2026-09-14 - Board of Zoning Adjustment

00:002028,

00:01excuse me, 2026 board of adjustment to

00:04order. Um, first I've got some rules to

00:08announce and basic operating procedures

00:10for the meeting. I would ask that if you

00:13got electronic device, first of all,

00:14that you turn on silent or off so we

00:16don't have a disturbance during the

00:18meeting. If you have any handouts that

00:20we have not received already, if you'll

00:22give them to staff so we can disseminate

00:25those now, it'd be beneficial so that we

00:27don't have to stop and try to do that um

00:31through the meeting. All right. So,

00:34first of all, uh as you have an agenda

00:38item called, we'll ask that the

00:39applicant come to the podium and give

00:42their name and address for the record.

00:44If you got more than one, I'm going to

00:46ask the same thing again for the next

00:48application.

00:50There we have a limit of four people to

00:52speak in for in favor of an application

00:55or a request and four in opposition.

00:59If you've got more than four, pick your

01:00best four. As I always say, you have

01:02five minute time limit. When you get to

01:06the fourth minute and you have a minute

01:08left, they'll give you a little

01:09reminder. Um, and then if you will

01:13summarize it. If we ask questions or we

01:16feel we need more information, we can

01:18extend that time and that's at my

01:19discretion. Um, we'll try to be

01:22considerate everyone's time here today.

01:25And the the applicant after that will

01:28get a twominut opportunity for rebuttal

01:31to explain or answer any of the

01:33questions that may come up from uh

01:35statements.

01:37Uh after that's completed, I'll call for

01:39the end of public hearing and then we'll

01:42go into deliberation of the board. The

01:44board's decisions

01:46will be ma will be made at that point or

01:50a recommendation either for a hold over

01:52or whatever. And then if you have

01:54questions, the planning department's

01:57number is 2512085895.

02:01And if there's a decision of the board

02:03that is appealed, it's appealed to

02:05circuit court.

02:08And let's see what else may I say at

02:10this time.

02:12If there's any board member that has a

02:15need to recuse themsel, we'll have a

02:17supernumemerary fill in during their

02:20time period and then we'll have that

02:23opportunity for that board member to

02:25come back to the u

02:28to join the board. All right. I think

02:31that's pretty much it. We'll start with

02:33a roll call and then we'll go from

02:36there. All right. Starting with Mr.

02:38Medaf

02:40>> here.

02:40>> Mr. Golden.

02:42>> Mr. Millie

02:42>> here.

02:43>> Mr. Pway.

02:45Okay. Absent.

02:48Mr. Morris

02:48>> here.

02:49>> Mr. Furell. Okay. Absent. Mr. Ason

02:53>> here.

02:54>> Mr. Williams

02:55>> here.

02:56>> And I'm William Guest. So we have a

02:58quorum. We also have at least one

03:01serving in a supernumeary position at a

03:04time. We'll alternate as needed. And

03:07with that, we'll entertain a motion to

03:10adopt the agenda as presented.

03:13>> So move.

03:14>> Have a motion to approve. Do I have a

03:15second?

03:16>> Second.

03:17>> Have a second. Any further discussion?

03:19All those in favor say I.

03:20>> I. Anyone opposed? Agenda is adopted as

03:24presented. All right. We're going to go

03:26in order and starting with the hold over

03:29which is 66754708

03:322160 676437

03:35regarding 1308 Old Shell Road if the

03:39applicant. Yes.

03:41>> And Mr. Golden is going to recuse

03:44himself and we'll start with um Mr.

03:47Williams on this one as the super

03:49numerator.

03:50>> Don't we need both of them because we

03:52have two absences?

03:53>> Yes, you're right. Thank you for that.

03:55So, we'll have both will be voting at

03:57this time and Mr. Aston is a uh

04:00representing one of the other board

04:02members. Yes, sir. Your name and

04:04address.

04:04>> All right. My name is Evan Bett.

04:06>> You got to pull up the mic for your

04:07height.

04:09>> There you go. My name is Evan Berdett. I

04:12live at 79 South Street, Mobile, Alabama

04:14360604.

04:17>> Okay. And you want to once again tell

04:18the board why we should consider this

04:20application? uh we actually changed the

04:24site plan and so we dropped it from 10

04:26lots down to eight lots and so we no

04:29longer need the lot size variance. Uh

04:31we're above the 6,000 square ft that's

04:34required by the zoning ordinance. We are

04:36only requesting the um side setback

04:40variance and that's because these are

04:42narrow lots and we need to fit our

04:44patios and our mechanical systems like

04:47our AC units and our generators.

04:50Okay. Uh, questions of the board for the

04:54applicant,

04:57>> Mr. Chairman.

04:58>> Yes.

04:58>> Just out of curiosity, on lot six, show

05:01a dash line, which typically looks like

05:03an easement that's 7.7 ft wide. What is

05:06that

05:07>> in the back on the side? That's the rear

05:09alleyway.

05:10>> No, I'm talking about that runs east to

05:13west. Seven and seven and 3/4t.

05:17>> Um,

05:20okay. I'm looking at I'm looking at a

05:21survey.

05:22>> Okay.

05:22>> Okay.

05:23>> Yes, sir.

05:24>> All right.

05:25Okay. Any additional questions of the

05:27board for the applicant?

05:29>> I just have a comment, Mr. Chair. Um,

05:32just looking at the updated site plan, I

05:35appreciate what y'all did because I

05:36think taking to heart the comments

05:38before and reworking it and trying to

05:40get those lots up around 6,000. So, I

05:42appreciate that.

05:43>> Yes, sir. Thank you.

05:45>> Quick question. Uh just looking at the

05:47site plan, where where is the driveway

05:49and the parking? Is it shown on a

05:50different document?

05:51>> It's the easement. Uh I wouldn't look at

05:53the 25 foot setbacks, but it's the

05:55easement that comes off of North and

05:56Street and it goes from what is that

06:00east to west and then it goes north in

06:03on the rear portion of lots for lot 6

06:05through 8.

06:08>> And then there'll be

06:11>> Yeah.

06:14Okay. Any additional questions for the

06:16board?

06:19>> One more. Not that it really is gerine

06:21to this, but your plans are to sell the

06:23lots or to develop them yourself?

06:26>> We're probably going to do a little bit

06:27of both. Yes, sir.

06:28>> Okay. All right. Thank you, sir.

06:31>> Okay. Um, do we have any public comments

06:35regarding this

06:37application?

06:38>> Yes, sir. We had one comment regarding

06:40this application.

06:42>> Okay. And that should be in our packet

06:45as well, right?

06:46>> Yes, sir. It is on your iPads.

06:49>> Okay.

06:55Okay.

06:57All right.

06:59All right. Do we have anyone in favor of

07:01the application would like to speak in

07:02support of it? Anyone in opposition

07:05today that's here? Okay. Sir, if you'll

07:07have a seat, if you'll come to the

07:09podium, please.

07:11Whoever's in opposition, right?

07:16>> Uh, do you have public com or comments?

07:19>> Yes, sir.

07:20>> Yeah. Your name and address, please.

07:23>> My name is Comey Hall, Senior. I'm a

07:25resident Mobile. My address is 111 North

07:28Street, Mobile, Alabama 3664.

07:33And

07:33>> you're in opposition?

07:34>> Yes, sir. I'm in opposition.

07:36>> Do you have a particular reason you

07:38would like to share with the board?

07:40>> Yes, sir. Um, I'm a longtime resident of

07:42Mobile. Um, I have uh I live at I've

07:45lived at that property for three

07:47generations. My grandmother originally

07:49brought that property on 111 North An

07:51Street. [snorts]

07:53Um, I believe um I see that the changes

07:57have been made to eight homes. Um,

08:00originally it was 10. Um, just a little

08:03background about myself. Um,

08:07this is more than just a house or a

08:09property. My home is one of the oldest

08:12homes on the block. Um,

08:15and it represents generations of uh my

08:17family's history. Um, my grandmother was

08:19there. Uh, she raised her children there

08:22and my father raised us there. Um,

08:27I'm I'm just in opposition of the amount

08:30of homes that's going to be in that that

08:33um plot. Um, I think it should be a lot

08:37smaller um, as far as the amount of

08:40homes.

08:42>> I'm looking at an aerial and it shows on

08:46Bush Avenue kind of a series of homes

08:48that are in a very similar layout. Are

08:50you familiar with those?

08:51>> Yes, sir.

08:52>> Are do they seem like they're on similar

08:55lot lines and

08:59size lots?

09:00>> I would say mainly on that on that

09:03street. Um the lot sizes are fairly

09:05large. Um

09:08now in conjunction with Bush Avenue

09:13still I'm just not in agreeance with uh

09:15the amount of homes.

09:17>> Okay. All right. Any other questions of

09:19the board?

09:21>> All right. Thank you, sir.

09:22>> All right. Thank you.

09:23>> All right. Anyone else in opposition?

09:25Yes, sir.

09:28I'm not getting back here.

09:35your name and address, sir?

09:36>> My name is John Le Perry, 115 North Anne

09:39Street.

09:41Uh, chairman, guests, members of the

09:43board. Um,

09:47>> yeah.

09:47>> Oops. Sorry. Okay.

