2025 Board of Adjustment Order.

There are a few rules that I need to cover, but first I would ask that any of you that have these on turn them off or silent so we don't have a disruption, including our board members.

So let me go through some of the basic rules of the uh board of adjustment.

First, as an item on the agenda is called the applicant comes to the podium, give us your name and address for the record.

And um as you make in comments or your statement to the board, I'd ask others in the audience not to disrupt or make comments during that presentation.

The speaker will have the applicant will have five minutes, and then when it comes to the last minute of their time period, the warning bell will be given to help them summarize their statement.

I have the luxury to extend if I think we've entered interfered with their statement or asked questions and their time's been interrupted.

And then you'll have opportunity for four up three others to speak on that particular application in support, and then we'll allow four in opposition.

If there are a number of people here that would like to speak in either favor or opposition, pick your best four, is the way I put it, so that we don't have to have a delay in your trying to decide who's going to speak on an application.

Then the applicant will have a two-minute time period for rebuttal.

And then um, if there's any questions regarding the well, first of all, at the conclusion of the statement and the rebuttal, the public comment period statements will be ended, and the staff the board will have an opportunity to discuss the application.

I'll call for a motion either in support or opposition, and then we'll proceed with a vote.

If there's any questions regarding the board's decision, you contact the planning department two five one two oh eight fifty-eight ninety-five.

And um it requires five members to approve a motion, and if we do not get a five vote in favor, then the motion will fail, and then the application will be denied.

Um we don't call for a vote for denial.

So then with that, I'll call for a roll call and then we'll consider the agenda.

So starting with uh Mr.

Metcalf?

Here, Mr.

Golden, Mr.

Milling, Mr.

Carroll, Mr.

Morris, Ms.

Frell, Miss Mr.

Atcheson?

Here, Mr.

Williams?

Here, and I'm William Guest, the chair.

Uh, we have a quorum.

We have two supernumeraries voting today.

Uh and if we have a recusal, which I've been notified, we'll have at least a recusal on two applications, one special exception and one application.

Uh the supernumerary will vote at that time.

So, with that, we have a quorum, so we'll proceed with the consideration of the agenda.

Chair entertain a motion for approval of the agenda.

Motion to approve agenda.

Motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Agenda is approved as presented.

All right, so let's get started with application 6649 regarding 5133 Cottage Hill Road.

If the applicant will come to the podium, please.

Good afternoon.

Your name and address.

My name is Alvin Ramos.

I'm here on behalf of Thomas Signon Awning, uh 4590 118th Avenue North, Clearwater, Florida, 33762.

Okay, we're considering a sign of variants to allow two freestanding signs and three wall signs for a single tenant site in the B2, neighborhood business or suburban district, unified UDC code limits single tenant sites in the B-2 neighborhood business district to no more than one free standing sign and two wall signs.

You want to tell the board why we should consider your the application?

Uh yes, sir.

Today I made just a uh requesting an extension of an already approved variants uh from uh February 5th.

Uh we ran into some delays in the start of construction.

Uh, right now the uh lot is moving, gas tanks are in the ground, uh, and we're scheduled to install steel uh here and at the end of the month.

Um we already have two of the wall signs already approved and permitting.

We have one of the freestanding signs uh also approved, uh, and we are just requesting an extension of the already approved uh variants.

Okay.

Any questions of the board for the applicants rep?

Once again, this is an extension of a previously approved variance request.

Uh time frame for the extension.

How much was the applicant requesting?

Uh at least uh 60 days at uh at a minimum, uh just as long the the time that it takes to submit the rest of the permits uh for approval.

Okay, all right.

Um do we have anyone that has submitted any public comments regarding this application?

No, sir.

We do not okay.

All right, do we have anyone in the audience either in support or opposition today?

All right, thanks, sir.

This would conclude our public hearing regarding the extension.

Chair entertain a motion, motion to approve.

Uh time period.

90 days.

90 days.

I have a motion to approve the extension with a 90-day time period.

Do I have a second?

I have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Okay, motion carries.

Application 6669 regarding 5399 U.S.

Highway 90 West.

The applicant will come to the podium, please.

Your name and address, sir.

Hey, good afternoon.

Jacob Franklin 11 Northwater Street, Maybelline, Alabama.

Okay, and the request is a variance to allow dumpster located within 25 foot setback within a V3 community business suburban district unified UDC does not allow it within the three foot in height, anything within three foot of height to be within that setback.

You want to tell the board while we we should consider this?

Yeah, this is also a request for extension.

Um client still in the process of finalizing agreements, purchase agreement with the landowner.

So at this time we realize that we don't have enough time to pursue permits, so we won't have a permit by the expiration date of next month.

So really just requesting an extension.

Ideally a 12-month extension if possible, if not the standard six months.

Okay, all right.

Questions of the board for the applicants rep.

All right.

Do we have anyone that was in support or opposition that submitted any public comments?

No, sir.

Okay.

We have anyone in the audience either in support or opposition today.

All right.

That'll conclude our public hearing regarding the application for an extension.

Uh applicants asking for a 12-month, whereas I don't know, is six months really standard?

Six months is the standard, yes, sir.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

All right, Chair entertain a motion.

Mr.

Chair, I make a motion that we approve it.

Uh the extension for 12 months.

Yeah, motion to approve the extension for 12 months.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Okay, motion carries.

Thank you.

All right.

Application three, which is 6698 regarding 7120 Airport Boulevard.

If the applicant will come to the podium, please.

I failed to mention before we started that if you have any handouts for the board, please give those to staff as soon as possible so that we don't have to disrupt the um flow of things.

All right, your name and address, sir.

My name is Paul Davis.

My address is 756 St.

