bit of a quirk in the comp plan currently. The low density residential allows a density of up to two units per acre. Medium density allows two to three point six units per acre. And then there's a gap until you get to the high density. [0:39:34, 0:39:54]: Density goes from six to sixteen units per acre. So there's no available land use for between 3.6 and 6 units per acre. We are at the very low end of the high density residential land use at 6.15. We're not trying to max it out. We're not trying to go for 16. [0:39:54, 0:40:00]: And in fact, we've loaded it substantially from our initial proposal. [0:40:00, 0:40:15]: And this is in line with uh townhome developments that are in the area. As staff pointed out, the big oak develop our big oak townhomes our big oak villas townhomes uh further down Davis Road to the east of our property are currently at nine units per acre. [0:40:17, 0:40:18]: Um [0:40:21, 0:40:41]: We are also aligned with a number of comp plan uh goals of the comprehensive plan. Uh the comprehensive plan notes that uh one of the goals is to provide a variety of housing choices to suit the changing needs and lifestyles of city residents, uh, provide a mixture of housing options to attract young professionals, singles, and small families. Uh [0:40:41, 0:40:55]: Prof preserve and enhance older existing neighborhoods by promoting uh infill of new development to revitalize established neighborhoods. And the comp plan also specifically notes the lack of townhomes uh in providing um [0:40:56, 0:41:00]: Housing options or the current lack of town homes in the city uh uh [0:41:00, 0:41:20]: To provide housing options. Specifically, it notes that the dominant housing option is likely to remain single family development within the city. However, to attract certain segments of the population, like young adults and millennials, other housing options should be available. Currently, there's a lack of townhomes and smaller multifamily residential housing that's on Patriot. [0:41:20, 0:41:23]: eighteen of the city's current comprehensive plan. [0:41:25, 0:41:45]: It's unlikely that the subject property will be redeveloped with the current low density residential and the current zoning that's on the property. There are uh currently two single-family homes that have been there since the 1940s. Um and it's uh unsuitable for uh proposed development. We believe our uh townhome development. [0:41:45, 0:41:54]: uh is fitting with the with the area uh giving the surrounding uh developments uh and it's fitting within the within the community [0:41:56, 0:42:15]: I'll go through a few other features that we've discussed with um uh both planning staff as well as other stakeholders in the city uh before I rest, but just feel it's important to note uh because these issues have come up before. Um [0:42:16, 0:42:20]: Well first before I get to that, just to note public support. Uh we [0:42:20, 0:42:40]: As I noted, we s originally submitted in October. We sent out three rounds of uh public notification to the surrounding property owners. Uh the first was on January 6th of this year, uh, then again on February 28th, and then on April 10th. We have received no public response uh to our uh [0:42:40, 0:42:55]: uh notifications with one exception and that is the property owner directly to the west of us uh that owns the Pine Hills uh mobile home park and that is the letter and support that you have before you tonight. Uh other than that we have heard no uh [0:42:56, 0:43:00]: uh no comments from the community or no no questions from the community [0:43:02, 0:43:22]: Uh but we have been in uh significant discussions with planning staff as well as other stakeholders with the city to to make this a appropriate development for the city. Uh one concern was affordability. Uh these units will be priced at the high 200s, low three hundreds. Um these are for sale units, and we're not seeking any [0:43:22, 0:43:31]: tra tax credits for uh federal affordable requirements. Uh so we're not meeting HUD or we're not bound by HUD restrictions for this. These are uh [0:43:32, 0:43:48]: for sale uh town home units. Uh but we are pricing these in an affordable range. Uh the medium home price for new sales and resales in Henry County and Stockbridge in the last 12 months are range in the high 300,000. So these are well within the [0:43:48, 0:43:50]: the affordable range for new homes. [0:43:51, 0:44:11]: And what we are proposing is uh it's also particularly within the affordable range of younger homebuyers. Uh town homes typically attract younger homebuyers or empty nesters. Uh those that their kids may have moved out of their house and they're looking to downsize, they don't want to take care of a yard, uh, so they move into town homes. Um [0:44:11, 0:44:31]: Uh, which is what we are proposing. And both of these are encouraged by uh the comp plan to add a variety of housing. Um I'll touch on these other things briefly. Um, because I may touch on these more in the uh the uh rezoning or variance uh presentation. So but parking. Uh [0:44:31, 0:44:51]: One of the issues was the number of guest parking spaces that we have. As you'll hear later on tonight, we are requesting a variance for the front yard setback to reduce it from 50 feet down to 25 feet. One of the consequences of that is there's less parking within the driveway. We still have enough room within the driveway for uh one to two cars for each unit. [0:44:51, 0:45:03]: However, we've redone our site plan from what we initially proposed to provide a significant number of uh off-street parking spaces, guest parking spaces throughout the development, particularly if you look at the site plan um [0:45:05, 0:45:17]: Along the interior blocks here, uh we've removed units. Uh we've reduced the density to add the extra parking to uh um allow more guest parking. [0:45:17, 0:45:37]: Uh in specifically, we'll have a total of 281 garage spaces and 281 driveway spaces uh with 92 surface guest parking spaces for a total of 654 parking spaces throughout the development, which is significant for the size of residential development. Uh the city [0:45:37, 0:45:57]: Stockbridge requires a minimum of 2.25 spaces per three-bedroom unit, which would equate to around 383 spaces. Uh so we're 271 spaces above that requirement, or almost 1.7 times above what we are 170% above what we are required to do. And that is just to facilitate. [0:45:57, 0:46:02]: facilitate uh the parking within the community and to uh help keep [0:46:02, 0:46:06]: prevent people from parking on the street uh and blocking the drive aisles. [0:46:07, 0:46:22]: Uh open space and amenities, I touched on this briefly earlier, but uh just to reiterate, uh we are preserving approximately 7.9 acres of the overall uh 27 acre property, uh or 28.5% of the overall property as open space. Uh [0:46:24, 0:46:44]: The city only requires 15% open space, so we are significantly above that for the open space. Uh a large portion of that is to the north of the property, uh, where we have a stream buffer, but we are also uh preserving green space in the form of uh nature trails. Uh we are having we have a eight-foot concrete sidewalk that goes through the the [0:46:44, 0:46:57]: green space area. Uh as well, we're proposing clubhouse, playground, dog park, walking trail, and uh approximately s 5600 square feet of landscape uh public open space towards the the front of the development. [0:47:01, 0:47:01]: I can. [0:47:02, 0:47:22]: Oh ten minut okay. All right. Well I'll wrap up and just say uh traffic improvements. As staff noted, we have a traffic report that will be brought up in the rezoning case. I'll go into those uh improvements and how our our coordination with the Georgia DOT on its improvements of highway one thirty eight uh during the rezoning case uh to show how we impact traffic on the uh [0:47:22, 0:47:42]: streets. And then utilities and four star's other developments in the area. Four star is a national developer, but they have developed several properties in the Stockbridge area. And with that, I'll I'll rest my presentation. I'll bring up some of these other points in the other two applications. [0:47:42, 0:47:44]: Thank you. [0:47:49, 0:47:49]: Questions? [0:47:52, 0:47:56]: It's core to us. Um I'm sorry, I I can't hear you, Ms. I'm sorry. [0:47:56, 0:48:03]: I keep forgetting to turn it back on. Um, I wanted to ask, did the staff um get a response on what you all approved? [0:48:04, 0:48:10]: Uh the two points that you wanted to bring out to us, did you get a response from them on what you want what the staff wanted? [0:48:10, 0:48:11]: Do you get my question? [0:48:12, 0:48:14]: Do we get a response from the applicant? [0:48:14, 0:48:27]: Right, on the staff recommendation, yes. Um I haven't specifically spoken with them, but it is it is the will of the board to impose those conditions on them. But they're reasonable and it requires that I can't hear you. [0:48:31, 0:48:48]: I'm saying that the the zoning conditions that are in the case, they speak directly to making sure that if the comprehensive plan is approved and the others are not approved, then you know, well let me say it this way. Let me let me just read the conditions so that it's crystal clear. [0:48:57, 0:49:17]: The first condition of the two is the comprehensive plan amendment shall not be approved unless the applicants request request a rezoning via RZ-2022-07 to rezone the property from rural residential to multifamily residential is approved to allow. [0:49:17, 0:49:21]: how the townhomes to be built. And then condition number two. [0:49:23, 0:49:43]: States the comprehensive plan amendment shall not be approved unless the applicant's requested variance to reduce the required minimum front yard setback from fifty feet to twenty-five feet is approved simultaneously with this request. CP dash two zero two two-six. [0:49:43, 0:49:47]: Okay. That answers my question. Thank you. [0:49:49, 0:49:54]: All right, are we gonna open this to public comment? Okay. [0:49:55, 0:49:55]: Oops. [0:49:55, 0:49:56]: Thank you. [0:49:58, 0:50:02]: All right. Does the pu does anyone from the public want to come up and make a comment? [0:50:06, 0:50:16]: You have somebody have a hand up over here. Okay. Do we have someone who wants to speak in opposition of the request? Come on up. And please state your name and address for the record. [0:50:17, 0:50:37]: Good afternoon. My name is Dylan Garnett. I live at 566 Davis Road. It's the property adjacent to the uh proposed uh land development. Uh Madam Chair and Senior Members of the Council, thank you for allowing me to speak. Uh I just wanted to voice my disapproval. [0:50:37, 0:50:39]: Because of the [0:50:41, 0:50:48]: I guess because of how they have it zoned next to my property, it's directly adjacent to my property and the developers haven't [0:50:48, 0:51:08]: spoken to me or asked me or you know, we haven't spoke about how they plan on uh setting boundaries or anything like that. And I know they spoke about having a traffic uh study. Well, I live there and I know the study, you know, I see [0:51:08, 0:51:17]: the traffic that it's already a lot of traffic during the afternoon and stuff. Uh and we have a lot of uh like [0:51:19, 0:51:21]: I don't know how to explain this, but you know, people who [0:51:23, 0:51:24]: Чес вукін [0:51:24, 0:51:29]: you know, on the sidewalk since they developed it. A lot of people walk through my yard. So we have just security concerns. [0:51:29, 0:51:42]: and boundary concerns. And I'll just want to make sure that the development is not infringing on my property because they haven't come to speak to us or say anything to us about how they plan on building. And if their buildings are [0:51:43, 0:51:51]: facing my backyard or I can see in today's backyard. You know, I just want to make sure that we have set boundaries if it is approved. And uh [0:51:52, 0:52:00]: I don't know. They didn't speak to me, so I don't know what their plan is. And that's why me and my family do not approve of the development. [0:52:03, 0:52:07]: Miss Carter, can they answer his concerns? [0:52:07, 0:52:22]: Um for the time being we would just to take pop public comment on those that are in opposition and those that are opposed and then w before the vote then the council can can ask for the applicant to come and speak. Yes ma'am. Okay, thank you. Thank you. [0:52:25, 0:52:27]: Repeat his name and and address. [0:52:31, 0:52:36]: Dylan Garnett and the residence is five six six Davis Road. [0:52:39, 0:52:40]: Thank you, sir. [0:52:46, 0:52:54]: Hello, Madam Chair. My name is Mark McFry. I live at 289 SHIELDs Road, which