09:51I'm here today because this proposal is

09:53uh they've reduced the amount to uh get

09:57it into compliance. So, but the thing is

10:01eight houses is uh

10:04you know that it's kind of like just

10:07moving the finish line a little so they

10:09could get still get the maximum amount

10:10of houses. I mean, eight houses is still

10:13a lot. Um my house is almost 3/4 of an

10:18acre and it's less than 100 ft from the

10:21property. Um the houses on an street,

10:25North An Street, that section, they tend

10:27to be larger lots. Even the lots on Old

10:29Shell. Uh Bush Avenue was developed

10:33around 1905. A different type of

10:36development. It's different than the

10:38houses on N Street and probably at the

10:41old Shell. I mean, I've spoken to a

10:43longtime resident of Bush Avenue. And

10:45he's his parents, his family's owned the

10:48house since 1905. And he says that as

10:51far as he knew, those houses were built

10:53on spec as well. So naturally, they

10:56weren't going to have this amount of

10:58land around them that a house that was

11:01built by a an owner for themselves would

11:04have. Um, this neighborhood is part of

11:08the old Mobile's old Dolphin Way

11:10historic district. It's one of the

11:11largest historic districts. This

11:14development began in the 1830s and 1840s

11:16along the roads leading west from

11:18downtown, including Old Shell Road and

11:20Dolphin Street. Over time, it grew into

11:22a residential neighborhood defined by

11:24single family homes, cottages, porches,

11:26mature trees, consistent spacing, and a

11:28human scale streetscape. That history is

11:31why compatibility matters so much here.

11:35I just want to say I'm not opposed to

11:36reasonable development, but this

11:38proposal is not responsible. as

11:40presented 10 h well even eight houses on

11:43the site would impose a level of density

11:45that does not fit the established

11:48pattern

11:49of the houses on North Street or the

11:52houses on Old Shell and there are some

11:54houses on Bush Avenue that do have

11:56larger spacing.

11:59Um

12:02the the Mobile Unified Development Code

12:05and historic district overlay are

12:07intended to prevent exactly this type of

12:09incompatibility

12:10in a historic neighborhood. Dimensional

12:12standards are not mere formalities. They

12:15are protections of the neighborhood

12:17scale, spacing, and character.

12:21I um I know that they've reduced the

12:23density of you know, Mr. Miller had

12:26objected to it last time. I know they've

12:28reduced the density so they, you know,

12:30they just slid under the line where they

12:32don't need a variance, but

12:35I mean, six houses would really be much

12:37better. It would kind of fit in better

12:40with that immediate streetscape.

12:42But I mean, I'll leave that to your

12:44discretion obviously, but I mean that

12:46was kind of what I thought would be

12:48ideal, especially that artshaped kind of

12:52triangular lot on the at the end of the

12:55properties. I don't know which lot

12:57number it is, but I mean that's a di a

13:00diagonal piece of property. I don't I'm

13:03kind of wondering how you know what the

13:05dimensions of that lot are. I mean I I

13:07don't know. I had a I really prepared in

13:11case they didn't change their plan, but

13:13they did. But for my from where I stand,

13:17that's eight houses still a lot for that

13:19particular location. So, thank you for

13:22listening to me.

13:23>> Okay. Thank you.

13:24>> I have a question,

13:25>> Mr. Uh sir, he has a question. Mr.

13:27Morris does. Sorry.

13:28>> Have Have you all or any of the people

13:31in the community met with the developer

13:33in regard?

13:34>> The developer asked me at the end of the

13:35last meeting. It was another gentleman,

13:37not the two gentlemen that are here

13:39today. He asked for my phone number,

13:40which I gave him and I'm still waiting

13:42for that call.

13:43>> Okay. Thank you.

13:44>> Sure.

13:45>> Yeah. Any other questions?

13:48All right. Anyone else who would like to

13:49speak in opposition?

13:52All right. Sir, if you would like to uh

13:56offer a rebuttal.

14:05It's a note that the uh city's

14:09engineering department and the planning

14:11commission approved our lots and that

14:13they are above what is allowed by the

14:16zoning ordinance.

14:18Um we're just strictly asking for the

14:20setback variances right now.

14:23Okay. Question over there.

14:26>> He has Mr. Sir, he has Mr. Morris has a

14:29question for you.

14:29>> Uh the gentleman just stepped down said

14:32he asked the question. Had you met with

14:35Have they met with you?

14:36>> We met with the Old Dolphin Way

14:38Neighborhood Association, but I have not

14:40met with uh the gentleman we spoke

14:43before. No.

14:44>> So, how many members of that consist of

14:46uh the board? I think it's 15 people. 15

14:50people

14:51>> from that community.

14:52>> Yes.

14:53>> Okay.

14:53>> And I also live on the street, too.

14:56>> Okay. Thank you.

14:57>> Yes, sir.

14:57>> All right. Thank you. All right. That'll

14:59conclude our public hearing regarding

15:01this

15:03request for variance and um sideyard

15:07setback is the primary issue today.

15:11Correct, staff?

15:19So, our application or our agenda says

15:22it's for

15:25substandard size lots, but that's not

15:27the case today.

15:28>> That was the original request that the

15:30applicant then revised their site plan,

15:32but we did not receive that revised site

15:34plan in time to advertise it with an

15:36adjusted uh description. So, you've got

15:38the original request on the agenda. With

15:41the revised site plan, they do not need

15:43that s the lot size request like you

15:46said. So that request is a moot point,

15:48but they do still need the uh zero foot

15:50setback as they are requesting.

15:52>> Okay. All right.

15:54Thank you. All right. Once again, any

15:57comments, questions of the board?

16:01>> All right. With that, chair entertain a

16:03motion.

16:06>> Mr. Chairman,

16:07>> yes. Although we're not here to discuss

16:09the uh um the site plan, that was the

16:11concern of both of those um residents.

16:14Um and I'm a resident of the

16:16neighborhood as well, pretty close by.

16:18Just wanted to tell uh say that I'm

16:20thrilled about it and I think it's going

16:22to help everybody's u property values in

16:24the area. Um and it will probably

16:27encourage some redevelopment of some

16:29structures that need to be redeveloped.

16:31Anyway, that being said, I move for

16:33approval

16:33>> subject to findings of facts and

16:35conditions. Okay, I have a motion with

16:38funding effect and staff's conditions.

16:41Do I have a second?

16:43>> Second.

16:44>> I have a second. Any further discussion?

16:47All those in favor of the motion say I.

16:49>> I.

16:50>> I.

16:52Anyone opposed? Motion carries.

16:55All right, let's go to uh number two on

16:58the agenda, which is 65376205

17:02regarding 2600

17:04Burden Lane.

17:08>> Pardon?

17:10>> Oh, okay.

17:13>> Has joined us.

17:15>> All right. Just for the record. And uh

17:19your name, sir?

17:20>> Steven Harvey, 11 North Water Street,

17:23Mobile. I'm here with uh I'm with McDow

17:26Knight Law Firm. I'm here for the

17:28applicant Alabama Export Railroad.

17:31I've been down here several times on

17:33this. I can go into the project if y'all

17:35want to. I really don't have anything to

17:37say uh than I did before. The permitting

17:40is it's a big project. It's taken a long

17:42time with the core of engineers. Um I

17:44think the staff says this is our fourth

17:47extension request and I think that's

17:49right. Um how long did we extend this

17:52last time?

17:53>> A year. And that's what I'd like to ask.

17:55Again, I and I want a point of

17:58clarification, too. Bert Hoffman asked

18:00me, told me I should ask for this. I

18:02think I finally convinced my client.

18:05This is This project's going to be done

18:06in phases. I think I finally convinced

18:08them to get the permitting done for the

18:11first phase and get that moved along to

18:14at least get a land disturbance permit

18:16for the first page, first phase, so I

18:18don't have to come back down here again.

18:20Um, but Bert said, I Mr. Mr. Hoffman

18:23said I should ask for clarification that

18:25if you've got a project that has gotten

18:27this this special exception approval by

18:29the board of adjustment. If you're doing

18:31the project in phases, if we just pull a

18:34land disturbance permit on the first

18:36phase, then the the approval is vested

18:39for the entire project from that point

18:41forward.

18:42>> I'll do my council on that.

18:47>> Okay. We would just ask a year to get

18:50that first phase um at least a land

18:53disturbance permit pulled.

18:55>> So are you still waiting on the core? Is

18:57that

18:57>> I that that's what I understand. I'm not

18:59involved with the core, but they're

19:01telling me they're still working with a

19:02core on wetlands delineations. It's got

19:05a lot of wetlands. It's on three miles

19:06creek and waterways run all the way.

19:08Drainage runs all through there.

19:10>> I think they're also trying to get a

19:12rail spur, another rail spur. Yeah, it's

19:15going to be

19:17>> and that getting one from any of the

19:19railroads takes

19:20>> multiple agencies involved on this

19:22project. I understand it's not just a

19:25normal city project.

19:27>> All right. Any questions of the board?

19:30>> Stephen, I've got a question. As far as

19:31the uh phase one, is that a single

19:34building of you know,

19:36>> it's going to be a warehouse and they're

19:38put in another rail spur to service that

19:40warehouse. Um

19:42>> Okay. But I I I think it's just one

19:44building for that one. Yeah. For the

19:45first phase. I think they're intended to

19:47do the first one's going to be about

19:50>> 20 20 something acres or something like

19:52that.

19:53>> This is the whole site's like 190. I

19:55think

19:57>> Okay. Any additional questions?

20:01Any additional questions of the board

20:02for the applicants are up.

20:04>> All right. Do we have anyone here in

20:06support of the application would like to

20:08add anything we probably haven't already

20:10heard? Anyone in opposition today?

20:14Okay. Do we have any public comments

20:16regarding this one?