Louis Street.

All right.

This is uh setback variants allow a construction of a new structure less than 25 feet from the front property line in a V3.

Normally it's not allowed.

So you want to tell the board why we should consider that?

Sure.

This is an existing church uh with an existing parking lot that wraps around three sides of the building, and we are creating an addition that goes toward Park Avenue.

That would be within the setback of that few feet.

And the reason we're asking for this is we're trying to keep the parking lots connected so that we can give access to airport, but if it's too too much traffic on airport, we can still exit to park avenue.

So the idea is just to maintain two exits off the property.

And so we're trying not to block any of the driveways that go around the church.

Therefore, we're requesting a variance on the setback so that we can still maintain two exits to park avenue from both parking lots.

From the renderings, it looks like the youth classroom edition is the primary structure that's within that setback.

Yes, there's an addition on the front building and then a sort of a covered porch edition on the back.

So the the addition on the front, you can see it.

There's a triangular slice that eats into that setback just a little bit.

And then the covered addition on the back is just clipping the corner just a little bit.

Okay.

So the addition for the youth classroom just for my understanding of your facility is in line with the other classroom.

Yeah, it's it's it's in line with the rest of the building, maintaining the same roof line if I understood your question.

Yeah.

Okay.

And we wanted to put it on that side because if we put it on the other side, it will block access back to airport and park avenue from both parking lots.

So we're just trying to maintain that.

Okay.

All right.

Questions of the board for the applicant?

Okay.

Do we have anyone in support of the application here today that would like to speak?

Anyone in opposition?

All right.

Do we have any comments, public comments?

No, sir.

All right.

And I my understanding is the applicant's trying to preserve access to two different primary routes, the park avenue and the airport.

Is your justification as a hardship?

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Once again, any other comments, questions of the board?

All right.

Thank you, sir.

That'll conclude our public hearing regarding this application.

Chair entertain a motion.

Motion to approve.

Okay.

I have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Okay.

Motion carries.

All right.

Proceeding along.

Application 6699, 4585, 4969 regarding 6710 Old Shell Road.

If the applicant rep will come to the podium.

Is the applicant here today?

All right.

We are we had any communication with the applicant?

We have not heard anything from them.

Okay.

Do we have anyone here either in support or opposition today that would have liked to speak on the application?

All right, do we have public comments?

No, sir, we do not.

All right.

All right.

With that, uh Chair will consider uh a request to hold it over.

Maybe there was some timing issues.

Mr.

Chair, I'll make a request that we hold it over to the next meeting.

Yeah, I have a motion to hold it over.

Do I have a second?

Have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

All right, we're on application five, which is 6700 regarding 316 Dolphin Street.

If the applicant will come to the podium, please.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Your name and address, please.

Mary Daffin, I'm at 5209 Woodline Drive South, Mobile, Alabama, 36693.

Okay, and this is a special exception approval to allow an event menu, event venue with an occupant load of 270 and a T5.

UDC does not normally allow that without a special exception or anything over 100.

You want to tell us why we ought should consider your special exception?

Well, um the space was originally well at one point in time uh used for assembly, and then it went to mercantile, and now we're just trying to take it back to assembly.

Um it was already used as assembly at one time, so we just ask that we be able to take it back.

Okay.

Questions of the board?

Now we got a question, Mr.

Chair.

Yes.

With the previous assembly usage, was that a church?

Exactly.

And do you know what kind of um I guess the number of people that they had typically at the church?

I mean, uh, I guess my question is just a assembly use change back.

If you're taking 270 people versus 105 people, that's probably a pretty big difference.

And so I guess just the fact that it was a previously used assembly use.

I'm just curious.

Do you know is it somewhat compatible to the size that you're looking at, or was it vastly different?

I did not attend that church, so I'm not I can't, I'm not privy to that information.

I I don't know.

Okay.

How did you arrive at the 260 that you're requesting?

How was that number determined?

Robert Moran 601 St.

Anthony.

Um we did it basically by code.

Um we figured it out by the occupants load of an assembly at the end.

Based on non-sprinkle, yeah, all that stuff.

And so they may not get to that point on a regular basis, but that's what is allowed.

Okay, so the the fire department and IBC code.

It's already that's all approved already.

So okay.

And um, I think to answer Jeremy's the number of times I've been by there, I wasn't a member of that church either.

It had a similar scale of folks, similar volume, so volumes would be similar.

Another question.

It will this be as an venue.

Will it be like wedding receptions, parties?

That is correct.

That um bands and we will be able to accommodate um wedding receptions, birthday parties.

We'll also be able to accommodate um office meetings, you know, different different things of that caliber.

But let me add to that.

Go ahead.

Go ahead and pull the mic, pull the mic a little bit.

Yeah, they don't they don't have services for kitchens or cleaning or any of that stuff, so there's not gonna be cooking or preparations of you know uh great kind.

So if there's any kind of catered brought on side, things like that.

Yeah, okay.

Thanks.

Okay, back to the question on the occupancy.

So was that calculated based on just a empty space or with tables?

They won't let us do the chairs and tables so often very much anymore, so it was done on the space, total space.

Okay.

So the tables and chairs was not part of the calculation.

They already know they want tummy 20 space uh 20 tables max, so they've already bought them, they put them there so that folks could see that that didn't come about.

People didn't, you know, inspectors didn't visit the site, but that's their intention.

Okay, thank you.

All right, any other questions of the board?

Mr.

Chairman?

Yes.

So I'm assuming that you won't be pursuing any alcohol?

No.

Sales or no anything.

No.

Live music venue.

Live music, if it is a reception, there's a possibility that they may want to bring a band in, but not we won't you have bands nightly there.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

And I'm assuming your business license would reflect that.