is on the corner of Davis and Shields. [0:52:55, 0:52:57]: We've lived there for about six years. [0:52:58, 0:53:15]: Anyway, we received these letters and it always said go to the hearings. I didn't know that we were supposed to contact them directly. But uh yeah, our concern is the traffic, the impact of all those people. They're gonna be moving into our neighborhood. [0:53:15, 0:53:19]: It's already traffic and that stop sign that I live on the corner of [0:53:20, 0:53:23]: People run that stop sign left and right. We've had the police. [0:53:24, 0:53:27]: sit there and I've told'em they could sit in my yard. [0:53:27, 0:53:30]: and stop in cars. People get out and haunt. [0:53:31, 0:53:35]: You know, I'm just afraid they're gonna start shooting at each other. But [0:53:35, 0:53:38]: You've got two trailer parts. You've got the uh [0:53:39, 0:53:44]: rentals down through there and then you got the subdivision up north of there. [0:53:45, 0:53:55]: you add that many houses, you're gonna have that many more people, you're gonna have that much more crying, that much more uh people getting upset with each other, stuff like that. [0:53:55, 0:54:06]: Um I'm wondering if they did a impact study. I'm wondering what the storm water that's gonna come off that comes into my yard, which the water off Davis comes in my yard anyway. [0:54:07, 0:54:08]: At my expense. [0:54:09, 0:54:11]: After they put that sidewalk in. [0:54:11, 0:54:13]: That water has eroded the hill. [0:54:14, 0:54:17]: It has eroded my yard and I've rented equipment. [0:54:18, 0:54:29]: gotten rid of dead trees and tried to fix it best I could. But it looks like they're gonna just force people like us out of the neighborhood. [0:54:30, 0:54:34]: with their development because once they're finished and they've gotten paid, they're gone. [0:54:35, 0:54:37]: They don't they don't have to live there. We do. [0:54:38, 0:54:45]: And uh I've lived here in Stockbridge for twenty five years. I've lived in Georgia my whole life. [0:54:46, 0:54:50]: And I think we should have a little, you know, say so. [0:54:50, 0:54:52]: in what goes on in in our neighborhood. [0:54:54, 0:54:57]: But you know, I know this is just a hearing, but uh [0:54:58, 0:55:02]: And I don't know what y'all gonna do, but I I hope y'all take us into consideration. [0:55:11, 0:55:16]: Are there any other comments? Any comments um [0:55:16, 0:55:18]: Opposed or for the project? [0:55:24, 0:55:24]: Okay. [0:55:32, 0:55:33]: I believe the [0:55:37, 0:55:41]: the applicant will be coming up to address what the opposition [0:55:50, 0:56:10]: Z thank you. As as I noted, we're a little bit surprised we have opposition tonight. We haven't heard from anybody, but we one of the things that we try to do with our developments and our rezoning in particular is to meet with the community. You know, all we can do is send out notifications to request to meet. Um you know, i if they leave their [0:56:10, 0:56:11]: Um [0:56:11, 0:56:31]: contact information here tonight, we will gladly set up meetings with them after tonight uh to discuss their concerns. But I think a lot of these are easily uh addressed. Uh particularly uh the next door neighbor at five sixty six Davis Road. Um we do have buffers along our property, uh landscape buffers against his [0:56:31, 0:56:39]: uh property and there's no there's only I think two units that are even close or lots that are close to his property. [0:56:40, 0:56:57]: If you can hear me, uh here is five sixty six Davis. Uh these row or these units would back up with him, but you'd still have uh quite a significant amount of buffer between the back of these units at his backyard. Uh we can most can you guys hear them? [0:56:59, 0:57:02]: Oh okay, good. I'm trying to speak loud, so [0:57:05, 0:57:23]: The majority of this area is taken up by uh what we're proposing as emergency access. This would be uh a a entrance drive, but it it would be closed off only in times for uh firetruck had to get in there. For some reason the main entrance is closed. Uh this would be allowable for firetruck access, but that would be used. [0:57:24, 0:57:34]: rarely during the entire length uh lifetime of the development. Uh so this would essentially be a green space area next to the five sixty six uh Davis Road property. [0:57:35, 0:57:36]: Um [0:57:38, 0:57:46]: The other gentleman that lives at the corner of Shields and Davis, um, a lot of the issues that he brought up are currently existing with the city. We're not [0:57:47, 0:57:55]: uh exacerbating those issues. He brought up a number of people running the stop sign, traffic uh on the roads, crime. Uh those are [0:57:57, 0:58:01]: Issues that the city is dealing with currently. Uh we are not going to [0:58:02, 0:58:19]: Add to that, uh, we have done a traffic study that has shown that the uh number of vehicular trips from the proposed development will not negatively impact the uh local roadways uh or uh diminish the level of service of the adjacent intersections. Um [0:58:20, 0:58:40]: We are also proposing improvements to Davis Road in front of our property. I mentioned one, the ten foot uh uh section of sidewalk on along the northern section of rideway. But we are also proposing a dedicated left turn lane on to on Davis Road as well as a D cell lane into our property uh to facilitate traffic movements in and out so it does not impact uh [0:58:40, 0:58:46]: uh uh vehicular trips along Davis Road uh for people turning in or into our development. [0:58:47, 0:59:07]: Uh stormwater. Our stormwater the site generally drains to the north, which is the left side of the plan there. And you can see the light blue area in the rear is our stormwater detention pond, which will capture and detain stormwater to mitigate the runoff and water quality before it is released to the stream to the north. And the purpose of that is to [0:59:06, 0:59:18]: control uh flooding and storm flows uh so that we are not negatively impacting uh downstream properties. And that's a requirement a state requirement as well as city requirement uh that we have to meet those standards. [0:59:19, 0:59:39]: The erosion that uh the gentleman mentioned along Davis Road, again, that's an existing issue we have nothing to do with. That's something that he would need to address with either the city or Henry County, um, whoever addressed or developed the sidewalk. But our stormwater generally drains away from those properties to the north, to the left side of the plan, as you see. [0:59:39, 0:59:53]: Um but again I would offer my invitation to meet uh with the with the uh residents. Uh if you leave your contact information or we can talk after the meeting and I can get your contact information, we'd be glad to reach out with you and and meet with you individually. [0:59:54, 0:59:57]: Um with that I think I have answered the question, so [1:00:00, 1:00:20]: All right, and I want to apologize to the uh the people that came up to say something I was rushing along, but we definitely wanted to hear the comments that you had. And I encourage you to leave your contact information with them so that they can get with you for sure. I use that area when I drive to work, so um I am concerned about the the traffic as well. Um so I'll be eager to to um listen to that. [1:00:20, 1:00:22]: The information about the study. [1:00:22, 1:00:23]: Any other? [1:00:23, 1:00:26]: Questions from the panel or comments? [1:00:26, 1:00:27]: It's just [1:00:31, 1:00:37]: I guess I'll go. Who is the owner of the Pine Hills estates? Currently we just received this letter from [1:00:37, 1:00:38]: It was uh [1:00:40, 1:00:40]: Is he present? [1:00:41, 1:00:44]: It's a it's a corporate owner. Um [1:00:47, 1:01:03]: Affordable Communities Group. Uh Chris Berry is the CEO. Okay, so so this person's not here then. That's correct. Okay. He's not here. Because I had a couple of questions for him. Um can we have an open conversation about this? Are we ready for that? [1:01:05, 1:01:25]: My first concern, of course, with any residential development is traffic. Um having lived in Stockbridge since 1985, I know what Davis Road is like traffic-wise, just coming from the residential area that approach it in and out now. And if you looked at the traffic study, it was gonna add some. [1:01:25, 1:01:33]: 600 new round trips to Davis Road. And if y'all know where Davis Road exits next to Walmart. [1:01:33, 1:01:49]: It's already a backup. Way far back. And if I could just imagine adding six hundred more round trips up and down Davis Road to that existing traffic, what a nightmare that's going to be. And also [1:01:50, 1:02:10]: The proximity of where Davis Road exits next to Walmart, they're at 42 Highway, is too close to an existing traffic stop to put in another traffic control device. So if they have to, if if it's decided to reroute Davis Road away from that area further down, [1:02:10, 1:02:18]: Down to where they can put in a traffic light, is the property owner willing to give up some of his property to reroute Davis Road? [1:02:19, 1:02:26]: to make it more accessible, to you know, make it more conducive to traffic flow and state requirements. [1:02:28, 1:02:48]: I will say this. Uh first off, we're a little less than a mile east of uh uh the intersection of Davis Road and one hundred thirty eight. Uh so we we don't control that that property or that area. Um it so we could not dedicate right away for that development. But I will say that our traffic engineer has the [1:02:48, 1:03:08]: The right-of-way improvement plans for the expansion of Highway 138 and Highway 42. That will come on or begin construction in 2024. Our development will begin, or we are looking at beginning the vertical construction around 2024. [1:03:08, 1:03:28]: With the last homes being built around 2027, which would allow time for uh the improvements to highway 138 and one and 42 to come online before our uh development is built out. So we're anticipating the improvement to particularly that intersection where Davis Road and 138 [1:03:28, 1:03:43]: uh currently is. Uh we're expecting an improvement to that. And our traffic engineer has taken those improvements into account and determined that there would be uh no impact from our proposed development on those on that uh intersection. [1:03:49, 1:03:59]: In I have a copy of the traffic study. It should be in your packet as well as part of our application. I know it is quite lengthy and a little bit hard to go through, but uh uh it it details that as well. [1:04:07, 1:04:21]: Okay. It it is adding a lot of new vehicles to that already clogged up corridor there. And I ha I'm afraid that we're gonna back up so bad that people are going to use the Walmart parking lot and the residents to the [1:04:22, 1:04:36]: east of there as a way to egress the neighborhood just because of the backup it's going to create. And that that would create another problem all by itself without any kind of improvement to where Davis Road now exits onto forty two. [1:04:37, 1:04:57]: It that and that's uh what they refer to in the traffic study is the level of service of the intersection. When a intersection begins to back up and uh cannot empty the cues before the next red light occurs or next green light occurs, that is a d decrease in the level of service. Our traffic uh engineer has taken that into account. They did [1:04:57, 1:05:07]: uh traffic counts at Davis Road. And with the improvements that are coming online from the Georgia DOP Georgia DOT widening, uh [1:05:08, 1:05:25]: it is anticipated that there will be no decrease in the level of service so even with the added cars from our development. So with those improvements um in the number of cars coming out of our development, we are not expecting the traffic queues to back up any further than uh uh what they are today. [1:05:28, 1:05:31]: Okay, answered my questions. Okay. Thank you. [1:05:35, 1:05:38]: Uh Madam President, I have a question. Yes, Ms. Tibet. [1:05:38, 1:05:58]: Uh I noticed you mentioned DOT. Here's the thing over at Davis Road. It it's a bottleneck. And that whole system as far as the street design and everything needs to be changed. Uh besides the DOT, wouldn't the city be involved in on that also, on that traffic study for that, if they already know that it's [1:05:58, 1:06:00]: It's a problem at Davis Road in one hundred thirty eight? [1:06:01, 1:06:18]: As as far as the traffic study, we prepared that on our own. Uh we have provided a copy to the city. Uh as far as the Georgia DOT improvement plans, uh you would have to I would have to direct that to the city staff is as far if I don't know if City Stockbridge transportation