2026-10-13 - Planning and Zoning Committee

00:00We will call this meeting to order.

00:03We have the September 22nd, 2026 meeting

00:06minutes

00:08uh

00:09available.

00:12There are no additions or corrections.

00:13>> Good afternoon, counselors. My name is

00:15Kim Sparrow, a services zoning

00:17administrator um for planning,

00:19engineering, and permits.

00:21So, this is the um former hospital site.

00:24If you remember during COVID, there was

00:27a re-property to mixed-use high for the

00:29Harbor Terrace development. It was going

00:32to be a high-rise

00:34condominium and mixed-use development.

00:37And it was obviously never constructed.

00:41Um and so, the Redeemer Church um has

00:46purchased this property. A What the

00:48property is just to the south where this

00:52um This rezoning request probably

00:54started about 3 months ago. In your

00:55packet, you have a list of the key

00:58conditions that um the applicant has

01:02worked out with the neighborhood

01:03association.

01:05They've probably met at They've met

01:07multiple times over the past 3 months to

01:10nail down these key conditions.

01:13Um and the neighborhood did vote last

01:15week 41 in favor, one opposed, and one

01:20abstention to recommend approval of this

01:23rezoning request with those key

01:26conditions.

01:28Um so, the the 15 and 1/2 acre site

01:32would go to QC2

01:34with these key conditions.

01:37Um and like I said, it's currently QMUH,

01:41and then there's a little strip of B6

01:44that still remains. And so, this

01:46rezoning request would change it all to

01:50QC2, which is consistent with the

01:53properties

01:54um that are adjacent to this

01:58Um and the proposal is to construct a

02:00new church campus. Um there would be

02:03eventually multiple buildings and then

02:06um I believe the applicant is going to

02:09try and utilize some of the existing

02:11structures where they can on site. Um

02:15the adopted [snorts] long-range land use

02:16plan does identify this property as

02:19mixed-use medium.

02:21It is in the southern area framework

02:23plan and their re-zoning will go to city

02:27council next week.

02:30And the the zoning that is currently

02:32there now, the QC2 and the QMUH,

02:36is what is on the southern area

02:38re-zoning plan.

02:39>> [snorts]

02:40>> So this would amend whatever is approved

02:43next week to QC2 if the council decides

02:47to approve it um at a public hearing in

02:50the future.

02:51Um so the first meeting of the Crestwood

02:54South Neighborhood Association was on

02:56July 27th and then they formed a

02:59committee and they've been working with

03:01the applicant since then on the Q

03:04conditions that the neighborhood just

03:07did approve last week. And you should

03:10have all of those Q conditions in your

03:12packet. Um I was present for some of the

03:15discussions, not all of them. So if you

03:18have questions about specific Q

03:20conditions,

03:21um Randall Manor, the applicant on

03:23behalf of the church, is here and he can

03:25answer any specific questions that you

03:28guys have.

03:29>> Yeah, before you leave though. So

03:31yeah, the southern area framework plan

03:34is going before the council on the 20th.

03:37>> Correct. So what we would do is we would

03:40wait and

03:42Does that make sense?

03:43>> Yeah. And the um

03:46So

03:49the portion

03:52of the area that will be

03:56mixed-use medium

03:58um

04:00portion along

04:02Montclair Road. The frontage on

04:04Montclair Road will remain mixed-use

04:07medium.

04:07>> It's actually already QC-2

04:10from that rezoning case.

04:12>> Okay. All right.

04:13>> And it'll stay. Where the apartments are

04:16across the frontage, those that zoning

04:19and those Q conditions will not be

04:21changed as part of this request. It's

04:24just the portion of the property to the

04:26north of that site.

04:29>> Right. Okay.

04:30Got it.

04:32>> I'm sorry. I know it's confusing with

04:33the Southern Area Plan going on.

04:36>> We're doing some gymnastics here.

04:38>> Right.

04:39>> Zoning and

04:39>> But hopefully we've got the timing down

04:41so we won't confuse anyone.

04:43>> Yeah. Got it. All right.

04:46>> Did you want to

04:47Yeah, here for me, no.

04:49>> So uh

04:53I'm familiar with Redeemer Church.