20:17>> No sir, we do not.

20:18>> Okay. And I would say just based on the

20:22number of agencies both federal and

20:25local that this is definitely a very

20:27complicated project and we did authorize

20:32the variance before and a series of

20:34extensions.

20:35Um, I'm not normally in favor of this

20:39many, but based on the complexity of

20:41this particular project, it may be

20:44warranted.

20:45All right, that'll conclude our public

20:47hearing regarding this application.

20:49Chair entertain

20:51opportunity to extend it another year as

20:54applicant request.

20:58>> Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion that we

21:00extend it for one year. Second. I have a

21:03second. Any further discussion? All

21:05those in favor say I. I.

21:07>> I. Anyone opposed. Motion carries.

21:10>> All right. Application 36689

21:13regarding 401 St. Louis Street. This is

21:16also uh an extension.

21:21>> Good afternoon.

21:22>> Good afternoon. Name and address.

21:24>> Steven How the developer for the

21:26project. Uh business address is 257

21:28North Conception Street. This is our

21:32second uh variance extension. This is

21:34our is this our second variance

21:36extension?

21:38Yes. Um we

21:42since we initially received the variance

21:44approvals uh last year, we had a couple

21:48of different issues to work through.

21:49First being the cost um that we've been

21:51able to resolve with the support of the

21:53city uh as of August. Um the second was

21:57a survey issue on the uh 313 lot which

22:01is the second parcel that's part of this

22:03project. Um we intend to move forward

22:07with both of those at the same time but

22:09we the survey issue that we uncovered in

22:11doing some coordination with the St.

22:13Louis complete streets project. Um, it

22:16wasn't an issue with the with the

22:17complete streets project itself, but it

22:19exposed a uh survey issue that we had

22:23that we had to work through where we had

22:25an overlap uh legal description on a a

22:28previously approved subdivision. So, um

22:31had to work through that, been able to

22:32design around it. Still got a little bit

22:34of work to do with the neighbor to clean

22:35up the title work, but we've got a great

22:37report with them and um so that's we're

22:41close finally.

22:43>> Okay. And what time period are you

22:45asking for?

22:46>> Um, I think our previous extensions were

22:486 months. I think that 3 months is would

22:50be more than enough. 90 days.

22:53>> Okay.

22:53>> So, six wouldn't hurt your feelings.

22:55>> Six would not hurt my feelings.

22:57>> Yeah. All right. Questions of the board

22:59for the applicant.

23:03All right. Um, anyone in the audience

23:05either in support or opposition today?

23:08Uh, no public comment on this one

23:10either. All right. That'll conclude our

23:13public hearing regarding the u request

23:16for an extension.

23:18Chair, entertain a motion. Mr.

23:20>> Chairman, I make a motion to extend for

23:226 months

23:23>> based on findings of facts.

23:25>> Yes.

23:25>> Okay. Do I have a second?

23:27>> Second.

23:28>> Have a second. Any further discussion?

23:30All those in favor say I.

23:31>> I.

23:32>> Anyone opposed? Motion carries. All

23:34right. Extension

23:37application number four 6690

23:40and it's regarding southoutheast corner

23:43of St. Louis and North Clear Barn

23:45Street.

23:46>> It's a

23:47>> name and address for the record.

23:49>> Steven how 257 North Conception Street

23:52>> and same project just different

23:55>> same project same reasons.

23:57>> Okay.

23:58>> Yes sir.

23:59>> All right. Any questions of the board

24:00for the applicant?

24:03>> Six month as well. Yes, sir.

24:05>> All right.

24:07Anyone here either in support or

24:09opposition?

24:11All right. Thank you, sir.

24:12>> Thank you.

24:15>> That'll conclude our public hearing

24:17regarding the extension. Chair,

24:19entertain a motion.

24:20>> Chairman, I move for a six-month

24:22extension based on the finance of fact.

24:23>> Okay. A motion to approve based on

24:25findings fact. Do I have a second?

24:29>> Second.

24:29>> Have a second. Any further discussion?

24:32All those in favor say I.

24:33>> I. I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries.

24:37All right. Now we're into our regular

24:40business, I would say, is application

24:436776

24:45regarding 2260 Pezno Court.

24:50Hope I pronounced that correctly.

24:52>> Yeah, that's correct. And your name and

24:55>> Good afternoon everybody. My name is

24:56Arthur Marquez. The physical address is

24:582260 Pesl Court. I'm here on behalf of

25:03Brookside. Uh what we are seeking to do

25:05today is to add an additional use to our

25:08current R3 zoning, which would allow us

25:11to take a portion of a unused building

25:16and turn it into office space. Uh that

25:19would be complimentary to the se uh for

25:23businesses that would be complimentary

25:24to the seniors that live on the campus.

25:28There will be no modifications to the

25:30elevation of the building. There won't

25:32be any structure needed for structure

25:34modifications or demolition or

25:37remodeling on the exterior nor the

25:40interior. So again, uh we're just adding

25:44an additional use that is commensurate

25:46to what we can see by line of sight from

25:49the building on Cottage Hill. And we

25:52believe it would be an asset for the

25:54campus and the community, allowing uh

25:57our seniors to have uh complimentary

25:59businesses

26:01uh that they would have the option of

26:04using while living at Brookside.

26:07And I think you stated this is in a

26:11building that was already designed for

26:13office space.

26:14>> No, this building was designed as an

26:16assisted living building. So, it's uh

26:19frankly overengineered for what I'm

26:21asking from the board. But um this is a

26:26a um a permitted under our PUD use.

26:30However, for R3, we do need to ask that

26:34u we get a revision and an update on the

26:36on the usage of it.

26:38>> Okay. And would you have special signage

26:40associated with this?

26:41>> I don't believe we would need any

26:43special signage needed for that at this

26:45time.

26:46>> Okay. I I remember this project quite

26:49well. I had a chance to actually tour it

26:51before we voted on it first time.

26:53>> Oh. Way back in 989 then?

26:55>> Some time ago.

26:56>> Yes.

26:57>> Yeah. All right. questions of the board

27:00for the applicant.

27:01>> Mr. Chairman,

27:02>> yes.

27:02>> Um, what would the intended uses be?

27:05What are you visioning or do you have

27:06already have specific uses that

27:08>> uh so what we would believe would be

27:11complimentary are vision

27:14uh hearing

27:16um

27:18VA type situations things that uh we

27:22perceive the seniors we're 55 and over

27:25campus okay so we wouldn't be

27:27exclusively open for business or those

27:30um

27:32businesses there that reside within

27:34Brookside would not be specifically for

27:37the residents of Brookside. It would be

27:38open to the public as well and in our

27:41area of Mobile. You know, there's quite

27:43a bit of of seniors that live in that

27:45area. So, we think this would be a

27:47definite compliment to for the

27:48community.

27:49>> I think it's a great idea.

27:50>> Thank you.

27:51>> All right. Any other question?

27:52>> Any other questions of the board for the

27:57>> All right. Anyone either in support or

28:00opposition today?

28:03All right. All right. Do we have any

28:04public comment regarding this?

28:06>> No, sir, we do not.

28:08>> Okay. Um, just some follow-up questions.

28:12>> Yeah.

28:13>> So, having, like I said, been familiar

28:16with your facilities, uh, parking, all

28:20that is,

28:21>> we're overparked. We have 87 spaces

28:24there,

28:25>> uh, in the adjacent to the building. Uh,

28:28this project required, I think by law,

28:3032

28:31spaces. So, we're extremely overparked.

28:34>> Okay.

28:35>> That's why it seemed logical to me to

28:37find another beneficial use for the

28:39building since we really didn't need to

28:42do anything to the physical elevation,

28:43the outside, the inside parking or

28:45anything like that.

28:47>> Okay. Thank you.

28:48>> You're welcome.

28:49>> All right. I would say that concludes

28:52our public hearing regarding the

28:54application

28:56and

28:58discussion of the board.

29:00>> I have a question, Mr. Chairman. I think

29:02maybe for staff

29:05um you mean one of the things that I

29:07think influences me as far as being

29:10positive on this is the fact that it'll

29:12be businesses that are geared towards

29:14that community. And so if we were to

29:17approve this, I mean, is there any type

29:20of I guess language or anything that we

29:22should put in there as far as I guess

29:25I'm just thinking forward with regards

29:27to if if you know down the road

29:29something changed and it was you know

29:32commercial office or businesses that

29:34were not really and how you can police

29:37it. I don't know.

29:41>> I'm not sure that you can. I think that

29:43the uh the request is to allow an

29:45office. So, we can't really restrict if

29:48that office use is associated with the

29:50senior living development of that

29:52property by the granting of this

29:53variance. Although, I'm glad to let Mr.

29:57Anderson put his input in.

29:58>> I agree. I think you could the motion

30:01could be office in um professional

30:04offices like the doctor, aiologist or

30:07whatever. Um I think that's that's the

30:10limit you can go.

30:11>> Okay. Thank you. Well, to that's a very

30:14good question, Mr. Mill, to respond to

30:17that question.

30:18>> Sir, we we've concluded the public

30:20hearing.

30:20>> Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, I was just gonna

30:21say very good question.

30:22>> I can't allow you to speak again at this

30:24point.

30:25>> All right,

30:28M. Millie, did we did we address your

30:30questions?

30:31>> Okay. All right. Do I have a motion to

30:35approve with the findings of fact and

30:37then the staff has conditions? If you'll

30:40look at those, make sure that they're

30:41addressed as well. Occupancy,

30:44engineering comments, traffic.