is involved with that widening. [1:06:19, 1:06:39]: I I think that's the c uh the citizens need to take a look at that overall, even with their uh city councilperson over that area and bring that to their attention. Uh to handle that. I I think they know that that's area is backed up already and they have some some problems over there. So I would uh [1:06:39, 1:06:49]: uh request the homeowners to get with their city council person to see what they can do along with the DOT to handle that problem. [1:06:57, 1:07:01]: Mm, Miss Carter, did you have any information about DOT by any chance? [1:07:04, 1:07:05]: Uh we have not. [1:07:06, 1:07:26]: We have not received any comments from the count. Um but what we will do is um reach out to our public works department on any comments they may have. But the traffic study does that's pro has been provided by the applicant. I think we'll get into a little bit more in the next item. Um but [1:07:26, 1:07:39]: um they're required they they provided that to us so it is of course at the discretion at of this you know body to recommend approval or denial um based on the overall uh project itself [1:07:43, 1:07:55]: What sorry about that, I have another question. Yes. And if you can speak up, my tinnitus is kind of on low overload today, so all I hear is a buzz and this separator here up front kinda hurts. Um [1:07:56, 1:08:07]: Now what was my question going to um maybe you stated it, I did not hear it. What are the anticipated? I know it's down the road, but the anticipated value of these homes once they're built. [1:08:07, 1:08:27]: The initial sales price, we're pricing these at uh it it'll be the high two hundreds uh to low three hundreds. And that's we're trying to hit a a nice medium between uh quality development and affordability. You know, we're trying to provide the amenities that we have here as well as uh landscaping and uh uh uh facade material. [1:08:27, 1:08:47]: Materials, but still keep it affordable so that we attract the uh younger residents or those empty nesters. Are there I don't see any on here, but are there any plans for adding amenities to it? Because I know for a fact that people paying that kind of money for a residential are gonna want to spend a lot of time. [1:08:47, 1:09:07]: I'm in their neighborhood and and I see there's not a whole lot of amenities being developed. There's a dog park and some walking sidewalks, but as far as a pool and a tennis court and something to keep the residents there that don't have to travel outside their neighborhood necessarily for basic entertainment. Anything like that be planned? [1:09:07, 1:09:15]: Not at this time. And we have we had that discussion when we initially uh proposed this development as far as the amenities that we were uh [1:09:16, 1:09:25]: Uh proposing. Uh we initially we we had the dog park and playground and the nature trails, uh but we've added a clubhouse. Can you speak just a little louder? [1:09:26, 1:09:32]: Sorry. Uh there we go. Can you all hear me now better? Sorry about that. I'll I'll lean into the microphone a little bit. [1:09:32, 1:09:52]: I didn't realize I was being that quiet. But um uh some of the amenities that we've added since our initial proposal, we have added the clubhouse, and that came uh directly from a comment from the city. Uh we were initially proposing a pavilion. We looked at a pool, uh, but the cost versus benefit analysis. [1:09:52, 1:10:12]: Analysis of that, we haven't a lot of our newer communities don't have pools. Um tennis courts rarely get used. You you don't you don't see tennis courts too much uh anymore. A lot in senior communities you do see pickleball uh coming up now. But we are not proposing that here. We are proposing the nature trail, uh the dog park and the playground. [1:10:12, 1:10:17]: uh which are are used uh typically more often by residents. [1:10:25, 1:10:45]: Okay. It i if I could add one clarification to your earlier question. Sorry. On the Georgia DOT uh project, I just wanted to let you know that that is a project that the Georgia DOT has and in its pipeline. Uh so it is a valid project, it's it is moving forward. Uh it's not something that is uh [1:10:45, 1:10:45]: Yeah. [1:10:46, 1:10:53]: Yeah, out there that that's uh maybe. Yeah, exactly. So that widening is is coming. [1:10:53, 1:11:09]: Is there a tentative date for that wipe that we have our our traffic engineer has been told construction would start in twenty twenty four, uh the summer of twenty twenty four. Uh the length of time for that construction I'm not certain, but [1:11:10, 1:11:12]: We uh are uh [1:11:13, 1:11:20]: I believe it will be done uh before our final build out in twenty twenty seven, is our understanding from our traffic engineer. [1:11:24, 1:11:26]: All right, thank you. Mm-hmm. [1:11:30, 1:11:32]: Any other questions or comments? [1:11:34, 1:11:50]: Okay. I just wanted to point out to the community um we did have some um comments in favor of this um from some people that own property adjacent to it. So we did have some some comments in favor. It was just put in writing. So I wanted to let the community know that. [1:11:52, 1:11:54]: All right, thank you. [1:11:56, 1:11:57]: Okay, so [1:12:00, 1:12:06]: May I have a motion to adopt the comprehensive plan amendment to K C P [1:12:07, 1:12:09]: Twenty twenty two zero six. [1:12:12, 1:12:22]: And this is to assign the future land use designation of property located at fifty six Davis Road, parcel S zero five zero one zero zero two thousand. [1:12:22, 1:12:27]: to high residential to allow for the construction of a town home development. [1:12:33, 1:12:46]: Madam President, can you get close to the mic because I can even barely hear you on this end, if you don't mind. Absolutely. May I have a motion to adopt the comprehensive plan amendment to KCP 202206? [1:12:46, 1:12:51]: And this is uh in consideration of a comprehensive plan amendment request to assign the future land use. [1:12:52, 1:12:57]: Designation of property located at five seven six Davis Road to high density residential. [1:12:57, 1:13:00]: to allow for the construction of a town home development. [1:13:09, 1:13:11]: Madam Chair. [1:13:11, 1:13:17]: I move approval of the comprehensive plan amendment case as recommended by staff. [1:13:21, 1:13:26]: I'm sorry, just for clarification, do we need to add in the we don't need to add in the conditions? [1:13:26, 1:13:37]: Yes. So if you do want to go with staff's two conditions, then the um the motion would need to be amended to include those with the correction that was I stated earlier. [1:13:38, 1:13:55]: Okay. So let me rephrase it. Um can I though Mr. Dumas has the ability to um amend his motion? I will amend the motion to approve the comprehensive plan amendment as recommended by staff with the conditions that they articulated. [1:13:55, 1:13:56]: Okay, do I have a second? [1:13:57, 1:13:58]: I second it, Harold. [1:13:59, 1:13:59]: Okay. [1:14:00, 1:14:05]: All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. [1:14:06, 1:14:07]: Okay. [1:14:07, 1:14:10]: So we have three in favor, one opposed. [1:14:11, 1:14:18]: Okay, the eyes have it. So the motion has been approved um for the comprehensive plan amendment c um request. [1:14:19, 1:14:21]: To move it to high density residential. [1:14:24, 1:14:24]: Okay. [1:14:25, 1:14:31]: Okay, we're gonna move on to the rezoning case number R Z twenty twenty two dash zero seven. [1:14:33, 1:14:40]: Consideration of a rezoning request to assign the zoning district of MFR multiple family residential property. [1:14:40, 1:14:48]: Located at five seven six Davis Road, parcel number S zero five dash zero one hundred two thousand. [1:14:48, 1:14:51]: To allow for the construction of a town home development. [1:14:51, 1:14:53]: Applicant Forester Real Estate Group USA. [1:14:54, 1:14:56]: Incorporated agent Alex Brock. [1:14:56, 1:14:57]: Of Smith. [1:14:57, 1:15:01]: Gambrel and Russell LLP, the property is located in landlot. [1:15:01, 1:15:03]: ninety one of District twelve and it contains [1:15:04, 1:15:07]: twenty seven point six three five plus or minus acres. [1:15:22, 1:15:23]: Good evening, everyone. [1:15:25, 1:15:32]: Uh this was presentation for R Z 202207, rezoning for proposed Davis Road Townhomes. [1:15:38, 1:15:54]: We've covered a lot of this material already. So I'm gonna move quickly through some of these slides. Um as has been mentioned, there's actually three applications. We just went through comprehensive plan. This is the rezoning, and then I'll also be presenting a variance application after this. [1:15:55, 1:16:15]: This is a map showing surrounding zoning. Property is here, Davis Road, and you have other other uses nearby. We have a gold suburban residential, this color here, and the orange, mobile home parks. [1:16:15, 1:16:16]: Um those are the main things. [1:16:18, 1:16:26]: Here's Ariel Photo. This is Davis Road here. And uh North Henry Boulevard and Walm Walmart in this area. [1:16:29, 1:16:33]: And some case facts here. Uh we've gone through a lot of these. [1:16:37, 1:16:41]: This is a brief uh boundary survey just showing the general shape of the property. [1:16:44, 1:17:04]: Um I have the site plan. We have a black and white version as well as a colored version. And basically Davis Road is here on the right side. This is turn sideways, so north is actually here to the left. So there'll be prop main project entrance off Davis Road plus a secondary emergency only access in [1:17:04, 1:17:24]: In this here area for um fire trucks, emergency vehicles. Uh there'd be a loop street internally, and these are all the town home units here. There'd be a mail kiosk here near the front with some parking and a minute area at the rear. The property slopes down quite a bit from [1:17:24, 1:17:35]: Davis Road about seventy feet uh drop and you have a stream area and um some wetlands so that this area is not usable as far as building. [1:17:36, 1:17:48]: There would be a club a small clubhouse and dog park, a playground and also a walking trail. You can see all this better on this colored uh site plan. [1:17:52, 1:18:12]: This is just a section that was included on the site plan. There's a lot of statistics here about the proposed density and uh part number of parking spaces, um, uh buffers, minimum open space, and they meet those requirements. Um there was a traffic impact study. [1:18:12, 1:18:32]: Done as I've said. The basis of the study was a project year build out of 2027, and projections were made looking at existing conditions and then projecting in 2027 with both with and without the project. [1:18:32, 1:18:52]: Looked at the intersection of the driveway that's proposed with Davis Road, as well as the other intersection of Davis Road with North Henry Boulevard. It also included a population growth factor considering for uh Henry County. [1:18:52, 1:19:12]: Traffic count dates were made last September twenty-ninth and also March second with Henry County Public Schools were in session on those dates. A site visit was also made on March seventh to zer observe cry traffic conditions. Uh Georgia DOT has several has three, in fact, uh [1:19:12, 1:19:32]: uh traffic count stations set up in that area. Uh and those were uh considered with different uh growth factors. Uh so uh specifically the annual growth factor Henry County's annual population rate of 1.67 in 2020-20 and [1:19:32, 1:19:52]: And then estimated population projection 1.55 by year 2027 and 2% to account for background traffic growth. Project would generate 1,245 daily trips per day at full project back build out. [1:19:52, 1:20:00]: Roughly 70% of trips would come from the west of Davis Road and 30% from the east. [1:20:00, 1:20:17]: Here's a breakdown of the peak hour trips and the AM and PKM PM. Um current traffic impacts are are low and this this is all from the the cus the engineer who prepared the study. And [1:20:18, 1:20:23]: It said that the current capacity lane configura configuration would be sufficient to accommodate [1:20:24, 1:20:44]: traffic from this proposed project. Um there is some um low level of service at the nearby intersections, but again with DOT's improvement. And I'll just mention it said in the study that uh Davis Road um no they would not add another traffic light but that Davis Road [1:20:44, 1:21:04]: uh left turns out of Davis Road would be prohibited and um would require a U-turn. That is what it the proposed DOT project says. So um traffic is expected to be acceptable by twenty twenty seven both [1:21:04, 1:21:06]: with and without the project. [1:21:07, 1:21:18]: I'll move on. There's here's the renderings