04:55They've been in um South Avondale for

05:00I don't know, a decade or more now.

05:02>> Yeah, at least.

05:03>> Yeah. And um

05:07they've

05:09you know, as I understand it, they've

05:10really outgrown the space that they're

05:12currently in. Um

05:14And actually, you know, have had to

05:18acquire some lots in the surrounding

05:19area just to accommodate their parking.

05:22So they're looking at this

05:24old hospital site as a new campus for

05:28their community, right?

05:30>> That's right.

05:31>> Okay.

05:32Um

05:36So tell me about the

05:40most recent uh meeting with the

05:43Crestwood South Neighborhood

05:44Association. So

05:46they had initially voted and

05:49um

05:52it they were divided.

05:54Uh

05:56roughly half were in support and half in

05:59opposed. So

06:00um what transpired after that that led

06:04to the

06:0641 in favor, one opposed uh

06:10most recently.

06:12>> Yeah, and um

06:13it's a simple answer. I'm going to give

06:14you a simple answer first and then I'm

06:16but there is more context just um since

06:19the committee you you know I can get

06:20into a little more detail than full

06:22council. Um

06:24so the simple thing that happened is um

06:26when we had the first vote um they had

06:28not really had any subcommittee

06:32discussions. And so as as Kim mentioned

06:34we met with the subcommittee multiple

06:36times. Um you know that's

06:38here in United City Hall, you know,

06:40meetings also um you know, numerous

06:42phone calls, conference calls, emails.

06:45Um probably you know, a total like six

06:48plus hours I spent with this group um

06:50you know, since the the first vote. So

06:53that's really you know, that's the the

06:54kind of short version of it. Um longer

06:57version is um we reached out you know,

06:59in the spring um just to kind of get

07:02this on the agenda. Um and for a variety

07:04of reasons we couldn't actually go

07:06before the full um community until the

07:08summer.

07:09And just timing, you know, like

07:12we we felt like we had a pretty good

07:14presentation

07:15and um and explained it but you know, it

07:17always feels awkward when you show up at

07:19a commit a community and they're like,

07:21all right, so you got to go when? You

07:23know, and and so that was kind of part

07:24of it. Um I think the biggest thing and

07:27you know, they're they're very vocal

07:29communities. I don't want to um put

07:31words in their mouth but um

07:33I think the biggest thing was that they

07:35had been you know, that they felt burned

07:37by prior development. And so they were

07:40concerned that this might be you know,

07:43or we're fine with this church, but what

07:45if you guys sell it to somebody else?

07:47You know, and we have C2 with no

07:49restrictions. It could be anything. Um

07:51and so that was really the dialogue was,

07:54all right, well, we're we're a church.

07:56We we intend this first time, you know,

07:57on the Q conditions that if you guys are

08:00okay with it, you know, I I know that

08:02the neighborhood's okay with it. Um and

08:05and so I think they would expect for

08:06that to be part of this and you know,

08:08and I think our client is okay with it.

08:10I mean, they I think they would prefer

08:13if if, for example, we could do a middle

08:14school, you know.

08:17But they don't have a plan to do a

08:18middle school, you know. So so it's kind

08:20of um it's kind of trusting the

08:22neighborhood, the neighborhood's

08:23trusting them, you know, if there is a

08:25school at some point on this site, um

08:28you know, I think we've built up enough

08:30um

08:31um credibility where we can kind of come

08:33in the future and say, all right, we

08:35said we're going to do these things, we

08:36did it, and now the school has been

08:39built and we'd we'd like to have a

08:40middle school. So that that's kind of

08:42the only thing that I think from our

08:43perspective, you know, would would be

08:45great if we could do a middle school,

08:46but other than that, I think everybody

08:48is got what they wanted.

08:51>> Right.