30:52I don't see anything there that I don't

30:54think you would necessarily disagree

30:56with. Okay.

30:58All right. So, once again, motion to

31:00approve.

31:02>> Motion to approve with finding the facts

31:04and the following conditions one through

31:07six.

31:08>> Okay. And do I have a second?

31:10>> Second.

31:11>> I have a second. Any further discussion?

31:14All those in favor say I.

31:15>> I. I.

31:16>> Anyone opposed? Okay. Motion carries

31:18with those conditions and findings

31:21effect. Application six, which is 6777

31:266655604

31:28regarding 429 Lincoln Boulevard.

31:32Good afternoon. Your name and address?

31:34Zeke Hudson with Row Engineering and

31:36Surveying 3502 Loft and Drive Mobile. Uh

31:39we're requesting the side street

31:41setback. Uh currently it's at 25 ft. Uh

31:44this is a three lot subdivision with all

31:47uh new construction will be fronting on

31:49Lincoln Boulevard. Uh it's not out of

31:51characteristic for 12th Street. If you

31:53look at 12th Street, there's several

31:56homes that are there's one in particular

31:59that I know it's 12 feet from the steps

32:02of the porch to the edge of pavement. Uh

32:04so we're requesting to reduce that 25 ft

32:06set back to 10. These are very small

32:08lots. This would give us a little bit

32:10more buildable area.

32:14All right. questions of the board.

32:25So, Mr. Chairman, just to be clear, so

32:27reading the his site history comments,

32:30we approved in March of 2025

32:35setback varants for reduced side street

32:38sideyard, but no permits were obtained

32:40and so it subsequently expired. So, same

32:44request.

32:45>> That's correct.

32:46>> Okay. Thanks.

32:47>> Thank you.

32:48>> Thank you for uh bringing that to

32:49attention of the board.

32:51>> All right. Once again, any questions of

32:53the board for the applicant?

32:56>> All right. Do we have anyone here either

32:58in support or opposition today?

33:02Do we have any public comments on this

33:04one?

33:05>> No, sir, we do not.

33:07>> Okay.

33:09And as mentioned, this was previously

33:11approved but had the uh based on time

33:14lapsed.

33:16With that, chair entertain a motion.

33:19Move for approval, Mr. Chairman, subject

33:20to findings of facts and conditions one

33:22through three.

33:23>> Okay. A motion to approve based on

33:25findings of fact. Do I have a second?

33:28>> Second. Have a second. Further

33:29discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

33:32>> I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. All

33:35right. Application seven which is

33:376778663

33:40regarding 1501 Spring Hill Avenue.

33:52>> Good afternoon. My name is Derka Smith.

33:54My address is 1567 West Avenue. Um I was

33:58actually approved um back in April of

34:012024. Um I missed the window of

34:03opportunity to applying for my permit.

34:05So, I'm back here again. Um, since then,

34:08there there aren't any other changes.

34:10Um, we've already made all of the uh the

34:13requests uh to make the changes uh to

34:16the plan previously, so everything is

34:18just pretty much the same.

34:20>> Okay.

34:27>> So, this is not necessarily an

34:29extension. You're actually

34:31>> just trying to get the variance.

34:32>> Yes, sir.

34:33>> Okay. Questions of the board for the

34:35applicant

34:38and for staff. Did everything get turned

34:40in last time we just other than just

34:42getting the permits? I take it

34:44>> that is correct. The approval the

34:45special exception was granted previously

34:47but was allowed to expire. So she's here

34:49to get that special exception granted

34:51again.

34:51>> Okay. All right. Once again, questions

34:54of the board.

34:56>> Just clarify no changes to what we

34:58approved previously.

35:00>> That is correct.

35:01>> Thank you.

35:02>> All right. Anyone in the audience either

35:04in support or opposition today?

35:07Do we have any public comment on this

35:09one?

35:10>> No comments.

35:11>> Okay. Well, thank you. That'll conclude

35:13our public hearing regarding the

35:14application.

35:16And as the applicant has stated, this

35:18was previously approved based on

35:20findings of fact and it was a special

35:23exception at that time. With that, chair

35:25entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I'll make

35:28a motion to approve subject to findings

35:30of fact A through L and also the

35:33conditions one through four.

35:35>> Okay. I have a motion to approve. Do I

35:36have a second?

35:37>> Have a second.

35:38>> Further discussion?

35:40>> All those in favor say I.

35:41>> I.

35:42>> I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries.

35:45>> All right. Application 8 6779 regarding

35:483680 Dolphin Street.

35:55Your name and address, sir?

35:58put my glasses on. Um Tom Witers with

36:01Night Sign Industries were representing

36:03Bryant Bank and Michael Holland for this

36:06particular variance for um we're

36:08requesting three signs on the building

36:11um the v um for the additional variance

36:13with that and the the reason for that um

36:17one of the more unique properties that

36:20he has or with the building is that

36:22there's three different entrances in not

36:24only into the parking lot but also into

36:26the building. Um, and so we just feel

36:28like it would not only help create um,

36:31or eliminate some of the traffic issues

36:32that could potentially come up with

36:34that, but it also faces three road

36:35frontages.

36:37>> This is this previous location for a

36:40restaurant. Um,

36:42>> I think so. That's correct.

36:44>> Did they have similar number of signs?

36:47Do we know? I don't remember. Of course,

36:50they didn't have three entrances.

36:52>> One on the facade and then one on the

36:54street.

36:55>> Okay.

36:56All right. Um, questions the board for

36:58the applicant.

37:16All right. I think we have none. Um,

37:20anyone in the audience either in support

37:21or opposition today?

37:24Any public comments?

37:26>> No, sir.

37:27>> All right. Thank you. That'll conclude

37:30our public hearing regarding the

37:31application.

37:33Um,

37:36it's kind of a

37:38if I remember right, an odd partial the

37:41way it kind of comes around that corner.

37:53Yeah,

37:56we have a question for you.

38:00Sorry, you having to come back to the

38:01podium. Mr. Merv has a question for you.

38:05>> Curious if those I'm seeing the picture,

38:07so the signs are already there.

38:09>> Yes, sir.

38:09>> So, this is after the fact.

38:11>> Well, we actually requested these up

38:13front. We got four electrical permits

38:16and we um our project manager submitted

38:19two of them together because they were

38:21exact same size sign. So we've been up

38:24front with with that all three of those

38:26from the beginning. Uh only at the final

38:29inspection were we aware that there was

38:30a violation of having the third one uh

38:33on the building.

38:35>> Okay. Thank you. [clears throat]

38:36>> Yes, sir.

38:41>> All right. Any further questions?

38:45All right. With that, chair entertain a

38:48motion.

38:52>> Motion to approve, Mr. Chairman. Based

38:54on findings of fact.

38:55>> Have a motion to approve based on

38:56findings of fact. Do I have a second?

38:58>> Second.

38:59>> Have a second. Any further discussion?

39:02All those in favor of the motion say I.

39:05I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries.

39:08>> All right. We're on application nine.

39:10Correct.

39:12This is 6780 regarding west side of

39:15Marston Lane and 100 ft plus or minus

39:19south of Exel Lane.

39:22Name and address, sir. My name is Zach

39:23Balet. I'm at 633 Chelsea Drive East in

39:26Mobile. I'm the owner of the potential

39:30house and me and my family are trying to

39:33build a house and we're asking for a

39:35additional 5% lot coverage and a

39:38reduction of 5t on the setback and the

39:41the main issue or reason for this

39:43request is that the irregular shape of

39:45the lot where it narrows from back to

39:48front it's reduces the buildable space

39:51that we have.

39:54Okay.

39:56Questions of the board for the

39:58applicant.

40:05I think some of us are trying to get our

40:06files open and where we need them.

40:12>> Jim, how big is the house?

40:15>> First floor is about 4,100.

40:18>> First floor,

40:18>> garage, porches, you know, not just

40:20heating and cold, it's everything.

40:24Do you [clears throat] know what the

40:25actual site coverage is?

40:27>> The site coverage is 4,100. That's the

40:29first floor site coverage. Okay. No, I

40:32made percentage of site coverage. 40%.

40:34So, it's 5%.

40:37That includes the carport, too, right?

40:40>> That would be all structures. Yes, sir.

40:42>> Yeah.

40:44>> Right. All right. Questions of the board

40:46for the applicant?

41:01and so you're within the 25 ft setback

41:04front

41:06for the garage. It looks like you know

41:09what

41:09>> the garage would be within It'd be at 20

41:12foot. Okay.

41:15All right. Questions of the board for

41:16the applicant?

41:19Anyone

41:22in favor of the application in the

41:24audience? Anyone in opposition today?

41:28All right. Thank you, sir. Um, public

41:31comments.

41:32>> Yes, sir. We received several comments

41:34uh in support and they're on your iPad.

41:37>> Okay.

42:08All right. If you'll have a seat.

42:10>> Thank you.

42:11>> All right. Discussion of the board.

42:19Mr. Chairman, I think just looking at

42:22the aerial and being a little familiar

42:23with the neighborhood, I think it's

42:25consistent with, you know, other

42:27structures that have been built in that

42:28area. Um, so based on that, I would uh

42:32recommend for approval subject to

42:34findings of fact.

42:35>> Okay. I have a motion to approve.

42:37Subject to findings of fact. I would

42:39also add that we've got several public

42:41comments in support of it and my review

42:45of it, the documents. It looks like it

42:47is in character with the neighborhood.