of what the finished townhomes would look like. You'd have the smaller townhomes with one car garages and the larger townhomes with two car garages. [1:21:20, 1:21:40]: We had different criteria to analyze and considering the rezoning. We went through the comprehensive plan and um we feel that the MF proposed MFR district would be acceptable. It would um uh located on uh major collector street uh have positive effects on the area. [1:21:40, 1:22:00]: By bringing alternative types of housing, and this is one of the goals of comprehensive plan. The site has, I mentioned before, the physical constraints. For this reason, the applicant has applied for variants, which I'll discuss next in my next presentation. [1:22:00, 1:22:00]: Mm-hmm. [1:22:01, 1:22:21]: Impacts on water sewer, a letter was received from Public Works stating a water and sewer is available. Of course, the developer would have to cover the cost of connections. We've gone through traffic impacts here. Um and these are just some more details of that I've already discussed. [1:22:21, 1:22:35]: So we we feel that the um property um although it could have further uh single family development, considering the area, we don't feel that is likely to happen. Um [1:22:36, 1:22:40]: There haven't been any demands for such development in recent years. [1:22:40, 1:22:43]: So we conclude the proposed development would be acceptable. [1:22:43, 1:23:03]: And therefore, we recommend approval with conditions and those same conditions. Number one, that the comprehensive plan amendment is is approved, as well as the variance, and then also condition on the site plan. And I'll just read for the record uh the site plan is this the proposed town. [1:23:03, 1:23:09]: home development shall be constructed according to the design which is shown on the applicant's submitted black and white. [1:23:09, 1:23:29]: Conceptual site plan entitled Davis Road Town Homes, Henry County, Georgia rezoning plan, which was prepared by Atwell Group of Marietta, Georgia on March fifteenth, twenty twenty three, as well as its companion undated colored conceptual plan, both of which were received by the city on March sixteenth. [1:23:29, 1:23:33]: Are there any questions? [1:24:09, 1:24:15]: Okay. Um didn't I didn't have any we didn't have any questions. Um, does he need to do a presentation? [1:24:16, 1:24:25]: So so at this time, yes, you can have the um if there are no questions then the applicant can come up and speak for a total of ten minutes. Okay. And um we open up for public hearing from there. [1:24:29, 1:24:30]: Thank you, Miss Logan. [1:24:39, 1:24:46]: Good evening again, Madam Chair and members of the Planning Commission. I am still Alex Brock with Smith Cambrell Russell. Uh off [1:24:47, 1:24:57]: I'll speak in the microphone so everybody can hear y'all lean in a little bit. Uh but again, I'm uh Alex Brock, Smith Cambrell Russell, office address at 1105 West Peace Street Street, Atlanta, Georgia. Um here on behalf of the applicant. [1:24:58, 1:25:17]: You know, I'll keep my this presentation fairly short because I think we had uh I gave a fairly lengthy discussion of the development itself in the previous um application, uh as well as our our follow-up questions with uh uh the commission. So I'll limit this to mostly just the uh rezoning specific items. [1:25:18, 1:25:21]: Um it [1:25:22, 1:25:42]: This property is one of the large number of properties that were just uh recommended to be rezoned for the annexation uh uh into the city of Stockbridge. It was previously zoned residential agricultural under uh unincorporated Henry County before its annexation uh earlier this year. Uh now the city [1:25:42, 1:25:51]: city with the adoption of its zoning plan, uh or zoning map will be zoned rural residential and we're asking to rezone that to a multifamily residential. [1:25:53, 1:26:13]: Uh the zoning is compatible with the surrounding properties. To the west, we have the uh Pine Hills Mobile Home Park, which is zoned Mobile Home Residential, MHR. Uh to the east, we have uh along Century Oaks Drive uh duplex lots that are zoned city center residential or will be zoned city center center residential once the uh [1:26:13, 1:26:25]: City adopts its zoning map. To the north, we have properties within unincorporated Henry County that are zoned residential agricultural along Valley Hill Road. [1:26:25, 1:26:45]: To the south of us, across Davis Road, uh is another mobile home development uh zoned um uh MHR uh as well. Uh in addition, there is another uh uh townhome development down uh Davis Road to the east that I mentioned in my earlier presentation, the Big Oak Villas, uh which are is [1:26:45, 1:27:05]: Is an attached home, uh townhome development uh at a density of nine units per acre. And if you recall, we are asking for a density of 6.15. Uh the proposed development is also located uh less than one mile east of the commercial node at North Henry Boulevard and Highway 138, uh, where you have the uh Walmart shopping center. [1:27:05, 1:27:09]: Center uh anchored commercial development. [1:27:11, 1:27:31]: The zoning that we're requesting is commensurate with other developments and zonings in the area today. Um and the MFR zoning will allow us to develop townhomes um and add a mix of housing options into the area uh to attract uh younger professionals uh that are noted in as goals among [1:27:30, 1:27:36]: The uh City of Stockbridge uh comprehensive plan uh that I went through in detail in my earlier presentation. [1:27:40, 1:28:00]: To go through, I won't reiterate a lot of the other issues that we've discussed with uh city officials and staff as far as uh affordability parking uh traffic improvements. I think we've covered if if uh commission has more questions on that, I'll be uh more than happy to answer those questions during the question and answer period. Um but a couple of things that I've [1:28:00, 1:28:20]: I will note as far as utilities, uh staff did note that y water and utilities available uh to the site. We are proposing an extension of sanitary sewer from Shields Road up to our property. Uh the developer will be installing that itself. Currently the property is on sewered, uh, but we will be uh paying for that sewer extension up to our property. [1:28:21, 1:28:36]: Um also noted the improv in our my earlier presentation, the improvements to Davis Road will be adding a turn lane as well as a D sell lane in front of our uh property to facilitate uh through traffic movements uh onto Davis Road, uh as well as traffic movements into our property. [1:28:40, 1:29:00]: Uh also just to note uh one thing that I didn't get to in my earlier presentation is Fourstar is a nationwide developer of residential lots. Uh they do a number of developments throughout the country, but particularly in the southeast and particularly within Georgia. Uh they are headquartered here in Georgia. Uh one development that is nearby is the Hampton Brazil. [1:29:00, 1:29:20]: Reserve at uh 103 Hampton Circle in Mid McDonough. Uh those units are selling in the high 200s. Uh that site is uh at a density or is eight point seven two acres uh with seventy-one units at a density of seven point nine six. So it's uh it's a higher density than what we're proposing here. [1:29:20, 1:29:34]: But it is a comparable development that Forest R has recently done. With that, I'll end my presentation and open it up for or reserve any remaining time for rebuttal or questions. Thank you. [1:29:40, 1:29:44]: Do we have any comments from the thank you. Do we have any comments from the public? Um [1:29:46, 1:29:46]: Opposition [1:29:47, 1:29:48]: For this project. [1:29:49, 1:29:49]: Yes, sir. [1:29:59, 1:30:04]: Hello, Mark McFry, two eighty nine Shields Road, Stockbridge, Georgia. [1:30:05, 1:30:15]: He was mentioning the uh sewer. Um I saw the stakes, one at one corner of my property and one where the manhole is where my sewer goes into. [1:30:15, 1:30:17]: And I'm just concerned with how they're gonna [1:30:18, 1:30:23]: get to that sewer, if they're gonna be coming up Davis and then turning down [1:30:24, 1:30:40]: I mean I haven't seen the drawing so I don't know how they're gonna do it. But they just put in that sidewalk and if that's where they're gonna be coming up through there, I I don't know if they're gonna be in the road, they're gonna be in the the small strip of of uh grass that's between the road and that. [1:30:40, 1:30:41]: But um [1:30:42, 1:31:02]: All that construction is going to impact all of our lives. I mean, you know, they're going to have construction entrances with trucks entering and exiting, you know, and it's going to make our lives pretty miserable for, you know, however long their their projects going on. And uh I know after seeing these projects what it does to the road. [1:31:01, 1:31:20]: what it does to the community around there because you know it's gonna rain, it's gonna get muddy, it's gonna dry up, it's gonna get dusty, you know, all that's gonna impact the people that live around it. So, you know, those are the concerns that I have for me and my neighbors. You know, like I said, um [1:31:21, 1:31:30]: I understand they wanna, you know, develop this property, make money, uh and that's that's the name of the game, uh, but it's impacting our lives. [1:31:31, 1:31:33]: That's that's all I got. [1:31:38, 1:31:41]: Any other comments from anyone from the public? [1:31:44, 1:31:44]: Yes, sir. [1:31:52, 1:31:58]: Uh Dylan Garnett, five six six Davis Road is the property. Uh [1:31:59, 1:32:00]: Can I take a look at it? [1:32:06, 1:32:21]: My question would be about the the buffer zone. You said you guys are gonna put up a natural barrier, uh like foliage and stuff like that. So I just wanted to know how high it would be and if and another question is uh what I'm looking at this [1:32:24, 1:32:40]: It seems like it's directly on my property line. And I know you guys came up and got a surveyor. So I just wanted to make sure that they not are they not infringing on my property when they build. And uh that's probably my only concern. And then I know you guys did a traffic study on [1:32:40, 1:32:52]: cars, but I don't think they did any studies on the foot traffic because the increased residency, I'm sure it's gonna be more foot traffic on Davis Road and it's already a lot of [1:32:52, 1:33:03]: foot traffic there because of the Walmart and stuff like that. So that would be another concern of mine's like uh are they going to are they planning on building a sidewalk in front of my home or? [1:33:04, 1:33:23]: Uh those those are just my concerns about uh my security on my side of my home and how far their barriers will be in you know proportion to my home. So those are just my only concerns so far. Thank you. [1:33:28, 1:33:29]: Okay, any other comments? [1:33:32, 1:33:34]: Okay. All right. You want to respond to it? [1:33:42, 1:34:02]: Okay, I'll try to lean into the microphone a little bit more so everybody can hear me. Um to answer the first gentleman's questions about uh you know the impacts for construction and how we are uh extending our sewer from Shields Road up to our property, that design is not finalized. We know we have to extend the sewer, but the as far as the route uh [1:34:02, 1:34:22]: that is taken. We have not done that. Uh Jack Burke with Four Star handed out our contact information to the residents. Uh we would be more than happy to continue that conversation uh with the adjacent residents to make sure that you know any impacts that we have from our construction are minimized or that we take care of their concerns as we [1:34:22, 1:34:42]: Move forward with this project. And that includes the uh alignment of the Sanitary Sewer uh extension from Shields Road. Uh so we would be happy to look at that and and coordinate with the with the community. Uh the second point he made were the impacts from construction itself as far as uh mud uh in dust and [1:34:42, 1:35:02]: And whatnot from the construction itself. We are required by state law as well as federal requirements for to provide sufficient erosion control uh during construction. Those plans will be uh reviewed and approved by the uh city of Stockbridge before we're even allowed to go out there to do any. [1:35:02, 1:35:04]: Yeah. [1:35:04, 1:35:24]: And w that is required to keep mud from exiting the site, uh, as well as to uh prevent mud from being tracked within the right-of-way or or uh uh mud from leaving the property through uh you know the use of uh certain best management practices like silk fencing or uh sediment basins during construction. Uh so that that [1:35:24, 1:35:44]: That is a typical