That is correct.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Any further questions?

Last question is there any proposed hours of operation?

Well, um, as far as hours of operation, will if someone wants to come in and have a wedding that starts a reception that starts at six, um, you know, we would really like for them to be out by midnight.

But I mean, it it's at the discretion of the person that's renting the space.

Of course, we would comply with all of the you know the codes for the area, but it just depends on what it whatever the particular person that rents the space would like to use.

Got it.

But you don't want to you don't want to commit to limiting yourself at this point, you want to be available to whatever your customers need.

Pardon?

You're not wanting to limit yourself to a particular time of ending service at this point.

I mean, I would we would definitely look at you know what the standard for the area, you know, what if the bars close at two, then absolutely we would be out of there by two.

But I mean, if with wedding receptions, I mean, you know, people are usually tired by midnight.

Sure.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Any further questions of the board?

I've got one more.

So as far as the alcohol, so if somebody's having a wedding reception there, there would be no alcohol served.

I'm not gonna say that.

I won't say that their vendor, if they hire a vendor, they would have to be licensed to the case.

It would be all be licensed.

They're their vendor would have to be licensed.

Okay.

Thanks.

You're welcome.

All right.

Any further questions?

All right.

Did we have any public comment regarding this application?

Yes, sir, we did.

Their comment uh copies of those are on your iPads.

Okay.

All right.

And do we have anyone in support of the application would like to speak at this time?

Do we have anyone in opposition here today?

Okay.

If you'll have a seat and we'll allow them opportunity to speak.

If you'll come to the podium.

Good afternoon.

Your name and address.

Jean Langford.

356 Dauphin Street, Mobile 36682.

I'm opposed just for the sheer number of people that are going to be allowed here in this venue.

I don't think it it's not it's not in keeping with the surrounding use is the character of the neighborhood.

The church that was there.

And that church was open on Wednesdays and Sundays for two hours, and was always less than 100 people, always.

So as far as I'm concerned, um this use is way over what the zoning allows, and I don't believe it's in care keeping with with the uh use of the neighborhood.

I'm saying also that I am pro-business.

We just put three new tenants in on the first hundred block of Dolphin Street, two venue to uh vintage stores and uh now a bicycle shop.

So I'm used to dealing with downtown mobile and have for 40 years.

So this is just something that we that I truly believe is is going to throw things out of balance.

Um the alcohol, the alcohol issue, she's not gonna have a vending license, then okay, but the hours of operation are concerning to me.

I think that there should be stated hours, and I think that that should comply and had somehow complicity.

Um I still believe that the numbers are not in keeping with what we have, and I believe that they're better uses for the property, or that they can take it back down to a hundred half what they need and and blend in with the neighborhood properly.

Um but um I'm definitely not somebody who wants to worry about police or anyone else calling the police for uh for people that are out of line that stay too long in an area that can't hold that many people.

There are a lot of other venues, the church, and you've got the Sanger and there are other things that will compact parking issues and be somewhat of a problem from time to time, not saying every day, but I think that the two and a half times the allowance of people here is just not in compliment in character with the neighborhood.

I appreciate your consideration and I thank you for your time.

Okay, hold on a second.

Any questions?

All right, Mr.

McCoff?

No, okay.

Thank you.

All right, do we have anyone else who would like to speak in opposition?

All right.

If the applicant wants to have opportunity to provide a response, they're welcome to come back to the podium.

Okay.

All right, with that, I guess that'll conclude our public hearing regarding the application.

This is a special exception.

There are 12, my understanding, 12 criteria on which we're supposed to findings of fact we must consider as part of this.

If the board will review those and make sure that they're in agreement with those as they make their motion.

And yes.

Can I ask the staff a question?

Yes, please.

Um, when Buzz Jordan was doing, you know, they a couple times, I guess was it 400 Dolphin Street, the one right?

Um, to the west of the cathedral.

Yes, sir.

Do you remember what number?

Because I know that was turned down several at least twice, I believe.

Do you remember the number of the for initial requests may have been between 700 and 900?

And then they did revise it down of their subsequent applications, and that was based again on square footage of the building.

Uh the square footage that they were that they had, they were going to also include, I believe, a roof deck.

So that was based on the allowable square footage based on fire and building code.

Okay.

Thanks.

That is still in litigation, by the way.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any other questions, comments?

Mr.

Chairman.

Yes.

I just want to state that I I bel I feel like that that the entertainment district downtown is kind of holding it a delicate balance right now.

And I'm concerned about it as everyone who lives in Mobile, especially people who who frequent or reside downtown.

Um with all the events that have happened with the amount of people and that's and they tend to the uh those events that have occurred, the negative events have been big gatherings of people.

Um I'm concerned about the uh um the potential hours of operation.

I'm concerned about the uh um the potential gathering of large numbers of people, especially in that particular location.

Um it just gives me it gives me concern.

I think that that uh um the fact that they're asking for that many should raise some concern as well.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any other comments?

Yes, please.

While the applicants walking down, I'll follow up on Mr.

Metcalf.

I I tend to agree in the heart of Dolphin Street.

There have been some larger occupancies approved around the area.

To my knowledge and memory, they've mostly had some level of private parking also, and I do think that's a lot to squeeze into this tighter area of Dolphin Street that mostly operates smaller bar and restaurants.

Thank you.

Okay.

There is a parking lot to the rear of our it's not private, it's paid, and it will be produced revenue for the city as well.

Okay.

Um we're going, you got a two-minute rebuttal.

I got it.

I got you.

I got you.

Um, I would like to say this is not we're not opening up a club.