08:53Um

08:59So the the

09:03is the has the church already acquired

09:06the property pending rezoning or

09:09>> Yeah. So they the and this was a a

09:11little bit of a strategic risk that I

09:13was going to um clarify one thing cuz

09:15you were asking about the frontage and

09:17as Kim said, that's not part of this

09:18application. It's not part of what they

09:20acquired. Um so they're and we kind of

09:24made the street the strategic decision

09:25that, you know, it made more sense to go

09:28ahead and just acquire the property um

09:32cuz they at that point they didn't have

09:35um even as much as they do now in terms

09:37of a plan. And so I felt pretty

09:39confident that if we were to acquire it

09:42and rezone it, and we didn't even have

09:43any plan, like we didn't have an

09:44architect engaged, like that was not

09:46going to be successful. Um, and and so

09:49obviously we've gone through this master

09:50plan process. Uh, what's in the package

09:53that you guys got came out of the master

09:55plan process. That's been refined um,

09:58some. Um, but it it's still I would say

10:01in kind of planning process.

10:03Uh,

10:04if we um, I mean so far with the project

10:08architects, but obviously, you know,

10:10nobody wants to spend the full design

10:12package until you know

10:14exactly what you're allowed to build.

10:16And so with these proposed key

10:18conditions, they, you know, the

10:21architects signed off on it as well. You

10:22know, there's enough information for the

10:25church to then, you know, spend the rest

10:27of the money to do the design.

10:29>> In any way,

10:31um,

10:34in any way, um,

10:38is there demolition or the structures

10:42going to be uh, re- re-purposed or

10:46>> Yep.

10:46>> just generally

10:47>> Yeah, I can describe the 55 ft high.

10:50Um,

10:50I can't remember the heights of the

10:51other ones. Um, everything north of Dan

10:55Hudson is currently flat. You know, you

10:58can see, you know, concrete pad the um,

11:01existing uh, professional office

11:03buildings, you know, the demolished or

11:05you know, the buildings that kind of

11:06have been gutted, you know, getting

11:07those demolished. Um, it's very

11:10expensive to demolish them. And you

11:12know, you hate to delete space when

11:15there might be a use for it in the

11:16future. So, what they're looking at

11:18doing temporarily is some kind of

11:20covering over those things. Um, so if

11:23you've been to

11:24you know, different parts of the world,

11:25different parts of the country, there's

11:27a a construction fencing that doesn't

11:29really look like construction fencing in

11:31a building. And I said and on the site

11:33plan it shows like multiple buildings on

11:35the north side.

11:36It's probably as part of phase one

11:39they're going to do one building that's

11:40a common that ultimately will be like

11:42children's church, you know, that sort

11:43of thing.

11:45With a future sanctuary built, you know,

11:48larger.

11:49But right now they're they're focusing

11:50on, you know, having one building that

11:52kind of accommodates everything.

11:54And you know, they'll have to do

11:55multiple services and that sort of

11:56thing. But at least it's a minute.

11:58>> tenants in or in any of the buildings? I

12:01know there were some other like office

12:04structures there.

12:06Um

12:06>> I don't think any of the buildings on

12:09the property that they own are currently

12:11tenanted. I think everything that they

12:13own and I'll I'll firm that up and I'll

12:15follow up with you.

12:17I think everything they own is is

12:19vacant.

12:20>> Okay. Council, would you got any

12:22questions?

12:24>> Uh yeah, I wanted to

12:25make sure I was clear on what triggered

12:27the rezoning need.

12:28>> Yeah, so it it's good.

12:31They don't need a rezoning technically.

12:33You know, as Ken pointed out. Um

12:35however,

12:36um

12:37you know, it's combination of, you know,

12:39staff recommendation and my

12:41recommendation when when they came to me

12:43and said they were looking at the site,

12:45said it's great site, I've looked at it

12:46before, very familiar with it. However,

12:49it's mixed use high

12:52and mixed use medium the same way.

12:54Anytime you build over there, you know,

12:56the with the cuz the character code, you

12:58know, you've got to build your new

13:00building

13:01right up on the street. And so 52nd

13:04Street to 57th Street

13:06what what am I blanking right now? Um

13:09It that's the only public street that

13:11this property abuts. So all of their

13:13buildings would have to be within, you

13:16know, 10 ft

13:17of 52nd Street um but for the rezoning.

13:21And the only way they could build

13:22something different than that they'd

13:23have to get a variance.

13:25And you know, that that means that to do

13:28the variance like practically that means

13:31they've got to get the architect to

13:32design it, you know, show how it parks,

13:35show how that particular building

13:36complies with zoning, you know, as to

13:39everything else.