consideration that we do with all projects. Uh, that er every contractor that is doing more than uh a certain amount of land disturbance has to comply with uh due to state law, as well as Sydney ordinances. Uh so those considerations will be taken into account during construction. The second gentleman uh [1:35:44, 1:36:04]: Uh the adjacent neighbor at uh 566 Davis. Uh he asked about the buffer as far as how high. Uh if you don't mind, I'll address this to the council, but you can hear the answer. We don't have the landscape plan uh designed yet. This is the very preliminary stages. We need to make it through zoning to make sure that we are allowed to develop. [1:36:04, 1:36:19]: develop the project or to build townhomes and it's zone properly before we move forward with the uh detailed landscaping design. Uh but we would be more than happy to cla uh to coordinate with the neighbor uh on the landscape to make sure that uh [1:36:19, 1:36:23]: Any visual impacts are buffered by proposed landscaping and plannings. [1:36:24, 1:36:39]: uh along that uh along that property line. And he also mentioned about encroaching into his property. We cannot encroach into somebody else's property. Uh we don't have the authority without an easement or some other uh agreement to encroach on somebody else's property that we do not own. So [1:36:40, 1:36:42]: Um [1:36:42, 1:37:02]: It's sidewalk in front of his home. That goes uh it's similar to my last answer. Uh we do not control the right of way in front of his property, so we cannot install sidewalk in front of his. We are proposing sidewalk along our frontage, and that uh came from a request from uh our conversations with the city uh that they would like to see a ten-foot sidewalk along the northern right of way of Davis Road. [1:37:02, 1:37:07]: Road. So uh that would end at our property line along Davis Road. [1:37:10, 1:37:16]: I think I think I answered everything, but if there's anything else, you know we're more than happy to discuss after the meeting as well. [1:37:20, 1:37:24]: I don't know. Brecka, Miss uh Carter, can he come back? Is that it? [1:37:25, 1:37:26]: Okay. [1:37:27, 1:37:28]: Um the [1:37:30, 1:37:38]: I don't know if the if the um resident back here would like to say something else if you w would allow him to speak. Okay. You wanted to say something else? Okay. [1:37:45, 1:37:55]: I wanted to find out if you guys are able to have a like a community forum so more of our concern [1:37:56, 1:38:15]: uh people in the area can have a chance to speak to them'cause I know they say they want to speak to us individually and privately, but we want to make a decision as a community in the area. So we wanted to know if there's a possibility to have a separate meeting to where they can explain the proposal to us as a community. [1:38:20, 1:38:40]: That decision will be at the discretion of this council. And if that is the will of the Planning Commission, then you can you have the option to table the item and have the applicant um set up meetings with community. Um but we just need to be maybe specific about the number of meetings and uh before we they come back to the planning commission. [1:38:39, 1:38:43]: I know they said they had um requested [1:38:43, 1:38:47]: I guess feedback January si sixth, February twenty eighth, and April tenth. [1:38:47, 1:38:53]: Um and the gentleman had brought the letter. I is it okay if I look at the letter? If we look at the letter, can we do that? Sure. [1:38:54, 1:38:56]: Mm. [1:38:56, 1:38:58]: Or may we see the letter that they sent you? [1:38:58, 1:38:59]: Right. [1:39:10, 1:39:11]: Um I thought. [1:39:12, 1:39:16]: the date of January 6, they sent us two identical letters. [1:39:20, 1:39:22]: Yeah, two other two other agents. Yeah. [1:39:23, 1:39:26]: it tells us to [1:39:28, 1:39:30]: Very often, says she. [1:39:31, 1:39:37]: Ma'am, if you would like to speak, um please um note your name and address for the record, please. [1:39:46, 1:40:00]: My name is uh Wendy Collins and I too live at two eight nine Shields Road. Um two of the letters were absolutely identical dated January sixth, and the third one is I think April or March. [1:40:01, 1:40:20]: But a majority at it tells you to contact you guys and at the very bottom is a little thing that says contact them. So we came up to one of the meetings and it was canceled. That was here. And so now we're attending this one. But we would like a chance to get more of our neighbors together. [1:40:34, 1:40:54]: Ms. Carter, I don't I don't know if you know, but was one of the meetings canceled? Yes, it was. Um because this property um it was mentioned before that it went through the annexation, it was originally gonna be proposed for an annexation, but due to the referendum getting passed in November, it did not have to go through that process. [1:40:54, 1:41:08]: So what staff had to do was go back and re-advertise for the correct legal um advertisement in order to bring it to you guys formally tonight. So that was not the fault of the applicant. [1:41:09, 1:41:09]: Okay. [1:41:11, 1:41:12]: You wanted to say something? [1:41:16, 1:41:17]: If I could mention um [1:41:19, 1:41:37]: If the Planning Commission so decides to move forward tonight uh with approval, we still have to go to city council on May eighth. Um we would welcome the opportunity to set up meetings with the community uh within that time. And if the community or city council is not uh I guess [1:41:38, 1:41:45]: Does not feel that we've adequately adequately met with the community. They can table it at that time, but I would urge the uh planning commission to move forward tonight. [1:41:50, 1:41:52]: You guys you guys have any questions or thank you. [1:41:54, 1:41:55]: What do you think? [1:41:56, 1:42:02]: You talking to me? Just you guys think they need to ask them for questions. [1:42:06, 1:42:26]: You want some feedback whether we should have them have a meeting? M Certainly. Because if the homeowners don't have any input, we're just making rules and regulations without anybody uh without representing the homeowners. I think it's unfair for us to go through everything and not [1:42:26, 1:42:36]: not let them have their say if they feel that enough of the community did not have an involvement in this process or decision making. [1:42:42, 1:42:44]: Any other comments on or thoughts on that? [1:42:45, 1:42:52]: Yeah, this was published January sixth, so it it seems like they've had plenty of time to [1:42:53, 1:42:55]: have a c comment one way or the other. [1:42:59, 1:43:19]: The the other side of this is why such a big gap and uh why didn't they have a town hall meeting for the uh community in the in that area? That's that's the question I would be asking. Now, you may have sent out these letters, but they really don't describe everything in detail enough to say [1:43:18, 1:43:37]: uh as a c person in the community that I need to go out and talk to the developer for this project. That's what a what the issue is right now. There's there there's just not enough feedback to say that the public was informed, from what I'm reading just by this paperwork. [1:43:39, 1:43:45]: They had some additional information attached um to some of the others. [1:44:00, 1:44:01]: If I could make one point, then [1:44:02, 1:44:15]: The city of Stockbridge, Stockbridge's ordinance currently do not require a uh town hall meeting or a meeting with the community. Uh other jurisdictions do as part of their rezoning process. Stockbridge has not adopted that. Uh [1:44:15, 1:44:35]: Our only avenue to reach out to the public is to send these public notification meetings, and whatever feedback we get, we can meet with the community at that time. Uh and as I noted earlier, the only response that we got to our letters uh was from the adjacent mobile home park owner uh until tonight, uh which is why we were a little bit surprised by the [1:44:35, 1:44:38]: the the the adjacent neighbors that showed up. [1:44:39, 1:44:43]: But again, we would be glad to set up a meeting between now and May eighth. [1:44:46, 1:44:56]: I would concur that they set up a meeting now between now and Apr and May eighth to uh hash out this and and make that as a condition. [1:44:56, 1:45:12]: And May eighth is when the counts you and the city council date. That's that's correct. That's our city council date. Okay. All right. I I I my thoughts are I think they did um give the community an opportunity for that for at least to have that one meeting um uh [1:45:14, 1:45:20]: It may not have been what what was thought or or it may have been a misunderstood, but they did give that opportunity. [1:45:20, 1:45:40]: Um and so I'm in agreement to have, you know, if if we decide to move forward um for them to meet and have a meeting uh before the city council meeting, um, because the city council meeting has to has to give input on this as well before it can before it can move forward. The city council has to give input. So I think that would be a good opportunity. [1:45:40, 1:45:47]: for you to get your community to get together if that's what you want, have that meeting before the city council meeting and and they you guys can set it up with them to meet. [1:45:48, 1:45:48]: Okay. [1:45:49, 1:45:53]: Um so we can if we decide to we can amend it to that. Does that make sense? [1:45:54, 1:45:57]: To you all. Okay. Mr. Dumas, do you have any [1:45:58, 1:46:02]: I can't think of any other multi family residential developments. [1:46:04, 1:46:07]: Even close to where this is located in the middle of Stockbridge. [1:46:10, 1:46:12]: I I just don't know if it's a a good fit. [1:46:14, 1:46:14]: Okay. [1:46:15, 1:46:15]: Okay. [1:46:18, 1:46:24]: Uh it there is one that's being developed now on thirty eight East Atlanta Road, uh that's two hundred plus units. [1:46:25, 1:46:26]: On East Atlanta. Yes. Okay. [1:46:33, 1:46:36]: But you're saying there's not one that's already existing? [1:46:37, 1:46:41]: Oh, he was saying there is one being developed, but you were saying there's not an existing one. [1:46:42, 1:46:43]: Like that. [1:46:43, 1:46:54]: Can you all both speak into the mic, please? Thank you. For the record. No worries. He you were saying that there's not an existing unit right now, like this one? Okay. I'm asking, is that what you said? [1:46:56, 1:46:57]: Yeah, yeah. [1:47:00, 1:47:01]: All right. [1:47:02, 1:47:06]: So I'm gonna uh ask, is there [1:47:08, 1:47:11]: One that would make a motion for the rezoning case R Z twenty. [1:47:11, 1:47:17]: twenty two dash oh seven consideration of rezoning request to assign the zoning district of M F R [1:47:17, 1:47:22]: Multiple family residential to property located at five seven six David Davis Road. [1:47:23, 1:47:27]: Parcel S zero five zero one zero zero two zero zero. [1:47:27, 1:47:28]: Zero? [1:47:28, 1:47:48]: Um with the amendment for them to meet. Is that how I would say that? Before the with the conditions with the condition um that they meet submitted by staff and the say say that again. I said but with the conditions, the three conditions that were submitted by staff and if you want to make a fourth about the [1:47:48, 1:47:55]: public meeting that they are required to have with the community. Okay. You could make that a condition as well prior to the the um May eighth. [1:47:56, 1:48:04]: Okay, so um may I have a motion uh for this rezoning case um with the conditions um that were the two conditions that were requested by the [1:48:04, 1:48:14]: staff and um with the additional third condition that they set up a meeting with the residents um within the community um prior to the May eighth. [1:48:14, 1:48:28]: meeting with the city council members. Ma madam vice chairman w staff actually presented three conditions. We had the other two cases plus the site plan. So if you want to add one that would be the fourth condition. I'm sorry. Okay so that's the fourth one. [1:48:28, 1:48:28]: Okay. [1:48:30, 1:48:32]: All right, so may I have a motion for that? [1:48:34, 1:48:35]: It's a lot. [1:48:35, 1:48:43]: Let me let me just make sure I have it. The two conditions from staff, the one condition for the community to meet with the developer. And what was the fourth one? [1:48:44, 1:49:04]: Uh for for clarification, there are three conditions for this rezoning case and a fourth could be added if you would like for there to be a public meeting uh between the applicants and the community prior to the May eighth. Okay, so we voted on the first one already to move forward. We voted on the first, yes, gotcha. Okay, all right. [1:49:04, 1:49:08]: I understand now. Do you want me to say it over? [1:49:09, 