We're not opening up, you know, we are trying to be a part of people's special day, whether it's a children's birthday party, whether it's a wedding reception, whether it's a micro wedding.

We're not we're not trying to, you know, open up the latest greatest nightclub in this area.

There is a lot of um right across from Cathedral Square is where a lot of homeless are dwelling right now and in front of that building as well, is where a lot of dwell uh homeless tend to camp out.

We're just trying to put a business there so that you know that there is somebody there in that area.

There is nothing going on right there right now.

So as far as you know concerned about the hours, I mean, we're trying to be a part of people's happy day, not trying to open up a nightclub or anything like that to that to that point.

All right.

Any questions, further questions from the board?

All right, thank you.

Thanks.

All right, sir.

You you got part of her two-minute rebuttal time, so if you got anything, you gotta make it quick.

Oh, okay.

All right.

Um my name is Devin Nobles.

I reside at 5532 Lakewood Circle, Sierra Land, Alabama.

I am the owner of 316, 318, and 310 Dolphin Street.

Um, 316 is between the 310 and 2318.

And if there are any issues with noise ordinances or anything, I'm going to be the first one to deal with it.

Uh, I'm giving them the go ahead for the use of that because of that.

But if there's any issues concerning, I mean, the heroes restaurant is right down less than a block away, and another nightclub that have a lot of gathering of people there.

So the the issue with gathering of the numbers is is kind of um confusing because of the businesses, businesses that's that are currently in that area.

But that's all I want to say that we it won't be a gathering of young people because we actually have in our agreement that you must be 35 years or older to opt to uh rent the the unit.

We're not be allowing unruly type gatherings is specifically going to be for wedding receptions or birthdays and things like that.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

All right.

Um so once again, this is a special exception.

There are approximately 12 factors or findings of fact that we have to consider.

Um if you will review those as you consider this.

We did have one individual that provided or two, I should say, that had comments, public comments that were submitted.

Um I would say my only concern, and I tried to get clarification on this is that when you put tables and chairs and other um furnishings in a facility, the occupancy will definitely drop, and you're you're going based on an empty facility, which you already stated there's 20 tables and however many chairs that go with that.

So that to me would reduce the number just based on uh those factors.

Um as Mr.

Metcalf said, there's other things we need to consider as we're reviewing this request for a special exception.

So with that, uh chair entertain a motion.

Mr.

Um Chair, before we uh ask before we go for a motion, I have a question for the staff.

Uh is this people count, is that in line with the square footage of the building?

So the occupancy load that they're asking for, the 270 is based off of what building code requires.

So building code has requires so much square footage per person.

So based on the square footage of the structure, the 270 is the occupant lead that they'll be uh able to have.

Okay.

Uh if I can recall, I think we had a similar situation.

Uh was it the music box?

Do we recall that?

That that was a recently approved uh special exception earlier this year, yes, sir.

Okay.

Oh, and parking was not an issue with that, I don't think, right?

They did not have any on strike in any on-site parking available with that location.

Okay.

Well, that's all of course.

Yes.

Yeah, uh in the time I was operating businesses.

So with a special exception, the board does have the ability to grant uh certain conditions, including hours of operation.

Uh typically though, uh bars and such do have uh limited hours by the the ABC board, but like I said, there are um there are board there are there is a bar I know that's operating with limited hours of operation per there's uh variance that they had um the board okay any further questions additional questions, uh Mr.

Chair.

Can I have a um question answered by the applicant?

Yes.

Hello, hey.

My question is um we have our occupancy set at the max.

Uh understand that it's tables and chairs.

Correct.

I think uh the board may have a concern about the tables and chairs uh against that occupancy.

Is it any way we can kind of come to an agreement on that occupancy level?

Absolutely, because we don't want to have 270 people there.

We want to max it out anywhere between 150 to about 180.

I think we'll be comfortable there realistically.

But I'm gonna let him say I'd like to add too that the bathrooms, all that stuff had to comply, was already there.

We didn't add toilets, we didn't add anything to the building.

There was no work to the building except to redo the air conditioning for the occupancy load, but we didn't add toilets, and that would be an indicator that the numbers were going up from what it was previously.

I just thought I'd mention that, and also we did draw it with the tables in there, which in some jurisdictions the city's uh AHJ will allow.

Mobile has gone away from that, but I drew it that way and submitted it initially with 20 tables, and they are there in the space.

So with the 20 tables, could the building accommodate the 260 270?

20 tables, uh-huh.

Will it accommodate 20 tables?

Well, the 260 people owe 20 times eight is where she's getting the 160.

Right.

So 160 is really the occupancy you're trying to get to.

That's if we use the round tables, yes.

Okay.

If we just use chairs, then that's different, however, more than likely.

We will not we we don't want to have 270 people.

180 sounds like a good number.

Exactly.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you again.

You're getting your steps in and up and down the stairs.

Thank you.

All right, Mr.

Chairman.

Yes, uh Bert Hoffman.

Um, just to point out that even if the board does set a limit on the occupancy, uh, building and fire code may still on the official posted occupant limit may still allow whatever the higher number is.

Okay.

I'm just letting you know that.

Even if that would be in contradiction to what we say.

Well, they are enforcing their regulations.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah.

It's based on square footage versus end number exits and non-sprinkled.

I understand that.

Yeah.

All right.

And Ms.

Chairman, too.

Maybe as with a with a maximum again.

Okay, that is well.

All right.

I think that Mr.

Chairman just one other thing.

I guess piggybacking on what Mr.

Carroll said uh about the music box, and I will say one thing because I think he brought up a good point with that, but I guess the differentiating factor that I was thinking about, which I think has just been addressed was the uh pressure over in that area versus the pressure in you know the 316 block that you know a couple people brought up earlier.