13:40And then they would have to apply for

13:41the variance and then, you know,

13:43it means going back to the neighborhood,

13:45it means going to the ZBA. Hopefully

13:48there's a quorum, you know, and then

13:50getting it approved.

13:52And then they have to do that for every

13:53single building on campus. So I just I

13:55just said, you know, look, we can you

13:57know, we can try to do that you know, if

13:59we can't get a rezoning, but the better

14:01thing for you guys long term would be a

14:03zoning that doesn't require that. And I

14:05think on the other hand from

14:07neighborhood standpoint

14:09I think they appreciated

14:12that it was so locked down even though

14:14it was a a zoning that didn't make

14:16sense.

14:17So

14:18>> Um this might be a Kim thing, but

14:21uh

14:23just I guess describe your footnotes

14:26that you're using. Does that have any

14:28application on the actual Q condition

14:30itself?

14:31>> There are the footnotes, yeah.

14:33But so those are the footnotes that just

14:35tell you which section of the ordinance

14:37those uses are permitted in.

14:40The footnotes in the Q conditions?

14:43Are those ones you're talking Yeah. That

14:45So the way the ordinance is set up, we

14:47have different use groups. So there's

14:50educational uses, there's the commercial

14:52uses, the communication and those

14:54footnotes just reference that section of

14:56the ordinance.

14:58>> Oh, so you just if you need to find it

15:00quicker?

15:01>> Yes. Yeah. But because

15:04>> prohibited regardless.

15:05>> Yeah, so the in the permitted uses table

15:09um

15:10and I'm sure you guys read it every week

15:12because it's

15:13>> character of the Q condition that it is

15:15actually prohibited.

15:17Well

15:18I guess cool new addition.

15:21>> You know and except for Randall has

15:22taken the time to do that.

15:24>> [laughter]

15:27>> Or did the neighborhood actually do

15:28those?

15:29>> What what happened was um to theirs in

15:32that table that Kim was saying, so one

15:33of the neighborhood people had put

15:36together this very intricate, you know,

15:38chart. And then there was a slight

15:40change to the permitted use table cuz I

15:43think she had pulled like an old version

15:45of zoning ordinance. So then that kind

15:47of created some confusion, you know, of

15:49all which one are we talking about, that

15:51sort of thing. So the foot The purpose

15:52of the footnote was just so we could

15:53have conversation and everybody could

15:55kind of track it. Um but it but I we

15:58didn't change anything in the zoning

15:59ordinance. It really was just kind of

16:00like a key. Cuz if you look at the

16:02permitted use table, it it it makes

16:05sense for somebody who looks at it a

16:06lot, and it makes sense from a use group

16:08standpoint. But if you're just a a

16:10layperson and you think, all right,

16:12well, what is

16:13you're looking at a list and you think

16:14alphabetical, you know, you would you

16:16would you'd probably miss it because of

16:18the way it's kind of grouped up.

16:20>> Oh, no, man. I I just want to make sure

16:22it didn't have any implication on the

16:23actual Q conditions themselves.

16:25>> No, sir. And And honestly, when when we

16:28include them in the ordinance for

16:30council, we'll probably take the

16:31footnotes out.

16:45>> All right.

16:47So the um

16:49zoning advisory committee

16:52referred to in these Q conditions is the

16:55zoning advisory committee of the

16:57Crestwood South Neighborhood

16:58Association.

17:00Is Is that what you're saying? Because

17:02you were just saying a minute ago.

17:04>> So the um in that um if I think if

17:07you're looking at the one I'm thinking

17:09about, I think it says that the

17:11neighborhood has to um submit a rec

17:15recommendation before, something like

17:17that.

17:18>> It's the It's our

17:19>> happen when they apply for permitting.

17:23If this rezoning is approved by the City

17:26Council, then that means our zoning map

17:28is, unless you guys ever change it, will

17:31put more work on us in the future, but

17:35we will when we do have Q conditions,

17:39even if it's an electrical permit that's

17:41in a flood plain, we still check Q

17:43conditions. If it's a building permit,

17:47if it's a sign permit, an adult

17:49establishment attempted to get a

17:51business license after this property's

17:53rezoned, we would pull this case file,

17:56and that's one of the prohibited uses.