42:51All right. I have do I have a second?

42:54>> Second.

42:54>> Have a second. Any further discussion?

42:57All those in favor say I. I

42:59>> I Anyone opposed? Motion carries.

43:02All right, let's go to uh number 10,

43:056781, 6517 Vanderbilt Drive.

43:17Jake Mosley, 5588 Jackson Road. Um we're

43:20just applying for this variance

43:23for a single family residence. There's

43:24already one there. Um, it's just zoned

43:26industrial. So, we're really just trying

43:28to get the variance to be able to

43:30rebuild the house that will eventually

43:31be torn down.

43:35>> So, there's an existing structure now.

43:37>> Yes, sir.

43:41>> And it it was annexed into the city,

43:44right? The house was there previously.

43:46So,

43:46>> yes, sir. The house has been there and

43:47then, you know, I don't know the whole

43:49process of what happened, but we're not

43:51really trying to change anything. you

43:52know, the zoning is going to stay the

43:53same and just rebuild a house that

43:56>> was there prior to the I1 zoning.

43:58>> Yes, sir. Okay.

44:01>> All right. Questions of the board for

44:03the applicant.

44:08>> All right. Uh, anyone in the audience

44:11either in support or opposition today?

44:18>> Good afternoon. Your name and address,

44:19sir?

44:20>> Uh, afternoon. My name is Arthur Clayton

44:23White. Um,

44:25I prepared to uh

44:30to do two of these today. This is I'm in

44:32favor of uh a house being built in that

44:35area. Um,

44:39I I'm here to represent not by myself,

44:41but I'm here to represent my mother,

44:43late mother who is deceased, Harriet

44:45Jones White. Um,

44:50we're we're here for Julianne Jones.

44:53Um, my address is 4050 Washington

44:56Boulevard, The Alabama 36582.

45:00Um,

45:02good afternoon ZVA board members and

45:06Mobile Citizen audience. My name's

45:07Arthur Clayton White. My deceased

45:11mother's name is Ar is Harriet Jones

45:13White. I am a taxpayer for my Jones

45:16family heir property

45:19and the owner's name Julianne Jones who

45:22is my great-grandmother.

45:25Vanderbilt Drive was a name was named

45:28after my late grandfather Reverend

45:31Vanderbilt Burke Jones senior. I was

45:34born in Mobile and raised in Theodore.

45:37I am a 61

45:40and the youngest child of Amos H. white

45:42senior

45:44and the youngest of five boys, two girls

45:48and two g two girls.

45:51I am also the Jones family patriarch

45:53since I moved back here in into our

45:5663year-old immediate family house in

46:00year 2022.

46:01the nurse care for my age 90 years years

46:04old deceased parents and I nurse care

46:09help for my two late age 70s year old

46:14brother brothers

46:16I support the building of a new house

46:19residence in that area

46:22my today's question is

46:26how will the 6781

46:29BOA 003 3853-206

46:35Royal Wilson V variance

46:38residence building request affect or

46:42effect my free slaves

46:45uh repres uh reparations historical

46:47family air property issue and can the

46:52committee now share with me at this

46:54meeting the latest plans for my land and

46:58when I and when do I finally get to meet

47:00with all Alabama's governments to

47:03discuss all the specifics.

47:05board members.

47:08I also like to make a quick note that

47:11last week I linked on and uploaded into

47:15the planning at city of Mobile

47:18government e mail address my questions

47:22and comments and concerns

47:25important and family er real estate

47:28issues between my family and and

47:30Alabama's government offices. Hopefully

47:33all of us can work hard on a meaningful

47:36resolution as soon as possible.

47:39Again, I support um the variance of uh

47:45building a new house or renovating a new

47:48house into that area. Uh and uh again, I

47:52have other comments to make about that

47:55area because it's historically my great

47:57great grandfather's uh

48:00>> to settle that area. So summarize,

48:03you're you're in support of them re or

48:06building a a residential

48:08>> or or or um

48:11>> home in in that area

48:12>> adding to what's already there.

48:14>> Okay.

48:15>> And and those are my re and those are my

48:17reasons.

48:18>> Yeah. Okay.

48:19>> So my reason.

48:20>> Any questions of the board for for this

48:22gentleman?

48:24>> All right. Thank you, sir. And you were

48:26one of the first ones here, I remember

48:28coming in today. I appreciate your time.

48:30>> Right. Um, and again, uh, my other

48:32comments about my other about my

48:34property is on your website.

48:36>> Right. Thank you.

48:38>> All right. Anyone else that would like

48:39to speak in support of the application

48:41today?

48:43Anyone in opposition?

48:46>> Okay. With that, that'll conclude our

48:48public hearing regarding the

48:49application.

48:51Comments of the board. [clears throat]

48:54>> Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out

48:55that we did receive one comment uh about

48:57this application as well.

48:58>> Yes. And I think it was

49:01from Mr. White. Yes.

49:02>> Yes.

49:03>> All right. Comments of the board.

49:06All right. With that, chair entertain a

49:08motion.

49:10>> Motion to approve with uh conditions,

49:12>> findings of fact.

49:13>> Findings of fact and

49:16number one also.

49:18>> Okay. Do I have a second?

49:20>> Second.

49:20>> Have a second. Any further discussion?

49:22All those in favor say I.

49:24>> I. Anyone opposed?

49:26>> Motion carries. All right. We're on

49:28application 11 and I believe we had a

49:32handout for the board that was to be

49:34considered as part of this

49:38application. If the applicant will come

49:40to the podium please.

49:42This is uh 6782 regarding 1600 Michigan

49:46Avenue.

49:50>> Good afternoon.

49:51>> Hello. My name is Katherine Clark and my

49:53address is 16 Common Street. Um this is

49:58for redevelopment of part of the um

50:01public housing area

50:03um on Michigan and Herail. Um so part of

50:08this is if you can see on your handout I

50:11apologize that it's so small but um you

50:14can see the yellow are the setback lines

50:18and especially the um ones on Thrush.

50:23You can see that the buildings are

50:25definitely all over that setback line.

50:27And then the um drive and parking area

50:31is also um and that's just because of

50:33the drainage areas, the constrained

50:35space

50:37um the small amount of area we have to

50:40work with in that area. Um we are also

50:43requesting for a variance for the

50:48frontage street um trees. Um and

50:52initially it was for the interior roads

50:55but we also requesting for along her

50:57tail. Now we can add some trees um to

51:01the west and the east corners. Um

51:04there's a little bit of space over there

51:06but there's wetlands along the ditch and

51:09it's narrow. Um so that's why we're

51:12requesting that and requesting for um

51:16sorry um the frontage landscape area um

51:20that percentage to be so we won't have

51:23to do that along per tail just because

51:25of the limited space available.

51:31>> The aerial

51:33gives the impression there's some

51:35sizable trees on this piece this partial

51:39land. Will any of those be retained?

51:43>> It looks like majority of your

51:45construction is right in those areas.

51:49>> I don't know the answer to that

51:51question, but I can find out the answer

51:53to that question.

51:56>> Oh, he can answer it.

51:59>> Your name and address.

52:00>> We're Sean Figures 2476 Commercial Park

52:03Drive on Figures Construction and

52:04Development. Just to give you some

52:06historical data on this, this is um a

52:09site that uh the airport authority

52:12bought from the housing authority. Um

52:14and it's an effort to move um displaced

52:17residents back to that community. Um and

52:20so we went to um federal government by

52:23way of the Alabama Housing Finance

52:25Authority won a 9% tax credit. So it's

52:28gone through that cycle. the city of

52:30Mobile has taken it on as a project, has

52:33funded in some part this project to

52:36bring those residents back. Um, and so

52:40if you know anything about this site,

52:42there's a dilapidated old housing

52:44complex there. It's 8.6 acres. We'll be

52:47tearing all the housing down on the 8.6

52:49acres and taking out the majority of the

52:52trees. We'll try to save some. Um, the

52:55Alabama Housing Finance Authority makes

52:57us safe some, but you can with the new

53:00regulations, you can understand bunch of

53:02utilities have to go in here, a bunch of

53:04new roads. Um, so we're basically

53:06cleaning the site out, putting a new

53:08town home complex. Um, the city

53:11councilman didn't want apartments, so we

53:13went with town homes, so it'll be 56

53:15town homes instead of a three-level

53:17apartment on this site.

53:20>> Okay. Questions of the board, Mr.

53:23Chairman?

53:23>> Yes, Rashan. Um, would they be similar

53:25to what when Orange Grove redeveloped

53:28with those homes, those detached homes?

53:30>> Yes, sir.

53:30>> They're designed to be something like

53:32that just so you have more of a

53:34>> neighborhood

53:34>> owner neighborhood ownership kind of

53:36feel to.

53:37>> Who's going to own the property?

53:38>> Uh, the development company will own the

53:41property.

53:41>> You are going to purchase it from the

53:42airport authority.

53:43>> Yes, sir. We're we're it it's

53:47uh a month or two from closing. Okay. um

53:49the tax credit deal, but this is one of

53:51the issues we have to get resolved

53:52before we can actually close the deal.

53:54And then we'll probably in the next

53:56three months or four months after that,

53:58we'll start construction.

53:59>> And if I'm not mistaken, um in order to

54:02get the um um HUD's approval to sell the

54:06property to the airport authority that

54:08there had to be some sort of residential

54:10component of of of the entire in order

54:14to get that uh approval.

54:15>> Exactly. Exactly.