Um and then Mr.

Nobles, I think, mentioned that they control their own parking behind there, and I should have asked earlier, but uh how many parking places, Devin, do y'all have or did you control?

I mean, is it something that you can provide a decent amount of parking if it was limited in size?

We do not own the parking place behind us, is managed by their rentals.

And it's quite a few spots, it's close to a hundred spots in the back.

I don't know exactly how many, but it's sir, and it serves probably multiple yes establishments there.

Yes, okay.

Thanks.

Okay, that's good information.

All right, I think that'll conclude our public hearing on this application for an extent uh special exception, and I think we've had good discussion.

Chair would like to entertain a motion.

I'm motion to approve with special exceptions consideration.

Okay, any limitation on the number of occupants or the hours?

Uh go along with the suggestion with Carroll.

Was it 160?

What was your 180?

180.

180.

And was there a time that you would say that you'd like to see the close down or limit their hours?

No, I do not have one.

Okay.

So I have a motion with uh limitation occupancy limit of 180 and no restriction on hours.

Do I have a second second?

Have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Anyone opposed?

Opposed, opposed.

Okay, motion fails.

Therefore, the special exception is denied.

All right, that's the end of that.

Public hearing will go to the next application 6701 regarding 24 and 49 and 2453 Slava Creek Parkway, and if the applicant, yes, sir, you name and address.

George Coles, 457 St.

Michael Street.

Okay, and you're asking for a front yard setback variance to allow construction of a new structure within 25 feet of the property line.

And normally not allowed within that setback.

Do you want to explain why we should consider it?

Yes.

So um the sheet metal workers union wants to build a new training center on uh to add on to their existing facilities on the neighboring property and on this property as well.

And they have some hardship imposed by a sanitary search easement on the south side of the property that uh really limits the space for that building to go.

So we're requesting the front setback be reduced to 10 feet to allow an adequate size facility to be constructed.

Okay.

Questions of the board.

All right, do we have any public comment regarding this application?

No, sir, we did not.

Okay.

Do we have anyone in the audience either in support or opposition to the application?

All right, thank you, sir.

That'll conclude the public hearing regarding your application.

Discussion of the board.

Motion to approve.

I have a motion to approve based on findings of fact.

Do I have a second?

Real quick, I'm sorry.

Uh quick question.

The sidewalks, that's what uh long as it's Lava Creek Parkway.

I saw note in the report that that would also be required.

Are there are there any sidewalks there currently?

Sorry about that.

No, that's really not believe that there are.

Um, but the uh applicant does have the ability to submit a sidewalk waiver application to the planning commission for consideration.

Now you got to come to the podium, sir.

I'm sorry.

We we have submitted a sidewalk waiver.

Okay.

Yeah.

Thanks.

Okay.

If and we don't have the authority to exempt them from the sidewalk waiver.

Correct.

That is the planning commission's uh responsibility.

Because I know in the past it seemed like we at times would have variances for that as well.

All right.

Once again, any further comments of the board.

Chair entertain a motion.

Do I have a motion?

I had a motion to motion.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Okay, motion carries.

Applications approved.

We're on application uh 6702, 6653 regarding 250 St.

Louis Street.

And Mr.

Milling or your recusal.

Okay.

And with that, a supernumerary and Mr.

Allen is also, so have a good day.

So Mr.

Ashton, you are on deck.

We appreciate it.

All right.

The applicant.

Mr.

Pipe.

Casey Pipes, 150 government street.

We've got two applications, and we can take them together or separately, Chairman.

Uh I think well, one's a special exception and one's a variant.

So I think we need to do special exception.

Okay.

The special exception deals with a drive-thru in the downtown district.

The proposed use is a bank, and the bank is a permitted use by right in the district we're in in downtown, but drive-throughs are not allowed by right anywhere downtown.

And uh they're outright prohibited in some areas, but in this area they're allowed with a special exception.

And that's the application for the special exception is to allow a drive-through for a bank.

The uh the drive-thru here, uh the the bank is River Bank and Trust is the potential buyer of this property.

It's currently a uh surface parking lot at the corner of Joe Ackham in St.

Louis, it's next door to the Greers parking lot on the east side of the greers.

Uh developing at this site, and so without the drive-through, uh the property's likely to save as a surface parking lot until some other user comes along.

The uh for the harmony, uh, the 12 criteria you have.

Uh this development satisfies three of the core principles of the map for mobile.

Number three, strategic infill and redevelopment.

Number five, high quality design of the built environment.

And number six, strong downtown.

What we're proposing in the uh design renderings and in the site plan is a uh high quality custom development for a bank.

Uh we're trying to cram it on the hard corner, you know, right up next to the sidewalk where the main entrance would be sort of uh at the corner there.

We don't believe there'd be any substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property owners or on the neighborhood.

We believe it's compatible with the neighborhood with the design we've provided.

It won't impede or the orderly development or the improvement of the surrounding area.

We think it provide a great benefit to downtown and to that area to get rid of one of the surface parking lots that has not been maintained or landscaped or fenced or shielded in any way and continue to develop uh quality construction along St.

Louis Street, and while the bank is a permitted use in this area, uh you know, a standalone bank like this, that the drive-thru is critical.

It has very little traffic compared to other types of users.

Anybody familiar with the Chick-fil-A downtown sees a lot of traffic going through that drive-thru.

This obviously is not going to generate that kind of uh that kind of volume, and uh, but at the same time it is critical to the bank's uh development of this site.

So I believe we had a re discussion last month regarding this application.

There was some things that we asked that to come back with, maybe some site better site renderings or something like that.

I can't remember the details.

There was an application about six or eight months ago.