17:59So, we would not be able to sign off on

18:01that business license, and we would,

18:03unfortunately, have to send the customer

18:05away, or either explain to them how they

18:08would go through the process to amend

18:11the Q conditions, which would be doing

18:13this entire process all over again.

18:16>> Yeah.

18:17But, you I mean, you had to do it

18:17regardless of anything that was in a

18:20place of worship or related, so.

18:22>> Yeah, we There are conditions on place

18:24of worship anyway. Um, this just adds a

18:27little bit more to it for us, but, you

18:30know, we're happy to do it. There's

18:32properties all over the city with lots

18:34of Q conditions, so.

18:35>> Happy to do it. All right.

18:37Cut that clip.

18:41>> All right. Councilman Woods, I'm going

18:43to make a motion that we recommend this

18:45to the full council for approval.

18:47>> Uh, second.

18:48>> All right. So, that will go to the full

18:51council. Thank you.

18:52>> All right. Thank you.

18:53>> All right. Um,

18:55next up, we have the Shelby County

18:57Hazard Mitigation Plan.

19:08>> All right. Good afternoon. Um, my name

19:10is Darius A. Garth, and I serve as the

19:13natural hazard administrator for the

19:15Department of Planning, Engineering, and

19:17Permits.

19:18Um, I'm here today in support of the

19:21City of Birmingham's adoption of a

19:23resolution to add the City of Birmingham

19:26to Shelby County's 2022

19:29multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation

19:31plan.

19:32Um,

19:34we received confirmation from the

19:36director

19:37um of EMA from Shelby County that our

19:40plan got moved from

19:43got moved to approved pending

19:47um

19:48approved pending adoption.

19:50Um, so

19:51um this adoption assures that 100% of

19:55the City of Birmingham's residents are

19:57covered by a hazard mitigation plan.

19:59So, um

20:02yeah.

20:03Do you guys have any questions?

20:08>> Yeah, let me ask. So, basically this is

20:10the same item we basically

20:14uh recently approved a resolution to

20:16>> Yes, sir. It's probably about a year

20:18>> and they reviewed our request.

20:19>> Yes, sir.

20:20>> And now we have to actually adopt it.

20:22>> Yes, sir.

20:24So, it's just the final step in in uh

20:27finishing up the adoption. It's a quick

20:29turnaround.

20:30>> Yeah.

20:33Yeah, so pretty straight

20:34>> act, Leticia Frazer, her term has

20:37expired. And then our building

20:39contractor, Mr. Daryl Varner, his term

20:42will expire in November.

20:45Um, if it's up to the pleasure of the

20:48committee if you would like for me to

20:50our team to reach out to them and see if

20:52they're interested in continuing to

20:54serve or if you guys would prefer to do

20:56it. I would say that as far as Mr.

20:59Varner's concerned, the building

21:00contractor position has been vacant

21:03prior to him agreeing to serve. It was

21:06vacant for almost 10 years. So, and

21:09unless you know another building

21:11contractor that would like to take his

21:13place, I would definitely recommend that

21:14we re-elect position as well.

21:17>> Okay.

21:18Um

21:21>> If you would like to If you guys would

21:23like to reach out to her in the next 2

21:25weeks, we can bring them back up at the

21:27next meeting.

21:28>> Um could reach out to them, verify that

21:32they're willing to be reappointed, and

21:35um

21:36send us their resume, background info.

21:40Um that would be helpful.

21:41>> Okay.

21:42>> Yeah.

21:43>> And then we can add it again to the next

21:45the next agenda for a vote.

21:47>> And what uh when do those terms actually

21:50expire?

21:51>> So, Mr. Warner's term expires November

21:5425th.

21:56And I've got to verify with the city

21:58clerk's office, but it looks like Ms.

22:00Frazee's term expired last year, and we

22:03it we missed it.

22:05>> You don't even have to ask people to

22:06show up.

22:07>> Isn't it nice?

22:09>> Okay.

22:11Yeah, so we'll um

22:14carry that one over to our

```*