1:49:10]: Do I have a motion? [1:49:11, 1:49:29]: Madam Chair, before I make a motion, I just want to make one comment to the residents uh that took the time to come and voice their opinions and offer my thanks to you for doing so. I would uh like to remind you that the [1:49:30, 1:49:38]: Decisions of the Planning Commission, it's just a recommendation to the council, the governing authority. [1:49:39, 1:49:56]: Uh the final decision for approval or disapproval rests with the city council, not with the Planning Commission. They can agree with us whatever we decide. They can disagree with us. [1:49:56, 1:49:59]: Sometimes they agree with us, sometimes they don't. [1:50:00, 1:50:15]: So I want you to understand that because I think it's important, particularly if you're gonna have a meeting in between now and the time that they meet and vote on it, that you understand that their decision is binding and ours is not. [1:50:16, 1:50:21]: And having said that, I would make a motion to approve the uh [1:50:22, 1:50:23]: Rizarning case? [1:50:25, 1:50:31]: As recommended by staff with the four conditions that's been articulated. [1:50:32, 1:50:33]: The second. [1:50:34, 1:50:35]: I Harold, second it. [1:50:39, 1:50:39]: I [1:50:40, 1:50:41]: Those opposed? [1:50:45, 1:50:46]: Oh. [1:50:48, 1:50:51]: And so the motion has to be adopted with those conditions. [1:50:54, 1:51:00]: And the last one, the variance case VR twenty twenty two dash zero. Miss Nelson, we can't hear you. We can't hear you. [1:51:01, 1:51:12]: Okay. The last one, the variance case, VR twenty twenty two dash zero three, consideration of a variance request to grant a variance for property at five seven six. [1:51:12, 1:51:18]: Excuse me, Davis Road, parcel Sero five dash zero one zero zero two zero zero zero. [1:51:18, 1:51:22]: In order to allow for the construction of a town home development [1:51:22, 1:51:28]: The requested variants would reduce the front yard setback from the required minimum of fifty feet to twenty five feet. [1:51:29, 1:51:33]: Applicant four star real estate group USA Incorporated agent Alex Brock. [1:51:33, 1:51:33]: smet [1:51:34, 1:51:38]: Gambrel and Russell, LLP. The property is located in landlot ninety one, District twelve. [1:51:39, 1:51:43]: And it contains twenty seven point six three five plus or minus acres. [1:51:43, 1:51:44]: To be presented. [1:51:45, 1:51:45]: Okay. [1:51:46, 1:51:52]: Good evening. This is a variance case. The applicant has requested a variance to [1:51:52, 1:51:55]: Allow for the reduction in the front yard setbacks. [1:51:56, 1:52:01]: from the required minimum of fifty feet to twenty five feet. This is for the [1:52:02, 1:52:18]: MFR district, that's uh he's requested in rezoning. Mfr is multifamily residential and our unified development code requires it to have fifty feet in the front yard. Let me see if I have the um [1:52:20, 1:52:40]: I guess I don't. All right. So um anyway, that's that's we've been through some of these already. Uh there are certain uh seven, in fact, criteria to look at in in analyzing this. Um so the first is whether [1:52:40, 1:52:52]: the property has extraordinary and exceptional fiscal characteristics compared with other properties in the same don't zoning district. And yes, um it does. In fact, it's a very long and narrow [1:52:53, 1:53:13]: Uh property sloping downward by 70, some 70 feet to the rear, as I mentioned, has stream bluffers present, and these factors uh considerably limit the ability of the site to be developed, um, as well as the developer's ability to create a reasonable site plan with time. [1:53:12, 1:53:28]: town home lots. Uh the next one is uh whether literal interpretation of the UDC would deprive the applicant of rights that are enjoyed by others, uh o other owners of properties in the same don zoning district and um [1:53:29, 1:53:33]: Uh we feel that yes, applicant might be deprived of that ability. [1:53:34, 1:53:37]: And uh C criterion C [1:53:38, 1:53:41]: Whether any special privileges would be granted to this property owner. [1:53:42, 1:53:43]: We feel that they would not. [1:53:44, 1:53:47]: And also that the deni denial of the requested variants would [1:53:48, 1:53:51]: force the developer to comply with the standards and [1:53:51, 1:54:00]: having much larger lots and this would be create a hardship um considering the property's difficult ph physical characteristics. [1:54:00, 1:54:12]: Um, criterion D whether the variance would be consistent with the purposes and intent of the UTC, whether it would be compatible with neighboring uses, and whether it would serve the public welfare f welfare. [1:54:13, 1:54:21]: So we feel that it will be consistent with the UDC by encouraging most appropriate use of land and buildings on the subject property. [1:54:21, 1:54:23]: Um it would um [1:54:24, 1:54:35]: the variance in a most is a mostly residential area, which has l had little development activity in recent years, and it'll be compatible with other residential uses in the area. [1:54:36, 1:54:41]: Criterion E, whether the extraordinary circumstances are not result of the actions of the applicant [1:54:41, 1:54:46]: No, obviously the physical conditions were not oh the property were not created by the applicant. [1:54:47, 1:54:52]: A criterion F whether the variance is the minimum relief that would allow the legal use of land [1:54:52, 1:54:53]: Um [1:54:53, 1:54:58]: although developer could still build a town home development under MFR without the variance um [1:54:59, 1:55:06]: he would be significantly constrained in designing it um to uh an economically feasible uh product. [1:55:07, 1:55:23]: Criterion G, um the request for variance is not uh request to permit a use of land or structure buildings or structures that's prohibited in the MFR district and uh no town homes are a permitted use within the MFR district. [1:55:24, 1:55:30]: So we have found that the subject property's physical characteristics substantially limit its developability. [1:55:31, 1:55:38]: And that without the requested variants, it may not be possible to build a sufficient number of townhome units to be economically feasible. [1:55:39, 1:55:44]: Um, we conclude that the requested variance is reasonable and should be granted. [1:55:45, 1:55:55]: And and all but that of course it should only be granted if the comprehensive plan amendment case and the rezoning case are simultaneously approved. So um [1:55:55, 1:56:13]: Therefore we recommend approval with conditions, those conditions being the same as before, that the comprehensive plan amendment is is approved, rezoning cases approved, and the site plan which I uh m mentioned before the uh the developer complies with that site plan. [1:56:15, 1:56:16]: Any questions? [1:56:25, 1:56:25]: It's so good. [1:56:26, 1:56:30]: To decrease the fifty feet to twenty five. [1:56:30, 1:56:31]: That's correct. [1:56:32, 1:56:33]: Mike, Miss Nelson. [1:56:33, 1:56:42]: Sorry. They wanna decrease the fifty feet to the twenty five feet. That's correct. And the city is in approval of it. Yes. Because explain that again. [1:56:42, 1:56:56]: Well, the physical conditions of the property make it make it difficult. As you saw at the on the site plan, the whole rear section of the property um cannot be built on. You know, it's got a stream there and a and a a creek and a a [1:56:57, 1:57:14]: uh wetlands areas and so forth and cannot build any units there. So therefore the units have to all be built on the remainder of the property, all, you know, so compressed into a much smaller area rather than evenly distributed uh among the entire site. [1:57:16, 1:57:23]: Okay. And you all agree with that. That's correct. That's correct. Okay. All right. [1:57:23, 1:57:25]: You all have any questions? [1:57:26, 1:57:38]: I do have a question for staff. Um, and I've held my peace through the comprehensive plan discussion and the rezoning question because I wanted to [1:57:40, 1:57:55]: make sure I heard the answer before I asked the question, if that makes sense. But as you recall, this case was presented to us in January and it got pulled back. [1:57:55, 1:58:15]: And but we did receive the documentation and and read it and digested it. And the conclusion that you guys recommended to us at that time was radically different from the conclusion that you're recommending for us today. [1:58:15, 1:58:21]: Obviously you had a come to Jesus moment somewhere between January and April and I just wanna to uh [1:58:23, 1:58:43]: Well the applicant has uh significantly reduced the number of units to be built. Originally was two hundred thirty five units, now is a hundred and seventy units, so that uh reduces the density a great bit. And then they work with us to on the site plan to to change some things and make it more acceptable. [1:58:44, 1:59:04]: But it's still high density multifamily residential development. Which if I recall in the earlier narrative, your recommendation um even used the word spot zoning and it wasn't compatible with the surrounding properties and stuff like that. I and I was just curious as to [1:59:04, 1:59:05]: [7145.5, 7162.9]: Well well again the density has g been greatly reduced. It's still within the range of the high density classification and that's because uh as before was mentioned the high density uh it starts at six units per acre and this is actually gonna be just six point one five units per acre. [1:59:23, 1:59:43]: And then goes all the way up to sixteen units per acre. And that there is a gap between high density and medium medium density. This is this is this is how the comprehensive plan was written. Um there's a gap. So medium density residential stops at 3.6 units per acre. So anything [1:59:43, 1:59:50]: more than three point six units per acre automatically falls into the category of high density residential. [1:59:52, 2:00:02]: Okay. I I I'm not trying to put you on the spot. I I just'cause I I happen to think that I mean, I would have voted in favor of it in January. [2:00:02, 2:00:21]: You know, um I'm just saying that for the record, but uh I just want to know how you got from point A to point B. That's right. And and and and for the public we didn't act we we presented materials to you but we did not hold a meeting on it at the time. We we correct postponed the case. Correct. So that the applicant could make these changes. [2:00:26, 2:00:28]: All right. Thank you, Miss Logan. [2:00:29, 2:00:35]: And Miss Logan, I have a question before you before you leave. So in other words that [2:00:36, 2:00:38]: You guys the zoning. [2:00:40, 2:00:53]: staff got all the information from the applicant and made this decision about reducing the number of townhomes in that particular project, right? Am I correct to say that? [2:00:53, 2:01:10]: Well, originally because of the two thirty five units we thought that was excessive for the site and then then the the uh applicant uh requested uh uh deferral of case to to look into it further and and make some changes and then they did. [2:01:10, 2:01:30]: And and then after they made those changes, then staff agreed with those changes. Am I correct, sir? That's correct. Good, okay. I just wanna get some clarification as for us what Mr. Dumas was talking about so that we can understand why these changes were made from January to now and they are presenting the case now to us. [2:01:31, 2:01:51]: Mr. Thibodeau, if I may add, so in looking at this project, we um looked at the number of units that were originally being proposed. Um the applicant went back to reduce that number because we would not have been able to provide any type of favorable recommendation. [2:01:50, 2:02:10]: recommendation based on what was originally submitted. We looked at the land use and the potential of other types of uses going in that space. Commercial would not be appropriate. Single family homes likely would not go there or sell well well because there's a mobile home just to the west. [2:02:10, 2:02:30]: um and to the south and we wanted to ensure that we looked broad broadband at the project overall. Um the concern about the comprehensive plan where it at at three point six units and up is considered high density. [2:02:30, 2:02:50]: Is problematic for us. However, we are undergoing a five-year update that the state requires us to go through to amend our comprehensive plan and make it more a transition of uses than we have currently. So we will be undergoing that. [2:02:50, 2:02:58]: process um and we'll be addressing this type these type these types of matters and these types of projects. [2:03:00, 2:03:01]: Thank you. [2:03:03, 2:03:06]: Okay. Any other