Yeah, uh, and there was no rendering, you know, or concept design.

There was a site plan, but not a drawing for it.

Uh, we've got uh some people here today.

Uh Michael was a designer, Thomas was the engineer of the site.

Again, we don't my client doesn't own the property yet, and so it hasn't been fully designed up, but we do have conceptual drawings and renderings.

And you know, we're we're happy to you know, tie the uh the special exception to you know a design that's compatible with the design we've we've shown the neighborhood and we've shown y'all, and that we've it's been part of the application and it's been submitted with this application.

Okay, and for hours, there'll be banker hours.

Yeah, Ms.

Chairman.

Yes.

Um, they were really sort of two things.

Well, there was a bunch of discussion, but uh one, you're right, Casey, was that that your client did not provide any kind of drawings, which I think everyone on the board, whether they said it or not, kind of felt like that was something that they should have done, especially given the controversy over it.

And also um, as originally proposed, there was gonna be two drive-ups, and there was uh discussion about potentially limiting that.

So your client has done both of those things by limiting the drive-up and they provide uh um some renderings.

But um, given the concern of the neighborhood, as your client, you or your client met with the the neighborhood and the concerned citizens and to uh to provide drawings and to try to you know just discuss this.

Yeah, yes.

Uh there have been meetings.

Uh Doug Thomas is here, and he's gonna he's able to speak and discuss what meetings he's had.

There were some people in the neighborhood that didn't want to meet with him, and you can't meet with somebody that doesn't want to meet with you, but uh they did have some meetings and they have had some back and forth uh with the uh with the neighborhood.

Uh the comments, you know, the the written comments were more positive than negative this time around.

There were there's one negative comment and maybe eight or nine positive comments.

Uh but you know, there's been a lot of time spent, money spent, effort spent to try to bring y'all a better application, bring a better understanding of the of what the request is to the neighborhood, and uh you know, and hopefully to generate a better result.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Questions of the board additional?

All right.

Do we have someone that would like to speak in favor of the application that has information?

Okay.

Your name and address, sir.

Thank you.

Doug Thomas, uh, I'm the regional president for River Bank and Trust 1301 U.S.

Highway 98, and Daphne is my office to address some of what the Mr.

Metcast question just was.

Um, the two things I took away from our initial hearing when I was here six months ago.

Uh one probably a lack of preparation on my part, not understanding uh the exact process of downtown mobile and understanding how difficult it can be to navigate.

Having kind of walked it for six months, I understand why.

Uh there's some special places in downtown.

So, what it you know, the outlook we took on it is we started looking for somebody who could help us do some renderings and create what we wanted.

Um, quite honestly, I had a vision when I was here last time, and I think today that vision's better.

Um Michael Cardis took our my design and and the reason I hired Michael was he's from Mobile, but has been living elsewhere in some urban cities for a number of years, um, has got a lot of experience as far as other downtown urban planning.

And so when he and I first met, I told him I don't want to go into this with a lot of adversarial animosity.

I I want to figure out how to make it work.

And his comment to me was I want to design a building that no reasonable person can say that's not a good fit for downtown.

And so that kind of stuck with me.

And so Michael and I started on that process, and honestly, when I gave him my initial thoughts, he told me that wasn't gonna work, and he came back and designed something that now I'm more in favor of.

Uh in terms of what we see.

I mean, he drew a storyboard, he walked the neighborhood, he went downtown, and he actually came up with a rendering that it's not trying to replace history, but it is trying to blend modern design and development with the long history of mobile.

Um, you know, the second talking point that I kind of took out of this meeting was I needed to lessen opposition.

Uh I feel like I've made a good faith effort.

We've reached out, we've talked to anybody that will listen, uh, had some good meetings with the POA of the neighboring areas.

Uh, we've talked to some of the historical societies, we've talked to city council to the mayor's office.

We've gone and promoted what we want to see here.

It's anybody that would listen.

Uh and that brings me to another point where some of the opposition that we've tried to kind of soften up says, well, what if this is a bait and switch?

What if you don't build this?

I mean, the only way I can prove what I'm gonna build is to build it.

So I need this approval to move forward.

But I'm gonna say we're north of $50,000, due diligence contract extensions, renderings, um, maybe closer to 60 or 70 when I really do the math.

Um, you know, I wouldn't waste that amount of money, much less the six months I've spent in between now with all these meetings, renderings.

Uh, we're committed.

We're an Alabama-based bank that wants to be here.

I heard somebody at a luncheon Friday say, you know, kind of love people that want to come downtown when there's no reason to be here.

And I've questioned over the last six months, is there a reason for us to be here?

Is downtown the right business for us?

Is it where we should be?

And I keep coming back to, I think it is.

And so, you know, in saying that, the reality of what I brought last time, um the core number hasn't changed.

It's still low volume, it's still good hours, it's complimentary.

I mean, in my opinion, when you look at a revitalization of St.

Louis, you're gonna see that rendering, and I think it's a cornerstone.

I mean, it's you know, we've reached out to some of the opposition personally and said, hey, come sit down with us.

And they said, There's nothing you can design that will change our mind.

I I can't fix that.

There's nothing I can do that will mitigate any of that.

I just hold on the fact that once again, community bank is different than other banks in this area.

There are drive-throughs that are already permitted in downtown that don't cause issues.

Um, there's several other banks, and if you look at St.

Louis in particular, I mean it's dubbed automobile alley, you've got a drive-through at one end of gas station on the other.

It all the development around it that has come is good.

I'm not in opposition of any of it, uh, but I think this is a complement to all of it.

There's there's other things that have been granted that are going to come that I'm in favor of that are gonna, as I said last time, bring way more traffic, light, noise, anything about it.