54:16>> And some other mixeduse type stuff as

54:18well.

54:18>> Yes, sir. And this is one of six

54:20projects for the city uh

54:23>> in

54:23>> in Mobile. Um

54:25>> total Mobile

54:26>> total development 146 million. Um so um

54:30there's a big effort to get affordable

54:31housing um that looks um uh like market

54:36rate housing. So we're we're there to

54:38fill that need and partner with the city

54:39on that.

54:40>> Would that development be accessed by

54:41the new road that's being pulled into

54:43the new warehouse or would it

54:45>> No, it'll be on the opposite side. It's

54:46on Herail Street, so it's a block back

54:48from that. Yes, sir.

54:53>> Huh?

54:54>> Airbus.

54:54>> Yeah.

54:55>> Yeah.

54:56>> And so, Boyin Towers has already been

54:58led by the airport authority. It's

55:00coming down in the next couple of weeks,

55:02if not a month. Um, and there's going to

55:05be demo of the entire rest of it going

55:07along with that. So, it's brought a

55:09broader plan to bring this neighborhood

55:11back to what it was.

55:12>> Thank you.

55:13>> Yes, sir.

55:13>> Yeah. I see on the drawings that it was

55:16a little easier to depict on here that

55:18you've got playground, you've got a

55:21community center,

55:23you got a pavilion, all those areas. I

55:25would just ask that we consider some of

55:28this um I guess the um landscaping is

55:32what I'm saying.

55:34>> Yes, sir.

55:35>> I hate I hate to see all this just turn

55:37in with no trees is what I'm getting at.

55:39>> Yes, sir.

55:40>> Yeah. So that compliance with that is my

55:43main concern. I think everything else

55:45about this looks very nice.

55:47>> Okay.

55:48>> So, all right. Other questions of the of

55:51the board for the applicant?

55:53>> All right. Uh do we have public comment

55:55on this one before I ask the audience?

55:57>> Uh no sir, we did not have any comments.

55:59>> Okay. In favor or opposition today?

56:03>> Application.

56:04>> Okay. If you'll come to the podium.

56:09Take take your time, please.

56:22Good evening.

56:24>> My name is Ray Malone. Um,

56:28I live on 1617 Prairie Avenue.

56:32My backyard is

56:35Raven Drive, next to Raven Drive. We've

56:40been there since 1968.

56:43My mother, who was a widow with five

56:45girls, uh,

56:48moved there. It was called Bin. It was

56:50called Brookley Heights. Y'all probably

56:53too young to remember that. But at any

56:56rate, it was a beautiful neighborhood.

56:59We had beautiful neighbors. And some

57:03years later, they put Burville behind

57:07our backyard.

57:09Little did we know how our lives would

57:12change. Through the years, Burville has

57:15become Dodge City.

57:18Uh my sister and I, I'm 82, she's 77.

57:24Um

57:26we had a roof put on a few years ago and

57:30the contra contract came and said

57:33they found 12 bullets in our roof.

57:38Now I realize that low income people

57:42need housing. I understand that. But

57:46when your quality of life changes and

57:50you have to duck and dodge, the worst

57:53times of my life is on

57:56Fourth of July and New Year's Eve.

58:00Bullets are flying everywhere.

58:04And

58:06when they moved everybody out from

58:08behind us, I was so happy. But I called

58:12the office earlier to try to get a good

58:14understanding as to what was going to be

58:17put behind our backyard again. And they

58:21what I was told was that they were going

58:22to fix up the existing uh housing.

58:27Um

58:30I don't know how to explain it. Uh it

58:33also brings down the value of your home

58:36when when that's placed down the street

58:40from us.

58:41where main school was. They got multif

58:45family units. And this past July,

58:49fourth of July,

58:51sparks were coming over, hit our front

58:54tree, and it was right by the electrical

58:56wires.

58:58And I called the police and they must

59:01have radio cuz the minute I called the

59:03police, everything got quiet.

59:06But

59:08I'm just saying,

59:11how would you feel if you had parents

59:15with with housing behind your house that

59:19would cause you to be afraid?

59:22I don't go out at night,

59:25but even when they empty the houses out,

59:30somebody was back there shooting those

59:32automatic things that go off. not just

59:35one bullet at a time. And um

59:40I can understand people needing houses.

59:43I really can. But something has to

59:45happen in terms of uh policing

59:50and uh restrictions.

59:54Um

59:57I don't know what else to say. I'm just

59:58totally against uh fixing those houses

1:00:01back up. I called the city week before

1:00:05last cuz the grass had grown so high. We

1:00:09had all kind of animals coming on our

1:00:11patio uh possums. I guess that's what it

1:00:14was. But uh and they said that it

1:00:18belonged to Airbus

1:00:20and that they would put in a complaint

1:00:22about it,

1:00:24but it's still there.

1:00:28>> And I thank you so much for listening to

1:00:30me. Thank you for being here. Any

1:00:33questions of the board?

1:00:34>> If I may,

1:00:35>> I think I think that the developer there

1:00:37will be able to clarify some things,

1:00:39some of the concerns that you have.

1:00:40>> This is ma'am, this is already zoned R3.

1:00:43They're not change. We're not deciding

1:00:45on any change in use. What's before this

1:00:48board is set back variances for the how

1:00:53close the building will be to the

1:00:55street. So, we're not changing we're not

1:00:57changing the talking about the street.

1:00:58I'm talking about the building. Yes,

1:01:00ma'am.

1:01:01>> Yeah. But I I'd like to say that this

1:01:04gentleman might be able to better

1:01:05address your

1:01:07>> questions and concerns.

1:01:08>> Thank you.

1:01:09>> All right.

1:01:11All right. Questions or comments of the

1:01:13board while we're you Hold on. We're I

1:01:16don't think we're

1:01:18okay.

1:01:18>> Yeah. Do we have any one that would like

1:01:20to speak in opposition that has not had

1:01:23opportunity? Do we have any public

1:01:25comments on this one?

1:01:27>> No, sir. We did not.

1:01:28>> Okay. All right. you have a two-minute

1:01:30opportunity for you.

1:01:31>> Just a second, Mr. Chairman. Rashan, I

1:01:33think that she

1:01:35>> Yes, ma'am. Um

1:01:38>> I I think she thinks that the ex the

1:01:41existing houses are going to be

1:01:42renovated. You just need to clarify that

1:01:44with her.

1:01:44>> Yes, sir. I I agree with everything you

1:01:46said. We we've known that this property

1:01:48has been a nuance.

1:01:49>> Come back to the

1:01:50>> We've known that this property has been

1:01:51a nuisance for a while, and this project

1:01:54is aimed at curing that. the these

1:01:57existing projects on that 8.6 acres will

1:02:00be torn to the ground and new housing

1:02:03that is way better and up to standards.

1:02:06>> This will be individual families.

1:02:07>> Yes, ma'am. This will be individual

1:02:09families and that's why we don't want to

1:02:11do the apartments like down the street.

1:02:13These will be individual families that

1:02:14are moving here in a town home setting,

1:02:17not a mass apartment complex. So, this

1:02:19is curated to uh address exactly what

1:02:23she brought to you here today. And all

1:02:25the homes, all all those buildings in

1:02:27the whole development are all coming

1:02:28down.

1:02:29>> Yes, sir. Yeah. Yes, sir.

1:02:30>> Because they've already got most of them

1:02:31on the on the east side.

1:02:32>> Yes. For for the Airbus project, but the

1:02:35the Boyin Towers is coming down, but I

1:02:37can't tell you when the other part is

1:02:39coming down because we don't have that

1:02:41under our contract. We just have the 8.6

1:02:43acres. The airport authority will have

1:02:44to do the rest.

1:02:45>> And they're doing it.

1:02:46>> They're they're doing it. And they have

1:02:48plans to tear it all down.

1:02:49>> Okay. Any other questions or comments

1:02:51from the board? Anyone else that would

1:02:54like to speak on the matter? All right,

1:02:56that'll conclude our public hearing

1:02:58regarding the application.

1:03:02Um

1:03:07I I would only say that we need to be

1:03:09somewhat restrictive on the landscape

1:03:11variance because they they do have some

1:03:14area to utilize but the setbacks I'm in

1:03:17full agreement and the idea of the

1:03:19project I think is worthy of our

1:03:22consideration

1:03:23with that chair will entertain a motion

1:03:26motion to approve uh would uh

1:03:30[clears throat]

1:03:31finding in act and uh one through five

1:03:35consideration.

1:03:37>> Okay. I have a motion to approve with

1:03:39findings of fact and the conditions as

1:03:42listed. Do I have a second?

1:03:44>> Second.

1:03:45>> Have a second. Any further discussion?

1:03:47All those in favor say I. I.

1:03:49>> I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. All

1:03:53right. We're on 263. Well, excuse me.

1:03:56application 12 which is 6783

1:03:596598 6594 6510 regarding 263 Dolphin

1:04:04Street. Your name and address, sir.

1:04:07>> Yes, sir. Fred Renfrey, Downtown Mobile

1:04:09Alliance, 261 Dolphin Street.

1:04:12>> All right. And um

1:04:22have we had the opportunity to see this

1:04:25before?

1:04:26>> Yes, sir.

1:04:28>> Yes, sir. This is

1:04:29>> I'm being facicious.

1:04:30>> This is important for

1:04:32>> All right. Tell us why we should

1:04:34consider your uh request.