questions? [2:03:07, 2:03:10]: Okay. Does the developer need to come back? [2:03:11, 2:03:13]: No, we can open it up for public hearing unless [2:03:14, 2:03:15]: There any questions? [2:03:17, 2:03:33]: I I had a question. Um, what was your what was your um and I read what you wrote, but I just wanna hear what you have to say about the decrease from the fifty feet to to the twenty five feet. Yes, and you you're the I think the city is saying because it's not as much property they [2:03:33, 2:03:53]: felt like it would be enough room because it's not enough room to spread it out with the wetlands. That's my interpretation. That's correct. And if I have the opportunity I believe the applicant has an opportunity to uh present because this is a separate You do matter. Okay. I'll answer that. And just for the record, my name's Alex Brock with Smith Gambrel Russell, 1105 West Peace Street Street. [2:03:53, 2:04:13]: Um and before I get into the hardships, I believe Miss Logan uh uh articulated some of the hardships that we're facing, I will note that the plan that's here tonight, it is different than what was what staff reviewed in January. Uh you know there's drop in density that uh Ms. Logan mentioned, uh there's other improvements. But another [2:04:13, 2:04:25]: Another thing that's important to this hearing is that we were originally proposing three variances. We were able to eliminate two through redesign. One that we could not eliminate was the front yard setback. [2:04:25, 2:04:45]: And that's due strictly to the heart the shape of the property uh and the topography. As you can see, it's a long, narrow property. Uh the houses are facing uh inward each other, which allows for a uh efficient layout of the development with the loop road uh and efficient uh traffic circulation through the property. [2:04:46, 2:05:06]: We looked at several other designs before we came to this and before we resubmitted this to uh uh staff in February. Some of those turned the houses different ways just so we could try to meet the 50 uh foot setback. Um it it became a very awkward uh layout, uh particularly with fire. [2:05:06, 2:05:26]: Fire access. We do have to have certain requirements to meet fire apparatus access, which they can't uh we can't have a dead end more than 150 feet. This this layout accomplishes all of that. We were as I said, we were able to eliminate the other two variances which were for maximum. [2:05:26, 2:05:30]: minimum lock coverage and to uh a side yard setback. [2:05:31, 2:05:51]: However, again, we were not able to uh uh lengthen the front yard setback uh beyond the 25 feet. And we've mitigated that impact uh for the shorter driveways uh by other other issues, most notably through the addition of a significant number of off-street parking spaces. One of the drawbacks. [2:05:51, 2:06:11]: Of having a shorter driveway is that you don't you have less parking in the drive. Some people find that unattractive, but then again, it's preferable to parking on the street. The way we've gotten around that is to add heading guest parking spaces, which it may be easier to see on your letter size sheets that you have in your packet than on my board. But the [2:06:11, 2:06:31]: The center blocks of the development have a number of head-end parking spaces. I believe there's a little over 90 head-end parking spaces, uh, off-street parking spaces for guest parking. And we are still maintaining uh at least one one to two spaces per unit within the driveway for additional parking. So we're not anticipating. [2:06:31, 2:06:32]: Um [2:06:33, 2:06:40]: issues with on street parking. We we are providing well over the the minimum number of required parking spaces. [2:06:40, 2:07:00]: Um as I mentioned my uh first presentation, I think the city requires uh it is uh 2.25 units per acre. Uh we are above that, we're closer to 3.84 uh spaces per unit. Or excuse me, 2.25 uh parking spaces per unit. [2:07:00, 2:07:07]: We are at uh three point eight four spaces per unit uh for a total of uh six hundred and fifty four parking spaces. [2:07:08, 2:07:28]: Some other issues that uh we have is that four star in their HOA it's a uh they maintain the landscaping for each unit as well as the common areas. So a longer driveway uh a l you know, requires more maintenance. Uh a lot of times people move into townhomes because they don't want to deal with the yard anymore. Uh [2:07:28, 2:07:48]: Uh and the HOA will take care of that in four stars communities. When you have a lengthened driveway and longer front yard, that's more maintenance, uh increased cost for maintenance and also increases the HOA dues to compensate for that. So at it particularly at this price point, that becomes difficult for a lot of homeowners uh to have the increased [2:07:48, 2:07:49]: H O A do's. [2:07:52, 2:08:00]: Um and then also finally, 50 foot front yard setback is atypical for most townhome developments. [2:08:00, 2:08:20]: We we found it odd that City of Stockbridge has that for their townhomes. Uh we could we actually looked and could not find another townhome development within the city uh that had a 50-foot driveway. Um, you know, if anybody has an example of that, we would be glad to go out and look at it. But most townhomes are around the 25 to 30 foot uh driveway. [2:08:20, 2:08:25]: That is typical for most other jurisdictions as well. [2:08:25, 2:08:45]: So what we are asking for is not out of the ordinary. We're not asking for something extraordinarily short uh for the front yard setback. Uh and it's due strictly to the shape of the property, the long, narrow shape of the property, as well as the topography. As Miss Logan mentioned, uh we have almost a seventy foot drop uh from Davis Road down to the rear of the property. [2:08:45, 2:08:50]: And that what that does is along with the stream buffers, it pushes everything uh uh [2:08:51, 2:08:56]: to the south. Uh so we are confined with how we can lay out the uh the development as well. [2:08:56, 2:09:00]: So with that, uh you know, we would request your approval of this variant. [2:09:04, 2:09:10]: Miss Miss Carter, I was just curious, is this something that will change in the um you said you're that we're gonna have to re review [2:09:11, 2:09:14]: the I guess the current policy, is this something that would change in it? [2:09:15, 2:09:35]: That's something that that the Plan Commission can direct staff to look at um and see what the best practices are in the area. Uh we have a lot of townhomes that are going in throughout the city um that are just under just in the development phases through um plan reviews at this point. So yes, we could definitely look at this look at this item. Okay. [2:09:36, 2:09:37]: Right. [2:09:38, 2:09:40]: Is this open to public comment? [2:09:41, 2:09:45]: Okay. Um any public comments on this last [2:09:45, 2:09:47]: Item for the variants. [2:09:47, 2:09:48]: Yes, sir. [2:09:54, 2:09:58]: Mark McBride, two eighty nine Shields Road. Um [2:09:59, 2:10:11]: I'm just curious if if I was wanting to build some town homes across the road on my property and I had a builder's license, would that variance be applied to me or is it just to them? [2:10:12, 2:10:32]: for this particular project or is it gonna be changed throughout? Or is it just town homes or is it any kind of homes? I I s I I'm you know, I don't know everything, but I know building and uh I know you have rules for a reason and uh sound like they won't [2:10:32, 2:10:35]: wanted to cram as many of these as they could. Profitability. [2:10:36, 2:10:42]: If they were want to put two hundred and thirty homes in there, I don't see how they could have done it and you know. [2:10:42, 2:10:56]: i if they couldn't use the back part and then now they saying they c they they can't get the hundred and seventy unless they got fifty you know, twenty five versus fifty. I mean, I I don't know. Um I I I'm questioning that myself. [2:11:01, 2:11:04]: Any other comments opposed to this variance? [2:11:12, 2:11:26]: Dylan Garnett of 566 Davis Road. My questions for the developers are uh I seen in the letter that they said they also wanted to take go from fifteen feet in the back of the property. [2:11:26, 2:11:27]: To ten feet? [2:11:29, 2:11:34]: Y'all removed that? Okay. See so that was my only question. So and the buffer line [2:11:34, 2:11:41]: Uh, are you guys going to explain how far the buffer is from the home's backyard to [2:11:41, 2:11:43]: You know, to the adjacent properties. [2:11:43, 2:12:03]: Is is that something they can address at the meeting that they're gonna set up? I can answer that. So the buffer is going to be at from the property line inside of their property line into their property. The buffer will not encroach onto your side if you are adjacent. Okay. It's is it is located there for screening for screening. [2:12:03, 2:12:10]: Screening screening mechanism. Okay. Yeah, those are my only two questions. So they can't touch his property. No, they cannot. Okay. [2:12:10, 2:12:11]: Thank you, madam. [2:12:18, 2:12:19]: Okay. Any other [2:12:21, 2:12:24]: Comments opposed or for the variants? [2:12:26, 2:12:26]: Okay. [2:12:31, 2:12:32]: You want to say something? [2:12:38, 2:12:58]: Just to uh address some of the concerns that the uh the neighbors brought up. One thing that uh the gentleman that lives at the uh corner, Davis and Shields Road, mentioned was if any developer could use this variance, as uh this body likely knows, as well as uh planning staff can uh reiterate, is variances. [2:12:58, 2:13:10]: are particular to a uh particular piece of property and based on the hardships peculiar to that uh specific property. So our the grant of our variants does not have any um [2:13:11, 2:13:26]: precedents or lying on any other property. So if we are granted a variance for a front yard setback, doesn't mean our neighbors could go back and and build into that setback as well. And one other thing to note is that fifty foot setback is peculiar to this uh zoning district as well. [2:13:30, 2:13:40]: Um and then Mr. Garnet, I I believe I answered his questions or we answered his. He had a question about the the other setbacks. We've withdrawn those variances uh when we redesigned the the site. [2:13:46, 2:13:53]: One one more thing. Are you aware that Stockbridge City Ordinance does not allow parking on city streets? [2:13:54, 2:14:14]: I'm not aware of that, but that's something that is typically enforced through HOA Covenants, uh, regardless. Um that is one of the reasons why we've tried to provide so much parking um on the on our site. Okay. I just wanted to make sure that you and you answer my question when you said covenants, that something could be written into the covenants to let people [2:14:14, 2:14:20]: Yes, I would believe if we have any objections to that. [2:14:22, 2:14:42]: Madam President, may I speak on that about no parking on city streets? They actually have a setup where they will allow parking just for certain events in uh certain subdivision. I mean sub subdivisions and certain areas. [2:14:42, 2:15:02]: city has something in place pertaining to that. So it's not a total package where you can't park on street. But if if there's events, they have to uh I think get uh permits from the city in relationship to that. So you might want to check on that situation also. [2:15:10, 2:15:11]: Yeah, you said that we [2:15:13, 2:15:19]: I wanted to uh get clarification. You said that we can request for more information on [2:15:20, 2:15:21]: Um [2:15:21, 2:15:26]: Are you saying tonight or you're saying whether in the future this is gonna be amended? [2:15:26, 2:15:27]: Um just [2:15:28, 2:15:31]: about the the spacing and things. He was saying that [2:15:32, 2:15:35]: That's not the norm um for [2:15:35, 2:15:38]: Townhouses, if you were saying that we've gotta make some changes anyway. [2:15:39, 2:15:59]: Yeah, so we we do have a few changes that we're gonna we're looking at in the UDC that we found, you know, best practices where we need to make those tweaks here and there. Um but we will consider that um and bring something to you guys in the coming months. Uh we'll probably bring some legislation to you guys as proposed um as we do our [2:15:59, 2:16:02]: our research. I have my team to research and and we'll get back with you on that. [2:16:03, 2:16:12]: Is there any way that you can research to see if i if we if we decided to postpone this or something like that, can you see if that's something that would be changed? [2:16:13, 2:16:15]: In terms of best practices? [2:16:15, 2:16:33]: Yes. Oh well I'd have to do the research and see if it's in fact um a requirement of a lot of jurisdictions