But all in all, I I'll thank you.

All right.

Any questions?

I have one.

Please.

And it would go after the drive-thru.

Uh, did you say you had a rendition of what it would look like, but you didn't present it?

Did it make it?

So if you look on the screen, this is the side facing west that would have the drive-thru.

And so the request that we made in the drive-thru was if there's not a car face or not a car sitting in the drive-thru that it it blends in, and you wouldn't know that it was a drive-thru otherwise.

No equipment, no canopy, uh, as far as outreach and canopy with tubes that you think of traditionally, um, just something to keep the rain off if it's raining and mobile and you're trying to use ATM and our drive-through.

So single lane, and it's just really that little bit of a lean to covering that would block you from weather elements.

I see it in drawers now.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Any other questions?

All right, do we have anyone that would like to speak on behalf of the applicant in support?

Good afternoon.

Your name and address, please.

I'm Lucy Cope.

I live at 308 St.

Louis Street, and I've lived there for 13 years.

As y'all know, St.

Louis Street is getting ready to go through a 17 million dollar renovation.

We've got three major residential projects coming on board, one of which will have commercial.

Ace uh Greers is getting ready to put in an ACE hardware and a liquor store.

One of the issues that came up originally with the drive up.

Was before the city decided they were gonna make St.

Anthony Street two lanes, so that you're gonna have to go from St.

Louis, turn on Jackson, go all the way to state, go downstate, come up Joacam, which was pretty nuts, frankly.

Um, I wouldn't for that either.

Now that they're gonna make St.

Anthony Street, y'all with me where all this is okay.

St.

Anthony Street, you just turn on Jackson, turn on St.

Anthony, turn on Joachim, boom, you're at the bank.

That makes a lot more sense.

The drawings work, um, and he's reduced it to two to one lane.

I trust y'all's judgment.

The way the UDC code is written is that you have to come and request a special variance.

So the fears are that I have heard from the neighborhood is that if we open up a drive-in, it'll allow a fast food restaurant or something undesirable.

I don't think that's gonna happen.

They have to come and they have to present that to y'all.

So I am a hundred percent in favor of this.

I can't think of a nicer neighbor than a bank.

Their hours are short, they generally invest in the neighborhood, and I hope y'all will consider their application.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Any questions?

All right, we have time for one more.

Mr.

Meet.

No, yeah, we're good.

Thank you.

Justin too.

To me, 250 Congress Street, so I'm a couple blocks away from this.

The renderings look fantastic.

You know, we have a beautiful community down here in Detonity Square, and I think this would be a great addition to it.

I would love to have a drive-thru bank.

I have to go to Service First Line now, and they have one as well already.

This one looks way more appealing than that one.

Simple, easy, and again, I think it's an added value to our community down here.

Okay, thank you.

Any questions?

All right.

All right.

Anyone in opposition that would like to speak on the application today?

Special exception request.

Yes.

Good afternoon.

My name is Pete Burns.

I live at 255 North Jackson Street.

I've lived in on North Jackson Street since 2013.

I've owned property in downtown Mobile since 1979.

I know a good bit about the community.

I was on the board of the Downtown Alliance in 2012 when we commissioned Andre Duane's team to determine why Mobile was losing population.

And the City of Mobile is losing population.

We need to do something about it.

Duane's report concluded we need to make downtown pedestrian friendly.

That if we can make it pedestrian friendly, we'll have a vibrant downtown, it will feed business, it will promote the welfare of the community and add value to the commercial property.

Well, he is not alone, and he was opposed to the drive-throughs.

Duane, who was down here, we paid him.

It seems like it was $380,000.

He did charettes.

He studied the history, studied the structure, studied the employment opportunities, and came up with his conclusions.

We hired a world class expert.

It was a good choice, and there's no reason now to say, well, we're going to deviate from what he said.

There are there are times when a special exemption can be granted.

That criteria is not met here.

This is not in keeping with the public interest.

Everybody, all the planners, everybody say is to make it a walkable urban community.

Drive-throughs are the antithesis.

They're the opposite of being able to walk through.

People drive up, they do business through the window, and they drive away.

A walk-up bank, you walk up, you see your neighbors, you're visiting with people, you're not sitting in the car, and and you don't have, there's no chance of people being backed up of the problems that we have associated with drive-throughs.

They say that, well, if you allow this drive-thru, that's really not going to mean that there would be other drive-throughs.

Well, I'm here to tell you that you will have that argument again.

You granted the bank a drive-through.

What's different?

How can you deny me a drive-through?

That will create a real problem, but your initial problem is the application that is before you.

We don't want people working in Mobile and living in Baldwin County.

We want people living in Mobile.

And maybe they got to go to Baldwin County to work.

But we want Mobile to be the place you want to live, not the place you leave at five o'clock in the afternoon.

That was Dewani's plan.

And if we follow it, it will work.

If we don't follow it, it won't work.

You got it right the last time, you denied the application.

It's the same place, the same applicant, drive-through.

The laws the same.

Be consistent, deny it again.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any questions of the board?

I have a question.

Yes.

Well, the banks is already down there and do have drive-throughs.

How do we?

No, what's the answer to that?

Any existing drive-throughs in the downtown area were there prior to the adoption of the downtown development district.

So they're all grandfathered in the Kim.

Yes.

As more as I can say that from working down there for well over 30 years, um, and I have in the area of Dolphin Street where I am, um, have um and I personally seen an issue.

Bank drive up.

Um there's a bank drive up right to the entrance to check that's a problem of the freestanding drive-ups or the ones like in the um in the bank bank trust RSA Tower.

Um, I've never one time seen any more than one to two cars.