1:04:36>> Yes, sir. So,

1:04:39Downtown Mobile Alliance is an economic

1:04:40development organization for downtown

1:04:42Mobile and Box Out is a a friend and

1:04:46neighbor. Uh, in addition, we happen to

1:04:48be, you know, the authorized agent on

1:04:50this because we are trying to meet him

1:04:53where he needs to be met and untangle a

1:04:56complicated web. Uh, site issues. It's

1:05:00in the DDD. It's got historic,

1:05:03you know, it's a renovation and new

1:05:04construction and the use is atypical

1:05:07candidly. Uh, additionally, timing. We

1:05:10had COVID and, you know, some building

1:05:14code changes, meaning

1:05:18we went from one set of building codes

1:05:19to uh, excuse me, to another. And what

1:05:23we are asking for is for

1:05:27these to be renewed as presented

1:05:32fourth the fourth time. Uh because

1:05:37you know it's taken a long time. It was

1:05:39phased uh again I mentioned COVID

1:05:41changing uh codes permitting issues. Uh

1:05:45he's a savvy smack is a savvy

1:05:47entrepreneur and engineer but this is a

1:05:49really complicated project and he is um

1:05:54stuck and and what I mean is

1:05:58there are the tenants to the pods

1:06:00there's the tenant to the building there

1:06:02are no cos TCOs no one can get a

1:06:05building permit and we're in purgatory

1:06:08looking at each other and so without

1:06:11renewing these we will not be able to

1:06:13reinstate building building permits and

1:06:17we will not there's no chance that we'll

1:06:18get to the finish line. So with with

1:06:20with this renewal our hope is that the

1:06:24project can move forward you know as

1:06:27designed and as permitted and as

1:06:30approved but without that

1:06:33we will be in limbo.

1:06:36>> Okay. So for staff we've had previous

1:06:38variances for absolutely everything to

1:06:41do with this project. Mhm.

1:06:43>> Um they lapsed.

1:06:47So we're kind of starting fresh on some

1:06:49of this.

1:06:49>> Yes, sir. So they are asking for the

1:06:52same variances that were granted for

1:06:53previously. However, they uh as Mr.

1:06:56Renfrey was saying, they did not get a

1:06:58final certificate of occupancy for those

1:07:00uh the buildings. They got a temporary

1:07:02certificate and they were not able to

1:07:05complete the facade uh design which is

1:07:08what kept them from getting their final

1:07:09certificates of occupancy. So in that

1:07:12interimm those uh certificates have

1:07:14expired and they're trying to get

1:07:16building permits to finish up the facade

1:07:18buildout uh to enable them to get final

1:07:20certificates of occupancy.

1:07:22>> Has anything changed with the facade

1:07:24from what we previously have considered?

1:07:27I know the gates was a big to-do

1:07:30>> was a to-do and it still is a to-do but

1:07:32but no sir that was not

1:07:37it has not changed but what was design

1:07:40submitted? Yes, sir. We're asking for

1:07:42the continuation of what was designed,

1:07:44permitted, and approved.

1:07:46>> Okay. So, this is almost like an

1:07:47extension again. Yeah.

1:07:49>> Kind of like some of the applications

1:07:51we've had earlier on the agenda where

1:07:53the approvals have expired and they're

1:07:54coming to get those approvals regranted.

1:07:56>> Yeah. All right. I know we had a lot of

1:08:00discussion on the this particular one

1:08:02before,

1:08:02>> Mr. Chairman.

1:08:03>> Yes.

1:08:04>> What I want to know is why was he not

1:08:07given the CEO? We've been messing with

1:08:08this thing and this is one personally

1:08:10that I regret and I think some of the

1:08:13board members may as well sir.

1:08:15>> Um there seems like there's always an

1:08:16excuse. Nothing gets done. Um and not

1:08:20that it matters but I've seen things on

1:08:21social media where the developer may be

1:08:24saying that the reason that the he can't

1:08:26get tenants because the city won't let

1:08:28him open at certain times which I think

1:08:30is probably ridiculous. Um I just don't

1:08:33have any confidence this is ever going

1:08:35to get done.

1:08:39And we've interjected oursel to try to

1:08:41understand

1:08:44all of the layers to that onion because

1:08:47it is complicated. But you know the

1:08:50reality is that without a co TCO he'll

1:08:54never get revenue. He won't complete the

1:08:56project and you know is in a death

1:08:59spiral there. So you're absolutely

1:09:03right. every everything all the

1:09:04objections that we heard are accurate

1:09:06and yet I ask you to um help me renew

1:09:11this so that we can attempt to um get

1:09:16him operational and get him in

1:09:17goodstead.

1:09:19>> So Fred, you're you'll you'll have an

1:09:20active role in trying to shepherd this.

1:09:23>> We will have an act active role in

1:09:25shephering this. Yes, sir. [snorts]

1:09:27>> Is it the same owner that it's been?

1:09:30Okay.

1:09:30>> Yes, sir. Is it a group or is it one?

1:09:33>> Yes, sir. It's a group. Same group.

1:09:35>> Yes.

1:09:35>> Okay.

1:09:36>> Fred, do you feel confident that that

1:09:39the project can be done financially from

1:09:41a financial standpoint?

1:09:43That there's wherewithal to do it,

1:09:47>> we have a strategy. And if the strategy

1:09:51comes to fruition, yes. And yet

1:09:55unintended consequences is if we renew

1:09:57this and still run into the same issues,

1:09:59we'll still be there. And you know, we

1:10:02would not be asking the city to accept a

1:10:06less than standard project,

1:10:08especially, you know, on Dolphin Street

1:10:10right next to the Alliance and and all

1:10:11the things.

1:10:12>> Well, I hope you're successful with it

1:10:14because it's really it has not been

1:10:15good.

1:10:16>> Yes, sir.

1:10:16>> Thank you.

1:10:17>> All right. Any other questions of the

1:10:19board?

1:10:19>> One quick question. Yeah, you said this

1:10:21the TCOs have expired. What's the

1:10:23current status of the tenants? Are they

1:10:24able to be open for business or is it

1:10:27completely closed at this moment?

1:10:31Um it is my understanding that

1:10:35we are in the spiral where the tenants

1:10:37are not getting licenses renewed and so

1:10:40as things are happening

1:10:42as months expire as we transpire it it

1:10:45is

1:10:48>> so when they have to renew their

1:10:49business license there it shows there's

1:10:51no certificate of occupancy so they're

1:10:53not allowed to renew their

1:10:53>> business.

1:10:55Thank you.

1:10:56>> Yes sir. Yes sir.

1:10:58>> All right. Any other questions?

1:11:01Do we have anyone in support of the

1:11:03application that would like to speak?

1:11:05Anyone in opposition today?

1:11:11>> All right. Do we have any public

1:11:12comments regarding this one?

1:11:14>> No, sir.

1:11:15>> Um, if we approve this another time,

1:11:19what is the time frame they have to get

1:11:21their CO or their temp? on staff's

1:11:24recommended uh considerations that we

1:11:27have. We have recommended that they

1:11:29complete the exterior facade and obtain

1:11:31a final certificate of occupancy within

1:11:3312 months of approval. So, September

1:11:3514th of next year. Uh that is similar to

1:11:38the condition that was granted to them

1:11:40last time in 2024 where they were given

1:11:42one year to complete those additions at

1:11:44that time.

1:11:45>> Okay.

1:11:46>> And Mr. Chairman. Yes. Murray is and

1:11:48this is obviously this site plan or or

1:11:51the elevation is this approval. Uh in

1:11:55order to get their CO, do they have to

1:11:57complete this as it's shown?

1:12:00>> Yes, sir. In order to get their final

1:12:02certificate of occupancy, the facade

1:12:04would need to be completely built out as

1:12:06shown on the proposal here.

1:12:08>> Okay.

1:12:09And you're

1:12:11>> pretty confident that that's what the

1:12:13end product, as you stated, would be?

1:12:16>> Would not want to put myself out there

1:12:17for a project that is less than, you

1:12:20know, what we've all seen and reviewed

1:12:22and agreed to.

1:12:24>> Okay.

1:12:24>> Yes, sir.

1:12:25>> I have other comments, questions.

1:12:26>> I have a quick question for staff. If we

1:12:28were to approve as we previously

1:12:30approved and set that one year for

1:12:32completion of construction, they pull a

1:12:35permit start work and what are our how

1:12:39can we enforce that if they're under

1:12:40construction month 12 and not complete.

1:12:43Typically the variance is in play after

1:12:45the permit's pulled

1:12:54once they get the building permit.

1:12:57They can as long as they're doing work

1:12:58they can go beyond the one year of

1:13:01approval.

1:13:02>> Not the way that the condition is

1:13:03written. suggested staff condition is

1:13:06written that they obtain their final

1:13:08certificate of occupancy by one year

1:13:10from today

1:13:11>> then

1:13:12>> but that can be changed by the board if

1:13:14you

1:13:14>> it can be changed and yeah putting I

1:13:17understand Adams and uh Jeremy's

1:13:21comments or concerns but if if you don't

1:13:25approve it or you approve it with really

1:13:27tight restrictions

1:13:30you're kind of pulling the plug on this

1:13:31and they're dead in the water and they

1:13:33might as well just go in there and

1:13:34bulldoze everything. So, they're far so

1:13:37far down the road and this isn't as much

1:13:40of a legal issue as it is, you know, for

1:13:42downtown. It's if if we don't allow them

1:13:45to succeed, and yeah, they should have

1:13:47succeeded by now, but if we don't give

1:13:49them that opportunity, it's going to be

1:13:50blight and and we don't want that.