or similar jurisdictions to the city of Stockbridge. And from there we would, you know, confer with our zoning attorney to determine if it's something we need to bring forward to you all and to the city council. Okay. [2:16:33, 2:16:44]: Because my I mean my thoughts are I agree, I think rules are put in place for a reason and of course I don't know anything about this, but um I know the rules are put in in in for a reason and so if you change it for one [2:16:45, 2:17:05]: It seems like you'd have to change it for another, you'd have to change it for another. Um well you have the option to deny it and state that the applicant has to build in accordance with the code and that's it. Right. So it's gets it's gets sticky if you say okay to this person, but then you tell this person no. It seems like that would get sticky when the the rules are there. Right. Well you those are just [2:17:05, 2:17:17]: You do set a precedence when you do um a precedent when you do approve a variance. Um and if you determine there is a hardship or not, um that typically will will guide your decision. Okay. [2:17:18, 2:17:20]: All right. Any other [2:17:21, 2:17:22]: Questions from the [2:17:22, 2:17:23]: Commission. [2:17:24, 2:17:25]: Yes, sir. [2:17:31, 2:17:51]: If I could just make uh one or two points uh quickly. One uh if city staff does go back to look at this issue as far as the town home lengths, I mean that is uh a lengthy process where they'll have to investigate it and uh determine whether or not they are uh what other jurisdictions use as best practices for the uh the length of the driveways. Um we would urge you to [2:17:51, 2:18:00]: Move forward tonight on this uh while they uh go back and look at their their code issues. And the second point I would say is that um [2:18:01, 2:18:12]: There's not necessarily there's not strict precedence for granting a variance. Uh variances are peculiar to a particular property uh based on the hardships and of that property. [2:18:13, 2:18:21]: So the grant of the variance tonight does not mean our neighbors can uh uh should be granted the same variance uh for a different property. Uh [2:18:23, 2:18:33]: Again, our hardships are due strictly to the layout of our property, uh the long, narrow shape of it. It is peculiar to our property. That doesn't mean the uh [2:18:33, 2:18:46]: if the uh mobile home park to the uh west or to the south of us is redeveloped that they would meet the same hardships. Uh so there is no precedent for them to be granted the same variance. I j just wanted to make that point. [2:18:56, 2:19:05]: Oh it one one sorry. One other point I think is important. I can't believe I just forgot this, but [2:19:05, 2:19:25]: You just approved or recommended approval of the rezoning of the COM plan uh based on certain conditions. One of those was condition that the variants be approved as well, uh, and also that it was approved pursuant to the site plan that you see before you tonight, which includes the twenty-five-foot driveway. So I would urge you to move forward with a recommendation of approval on the [2:19:25, 2:19:31]: variants. Uh again, if council feels that it's uh not necessary, they can make the determination to [2:19:31, 2:19:43]: either adopt or remove conditions as necessary. Uh but since you have already recommended approval of the other two applications with those conditions, I would uh urge you to recommend approval of this as well. [2:19:47, 2:19:49]: I just I have a question in terms of funny book. [2:19:50, 2:20:10]: I have a question just in terms of point of order, may I ask you? Right. Point of order is that it is your decision tonight to determine whether there is in fact of hardship, if you believe there to be a hardship. And if so, that would guide your decision. Um and then of course you are the recommending body to the city [2:20:10, 2:20:23]: council and the council will make the final decision. But it is up to you whether you want to move forward with this. You can ad deny it, you can approve it with the conditions, or you can table it. You have those options ahead of you. Can it be postponed? [2:20:24, 2:20:28]: Yes, that's that's the same as tabling, yes ma'am. Okay. [2:20:28, 2:20:28]: What do you guys think? [2:20:30, 2:20:31]: That's kind of quite. [2:20:35, 2:20:37]: Okay. I have to make the motion. Okay. [2:20:39, 2:20:39]: Yeah. [2:20:41, 2:20:42]: If I can make [2:20:47, 2:21:07]: If I can make one last point. Uh and I just to reiterate, um I would also urge this body not to postpone uh or defer the application, uh just because there is a lengthy amount of time that the uh staff would take to do their research uh and then come up with a uh change to the the ordinance if so deemed. Um that [2:21:07, 2:21:27]: If they do make a change to the ordinance, that would uh affect future townhome developments in the city of Stockbridge. Um but we would urge you to move forward tonight based on the hardships, based on our particular peculiar uh circumstances on our property. I would like to make a point of order that the public hearing has been closed and that you can't do that. [2:21:27, 2:21:28]: You are ready for a motion. [2:21:29, 2:21:30]: Okay, thank you. [2:21:33, 2:21:34]: Okay. [2:21:36, 2:21:41]: I would like to see if we have a motion to um postpone this particular um [2:21:41, 2:21:46]: variants so we can just get some more information. Um [2:21:47, 2:21:53]: Because the rules are set and I I'm not sure how to phrase this, so I would uh see if we have a motion to postpone it. [2:21:55, 2:22:10]: I do have a question. Is the postponement based on the research needed f to determine whether that hardship is should be granted or is it based on uh best practices across? Best practices. Okay. [2:22:11, 2:22:11]: Just one moment. [2:22:17, 2:22:37]: So so because of the current even if we do the research, it is not approved by the city council today. So postponing it w may not achieve, I think, what you what you think it might. Um so what the applicants are vested in is what the code is today. So you all would have the determination. [2:22:37, 2:22:44]: To recommend approval, denial, or to table it all together. Okay. [2:22:48, 2:22:51]: Madam President, may I speak? Absolutely. [2:22:52, 2:22:54]: First of all, when you approve [2:22:54, 2:22:55]: Uh [2:22:56, 2:23:09]: The other rezoning you basically add it to all the rest of'em because if you don't approve the variance, then everything else doesn't get approved on there. [2:23:11, 2:23:15]: So and basically you you acknowledge [2:23:15, 2:23:20]: Most of the approval process here anyway. Uh [2:23:21, 2:23:25]: You would be defeating your purpose of all decisions we made tonight. [2:23:27, 2:23:28]: If we don't go forward. [2:23:29, 2:23:41]: And then you can also have the homeowners uh we can add stipulations to this even when we approve it, which you've already done on one of them that [2:23:43, 2:23:55]: we have approval to it. We actually put stipulations to some of these already. So you basically just about complete the whole task right now. [2:24:00, 2:24:11]: So do I have a motion to um move forward with this variance with um the uh the one that we've already approved, the ones that we've already approved. [2:24:12, 2:24:17]: the amendments that the city recommended as well as um the meeting [2:24:17, 2:24:20]: with the residents. Do I have a motion to [2:24:21, 2:24:22]: Approved this. [2:24:27, 2:24:36]: Are you asking for a motion? Yes. Yes, I'd like to make a motion. We accept this variance um along with the coinciding [2:24:38, 2:24:42]: And I second it, Harold. Condition? [2:24:43, 2:24:46]: Okay. Um all in favor say aye. Aye. [2:24:46, 2:24:47]: Aye. [2:24:48, 2:24:56]: Okay, those opposed, I'm opposed. So we have three forward and one against it. The eyes have it. So we will move forward with the variance. [2:24:57, 2:24:57]: Okay. [2:25:01, 2:25:02]: All right. [2:25:03, 2:25:05]: Project updates. Ms. Carter. [2:25:11, 2:25:15]: Hey, I have um just a few quick updates to make to you all. [2:25:16, 2:25:23]: Um as you know there have been um several town hall meetings that the council members have hosted and [2:25:28, 2:25:36]: And um as a result, um just wanna give you a few uh few tidbits of those meetings and we'll send this out to you as well. Um [2:25:41, 2:25:45]: I just want to kinda highlight some of the major city projects. [2:25:45, 2:26:05]: Um one of which is the uh project that you all approved for the final plat, which is Eagles Hill subdivision. There is a hotel that is going in right off of Spear Road, and that's uh the home to suites hotel and conference center. Um of course Argento at Bridges of Jotaco is underway. It is [2:26:05, 2:26:10]: is located um on the uh south side of Jotoko Road. [2:26:10, 2:26:30]: And there are 306 units underway. There's 16 buildings that are under construction, so a lot of movement there. Costco will be coming in at Bridges of Jotaco and the Holiday and Express as well. There's also a True Hilton Hotel that's being built on Papua. [2:26:30, 2:26:30]: Patrick Henry. [2:26:36, 2:26:38]: What do you want out of it? [2:26:39, 2:26:40]: You just need fold, right? [2:26:41, 2:26:46]: I you took we've share and you took it. Was it yeah. [2:26:50, 2:27:10]: And a few honorable mentions is the Starbucks that is um sub submitted uh for land disturbance application, Chick-fil-A that is scheduling a pre-submittal meeting, which they've done. And then we have other projects on the north and south side of 138, the apartments that were approved um several months ago. [2:27:09, 2:27:29]: And then the best western is um has been cited. It has not finished its construction um due to some um construction issues, um financial challenges that the owner is having. Um last but not least, I wanted to address the um five-year comprehensive plan update, which [2:27:29, 2:27:43]: we will be bringing to you all for your comments over the next months. We are required by the state to adopt an updated five-year plan by October. So we plan to have meetings in May. [2:27:44, 2:28:00]: in June and July for public comment. We have our website that will be up and running tomorrow uh so that people can do the surveys, provide comments, and uh get in the information that they're asking for. Um and that with that, that ends my comments for the evening. [2:28:06, 2:28:07]: No additional staff comments. [2:28:10, 2:28:15]: Just question for s for Bracket. Sure. The um Spear Row [2:28:16, 2:28:36]: Is that behind the McDonald's? Yes. That's the home to yes, it's right behind the McDonald's. Correct. It's gonna be a hotel and conference center. Yes. Um so they're uh uh they're proposing 108 rooms and it is currently underway as well. So a lot of movement, a lot of growth is going on in the room. [2:28:36, 2:28:42]: in the city and we're looking actually for more in our downtown area. So we're look trying to get that going as well. [2:28:42, 2:28:47]: What's happening with the hotel further down one thirty eight on the right? The best western. [2:28:48, 2:29:08]: I don't know what it's gonna be. It never got to the point where you could identify. We've had to cite the owner um for the property because they have not been able to complete it. Um it started originally, I wanna say in twenty eighteen before I came to the city, years before. Wow. And um it just uh [2:29:07, 2:29:27]: with a building sitting there, you have to get engineers to, you know, confirm that it is still structurally sound because it's been open um to all the elements. Um and of course still that broken window theory, we need to make sure we close up those windows and not make it be easy access for um for folks who are just [2:29:27, 2:29:38]: you know, pass it passing by. Um, so we are trying to work with that applicant to get things either done or we can condemn it and um get it taken down. [2:29:40, 2:29:40]: Okay. [2:29:41, 2:29:42]: Thank you. Absolutely. [2:29:52, 2:29:53]: Yeah. [2:29:53, 2:30:00]: Is there a motion for us to adjourn the meeting? Madam Chair, I move for adjournment. Okay. And I second Harold. [2:30:00, 2:30:07]: All in favor? Aye. Okay. Aye. Um the meetings are journey. Thank you so much. Okay. Have a good evening. [2:30:07, 2:30:16]: Do we need to do that? Do we want your notebooks back? Uh yes, please. Okay. Please. And we'll get you can take the information if you'd like, um, but we'll give them back to you for the next hearing. [2:30:18, 2:30:37]: We can leave it. You can leave it and we can have the maps. Yes, keep the maps. Yes, the maps are for for you all to keep. Okay. Yes. Home with you. Or you could Gordon will come and collect'em.