Yeah, thank you.

Do we have others that would like to speak?

Thank you.

Hello, good afternoon.

I'm Lee Weisinger, 254 North Jackson Street, 36603, and that is Daytonte Square.

Thank you guys for your service.

It's a big commitment you make, and thanks for the staff for making sure all of this material gets online and is is tracked and considered.

Let me enthusiastically say that the concept for the building is beautiful.

I support the bank, the building is beautiful.

The issue before you is not the bank, the issue is the drive-thru.

And I endorse everything Attorney Pete Burns just said, so I can I'm gonna try to cut through some of what I was gonna say and not not repeat it.

Um I do want to emphasize that you made the correct decision back in March.

You issued a letter of decision with extensive findings of fact.

I don't see that any of those findings of fact have changed.

Um Jeff Speck, who's a renowned urban planner, you've probably heard of him, uh, walkable city rules.

He has a whole chapter, chapter 81, disallow curb cuts, and he specifically says fast food and bank drive-throughs have no place in walkable districts.

So that's the city's aspiration to make mobile walkable, pedestrian-friendly.

These urban planners, and Pete referenced the design for Mobile, the map for Mobile and the rules and regulations around creating this district, are there to promote walkability.

There's a whole science behind it.

And so this decision's been made about walkability and pedestrian um access.

So the bank drive-through is antithetical to making mobile walk walkable.

Um, I was present back in March and I've looked at everything online, and I want to make two comments about one of the letters in support that's that's um on the your website.

Um it was by Michael Curtis, MPC Design Studios, and he emphasized that you can accommodate pedestrians in cars, and he illustrated an example in Portland where Portland has made pedestrians first, cars have to stop, pedestrians have the right-of-way, and that uh reference to Portland that was on um page one of his letters, I think, made me wonder what Portland thinks of curb cuts.

And Portland since 2020 has banned curb cuts in the in the center city of Portland.

And I saw an article where existing banks that were grandfathered in are for sale in Portland.

And this says many drive-thru properties on the market are former banks at large as large financial institutions pull back on in-person banking.

At the same time, fast food restaurants are going, are in an in an expansion mode.

And so banks with existing drive-thrus in Portland are being sold for fast food restaurants, and that's exactly the fear that we have here.

Mr.

Curtis in his letter also stresses that banks provide essential services.

I agree.

He likens the essential services that bank provides, the same as grocery stores and pharmacies.

I agree.

So does that mean Greers can request a drive-thru?

They're both essential services, all the same arguments would apply.

What about the new Ace Hardware Store?

Somebody has a plumbing disaster and they need a pipe, they want to whip through a drive-thru at Ace, maybe the liquor store.

I don't know about that.

But the same arguments could be made, and I believe that as a board, if you grant this special exemption, you'd be hard pressed to deny the others.

And lastly, I would say one minute, there needs to be certainty with zoning.

We're here for the second time.

This is before you for the second time.

Staff has spent time on this for the second time.

If we were confident that the zoning map for mobile and the district code would be upheld, we wouldn't need to be here.

And it's not just for residents that need certainty.

It's for the businesses, the developers, the commercial real estate agents.

People need to know mobile is moving toward walkability.

Drive-throughs are not appropriate for a walkable city.

The city is trying to lead.

They are trying to force people with a tiny bit of bad medicine to get to the other side to a vibrant diverse city where we all live, work, and play.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any questions of the board?

All right.

Yes.

No, not a question, but the last two speakers have uh mentioned about uh about precedent.

And I just want to say for the audience that uh that this board um looks at each application in its entirety, um, and a stand on its own merit.

And because if if this board grants a special exception or variance for something, that does not necessarily mean that we are under any any pressure from an additional application to um to approve it.

Okay, thank you.

All right, we have time for additional speaker.

Yes.

Good afternoon, your name and address.

Kelly Baker, 254 State Street.

Um Mr.

Pipe said drive-throughs are not allowed.

This is true.

So I'm gonna start by saying that six months ago, you all were correct.

You were right in denying this drive-thru.

Now here we are again, and nothing has changed that would legally allow a special exception.

Keep in mind you're not denying Mr.

Thomas the right to build his bank.

The bank is beautiful, we're not opposed.

You're simply telling him that he has not shown you any legal reasons to reverse your decision.

And I'm I will also say that I did meet with Mr.

Thomas initially, and a group of us did, and when he wanted to meet a second time, I said I wasn't interested in meeting because a prettier building has nothing to do with the drive-thru.

We have to remember, keep our eye on the ball.

This is not about the building.

We would love the bank.

We just don't want to drive-through.

So I'm gonna make an analogy here.

While a drive-thru at a bank may seem benign, it's not.

You say it's not so bad.

It'll be fine.

People do that all the time.

And the next thing you know, that cancer has spread.

We cannot do for one what we're not willing to do for everyone else.

Allowing this drive-thru would create a very slippery slope, a cancer, so to speak.

Now, what I'm about to say is very important.

Are any of you all familiar with Huntsville, Alabama, where I grew up?

Anyone?

Well, Huntsville has done a beautiful job revitalizing their downtown area.

I was up there a few months ago, and I noticed that Riverbank had a location on Holmes Avenue in downtown Huntsville.

So knowing I was going to have to come back up here and speak again.

Attention.

Attention.

Attention.

And has been reported.

All occupants walk in the nearest stairway exit and walk down to your side of re entrance floor.

Well, that was good timing.

Walk in the nearest stairway.

Mr.

Chairman.

Attention.

Attention.

Attention.

An emergency has been reported.

All occupants walk to the nearest stairway exit and walk down to your side reaction or main wall.

Walk to the nearest stairway.

Attention.

Attention.