1:13:54>> I agree. And I' I'd say just

1:13:55piggybacking on that, I think it's not

1:13:57an ideal situation. and there hasn't

1:13:59been. But I think the fact that the

1:14:01downtown alliance is taking a proactive

1:14:03role in this and have a huge amount of

1:14:05confidence in the alliance and

1:14:07appreciate that you can't give us, you

1:14:10know, guarantees. I mean, there's, you

1:14:12know, that's that's not within, I think,

1:14:14probably your uh control, but the fact

1:14:17that y'all are going to be, you know,

1:14:19helping shepherd this, I think is a huge

1:14:21step forward. So, I I see that at least

1:14:24for myself, I don't see another option

1:14:26but to prove it. give them time to get

1:14:28it done.

1:14:29>> Yeah, [snorts] Mr. Chairman, I I agree

1:14:30totally because like like what Doug was

1:14:33saying and I've thought about this every

1:14:35time I ride past it. You know, if we

1:14:37don't try to be a part of the team to

1:14:40get this thing done, it's just going to

1:14:42be closed and it's going to look that

1:14:44like that forever and it'll be a stain

1:14:45on that street. So, I agree with, you

1:14:48know, it's with

1:14:50it's a tough position, but

1:14:52>> All right. So, if the board should

1:14:54consider this, the number two on the

1:14:58conditions has a 12-month

1:15:01time period for final CO.

1:15:04That would be something you may

1:15:06>> if you deleted that they still if they

1:15:09if they're not through. No, if they're

1:15:11doing work, then the variance would

1:15:13continue until they are completed. So,

1:15:16>> if it's actively

1:15:18>> without that without that

1:15:20>> chairman, could that be sync? Sir, sir,

1:15:21hold on. We got to We're asking for

1:15:23staff

1:15:23>> as as long as they if they get a

1:15:25building permit uh to finish the work

1:15:28and they continue that building permit,

1:15:30keep it active. Yes.

1:15:32>> They could still theoretically have an

1:15:34active building permit and be

1:15:36approaching the completion of the

1:15:38project within one year and maybe not

1:15:40have finished it. But if they still have

1:15:42an active building permit, that would be

1:15:44acceptable if that condition is deleted.

1:15:48>> Okay. Are we clear for the board? Would

1:15:51that mean just an active permit or or

1:15:54progress being made? And I don't know if

1:15:55you can

1:15:56>> both.

1:15:57>> Okay. So, that is something that permit

1:15:59with progress being made would need to

1:16:01be

1:16:01>> because again, you can have a permit

1:16:04>> be building.

1:16:04>> And if that permit were allowed to

1:16:06expire without the project being

1:16:08completed, then we would be right back

1:16:10where we are right now.

1:16:11>> Okay.

1:16:13in within the current conditions, they

1:16:14could wait 11 months, 30 days to file

1:16:18for their permit and get their permit

1:16:21and kick it that far down the line.

1:16:22Since we can't really control control

1:16:24construction, should we consider

1:16:27changing it to six months to pull their

1:16:28permit since we can't constru control

1:16:30control the construction timeline? It's

1:16:32not bad.

1:16:41>> Yeah. But I think what I'm hearing is we

1:16:43can't truly control that once we issue

1:16:45the variance.

1:16:46>> Yeah.

1:16:48>> Well, I think as proposed by

1:16:52>> as proposed by staff,

1:16:54they're suggesting that they we give

1:16:56them a year to get a co.

1:16:58>> I understand that. I'm saying if they

1:16:59don't complete the construction within a

1:17:01year, that means the variance is gone.

1:17:04The construction has to stop. The

1:17:05permit's no longer valid.

1:17:07>> Yes, that's how I read it.

1:17:09>> And that's enforced by whom?

1:17:11>> That would be enforced by our

1:17:12department.

1:17:17>> Okay.

1:17:19Do you have a true timeline where you

1:17:22think this might [laughter]

1:17:26>> I know you're kind of in a hard spot on

1:17:27this one.

1:17:30Yeah.

1:17:30>> Yeah. You regret coming down here.

1:17:33>> I just wonder whether or not we need to

1:17:34give more time.

1:17:36>> Well, and I you know the I think maybe

1:17:38the applicant had a a request that might

1:17:41help and but it might complicate it. The

1:17:44ask would be um the one-year time

1:17:47subject to the permit being reinstated

1:17:49because they're fine with a year but the

1:17:53permit can't get reinstated and they

1:17:54can't work. then we're still at the doom

1:17:58spiral. And so I'm not sure if that is

1:18:02um ever something that that is, you

1:18:04know, discussed, granted, but that might

1:18:07be a uh helpful or not.

1:18:10>> Here's a question. So, how long is a

1:18:12permit a building permit valid for? A

1:18:14year.

1:18:15>> So, if we I mean, we could theoretically

1:18:18say they need to have a building permit

1:18:19within

1:18:21>> three, four, five, six months.

1:18:23>> Yes.

1:18:23>> And then they have a year. Yeah,

1:18:26>> if I can say uh since y'all are talking

1:18:28about them trying to get a building

1:18:29permit in a certain time frame, uh it is

1:18:32important to remember that the special

1:18:34except or I'm sorry that the variance

1:18:35approval is valid itself for 6 months.

1:18:38So if they did not get a building permit

1:18:40in hand within that six-month period,

1:18:42the variance will expire. So you don't

1:18:45have to put an additional condition on

1:18:46there that they have to get a building

1:18:47permit within six months. If they don't,

1:18:50they lose their approval.

1:18:52>> Okay, one more question.

1:18:55They already had a building permit.

1:18:57>> Correct.

1:18:58>> They do not have an active building

1:19:00permit.

1:19:00>> No, no, no. They had

1:19:01>> they had one. Yes. Plans were submitted,

1:19:04approved, they got a building permit.

1:19:06>> Yes.

1:19:06>> So, in order to get a new building

1:19:08permit or a current one,

1:19:10>> nothing else has to be done but just

1:19:11apply for it.

1:19:13>> That is my understanding. Yes, sir.

1:19:14>> No other work, no other engineering

1:19:16work, architectural, just go in and buy

1:19:18the permit.

1:19:19>> It should be all done that they have.

1:19:20They should have everything to be

1:19:22submitted. Uh however then again uh

1:19:25since their previous permits have been

1:19:26approved uh certain codes may have

1:19:29changed so I can't say that they have

1:19:32everything that they need. They might

1:19:33have to have some changes

1:19:34>> but substantially.

1:19:35>> Yes, sir. I would imagine so.

1:19:39>> All right. Go ahead, Mr.

1:19:41>> I was just wondering if we could add a

1:19:42condition number five that Fred

1:19:44personally guarantee this project.

1:19:46>> Yes.

1:19:47>> That would make me very comfortable.

1:19:50[laughter] We can just make another two.

1:19:52>> All right. Any any further discussion on

1:19:54this comments?

1:19:57>> I think we all want it to succeed. We

1:19:59wouldn't have approved it this many

1:20:01times if we hadn't got to this point,

1:20:03but obviously it's complicated more more

1:20:06than I realize. All right. Uh that'll

1:20:08conclude our public hearing regarding

1:20:10the application. Uh chair will entertain

1:20:12a motion. And please keep in mind the

1:20:15number two condition may inhibit their

1:20:18ability to complete this if there's some

1:20:22time restraint like that.

1:20:24Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to

1:20:26approve removing item number two. Um

1:20:31but with the idea that approval will be

1:20:34good for 6 months and so they must get

1:20:36that building permit within that time

1:20:37period.

1:20:39>> All right, I have a motion with second

1:20:41>> conditions funding effect. I have a

1:20:44second. Further discussion. All those in

1:20:46favor say I.

1:20:47>> I.

1:20:48>> Anyone opposed? And good luck. That's

1:20:51all I can say.

1:20:53>> All right. We have uh minutes from

1:20:56previous

1:20:58meetings, January 5th, February 2nd,

1:21:01March 2nd, April 6th, May 4th, June 1st,

1:21:04and July 13th. All of this year. Uh have

1:21:08you had the opportunity to review? If

1:21:10so, uh, chair entertain a motion to

1:21:13approve the minutes as presented.

1:21:17>> Move for approval.

1:21:18>> Have a motion to approve. Do I have a

1:21:20second?

1:21:22>> Second.

1:21:23>> Second. All those in favor say I.

1:21:26>> I. Anyone opposed? Minutes are approved

1:21:28as presented. Do we have any other

1:21:30business for

1:21:32the board today?

1:21:34Just a reminder that our next meeting is

1:21:36October 1st, which will be a Thursday,

1:21:38our very first Thursday meeting. So, uh,

1:21:41no more Monday meetings after today. So,

1:21:43please make sure to attend. So, we have

1:21:45a quorum.

1:21:46>> Okay.

1:21:46>> Mr. Chair, a question for Doug.

1:21:48>> Are we getting anywhere on government?

1:21:56>> I saw it.

1:21:58>> Okay.

1:21:59down.

1:22:08>> Are they working on the one adjacent to

1:22:10Captain Digs? That was the other one, I

1:22:13think.

1:22:14>> That's the one, right?

1:22:17>> No.

1:22:18>> No. I just I thought we had a

1:22:20>> All right. Anything, Mr. Anderson? Any

1:22:22activity?

1:22:34was the last thing resolved which was uh

1:22:37one on Glenwood. Was that all because we

1:22:40had that meeting done on that? Okay.

1:22:44>> All right.

```*