[00:00:05] ALL RIGHT. HEY. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. WELCOME TO THE FEBRUARY 12TH, 2026 PUBLIC HEARING IN THE JEFFERSON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. I'M YOUR CHAIRMAN, KEN LOWRY, AND THE TIME IS 1:00. AND WE'RE BEGINNING OUR SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. BEFORE WE PROCEED, IF YOU HAVE PHONES AND IPADS AND ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT MAKE NOISE, IF YOU PLEASE, SILENCE THEM. SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY DISRUPTIONS DURING THE MEETING, I'D APPRECIATE THAT. SO THE COMMISSION IS CHARGED WITH REGULATING THE SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY. THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION IS ANY DIVISION OF LAND INTO TWO OR MORE LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPMENT OR SALE. AS NOTED ON THE AGENDA, THE MAJORITY OF OUR CASES INVOLVE DIVISION OF PROPERTY INTO FOUR LOTS OR LESS. AND FOR THE CASES WE HEAR TODAY, ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OF EACH SUBJECT PROPERTY. OF EACH SUBDIVISION HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED BY MAIL. IN ADDITION TO THAT, LEGAL ADVERTISEMENTS HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED IN A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION, AND SIGNS HAVE BEEN POSTED ON AFFECTED PROPERTIES CONTAINING FIVE OR MORE LOTS. SO THIS COMMISSION IS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR ADMINISTERING JEFFERSON COUNTY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENTS. THE COMMISSION EVALUATES REZONING CASES FOR THEIR CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLANNING POLICIES AND ZONING REGULATIONS AS THEY PERTAIN TO UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, AND WE PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSION, WHICH MAKES THE FINAL DECISIONS ON REZONING CASES AND PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF EACH CASE. PROPERTY HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED BY MAIL, IN ADDITION TO LEGAL ADVERTISEMENTS BEING PUBLISHED IN NEWSPAPER, AND SIGNS HAVE BEEN POSTED ON THE AFFECTED PROPERTIES. AS PART OF OUR RESPONSIBILITIES, WE CONDUCT OUR PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FEDERAL FAIR HOUSING LAWS. THE FEDERAL FAIR HOUSING ACT PROHIBITS DISCRIMINATION IN HOUSING BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, FAMILIAL STATUS, NATIONAL ORIGIN, DISABILITY, FINANCIAL STATUS, HOUSE ARRANGEMENT. THE COMMISSION IS COMMITTED TO ENSURING FAIR, LAWFUL AND EQUITABLE LAND USE PRACTICES IN ALL MATTERS THAT COME BEFORE US. ALL RIGHT. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? PRESENT. MARTHA. ZIEGLER. HERE. CHRISTIE. FORSYTH. HERE. PATRICK. GILBERT. HERE. JOSEPH ANDREWS. HERE. KENNETH. KUSH. HERE. KENNETH. MURRAY. HERE. EDWARD BROWN. HERE. MR. CHAIRMAN. HERE. ALRIGHT. GOOD TO HEAR. THANK YOU. NOW I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE [Additional Item] MINUTES FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING. SO MOVED. MR. CHAIRMAN, MOTION TO SUSPEND THE READING OF THE LAST MINUTE MEETING MINUTES AND APPROVE AS WRITTEN. SECOND. ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN WITH TODAY'S AGENDA. EACH CASE WILL BE PRESENTED INDIVIDUALLY WITH TIME ALLOTTED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. FOR THOSE OF YOU WISHING TO SPEAK, I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU AND ASK YOU TO COME TO THE PODIUM AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. AND HAVE YOU DIRECT ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS TO ME DIRECTLY, AND I'LL TAKE CARE OF GETTING THEM ANSWERED FOR YOU. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED. FIRST WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THE SUBDIVISION CASES. I'LL BE ANNOUNCING EACH CASE SEPARATELY AND THEN CALL FOR ANY OPPOSITION. THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE MAY BE ASKED TO COME FORWARD TO THE PODIUM TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OUR FIRST CASE TODAY IS S 25 0093. THE APPLICANT IS QUINTON [S-25-0093 Finley Fam LLC, owner; Quentin Finley, agent; Resurvey of Lots 9 & Lot 10 of Pinewood Park, Two (2) lots proposed. Property zoned R-2 (Single Family). PID# 3100241000005000 in section 24 / Township 18 / Range 5 W. (Site address 619 Pinewood Ave, Hueytown 35023)(0.54 acres +/-)mission Meeting] FINLEY. THE REQUEST IS A RESURVEY OF LOTS NINE AND TEN OF PINEWOOD PARK. TWO LOTS PROPOSED. AND THIS IS AT THE ADDRESS OF 619 PINEWOOD AVENUE IN HUEYTOWN. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TODAY TO THIS SUBDIVISION CASE? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. MAY I HAVE A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION OF APPROVAL FOR CASE NUMBER S 25 0093. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. AND SINCE WE JUST FINISHED THE FIRST SUBDIVISION CASE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO STAY FOR THE WHOLE SHOW IF YOU DON'T WANT TO. YOU'RE WELCOME TO LEAVE. AND THAT APPLIES FOR ALL THE SUBDIVISION CASES. AFTER WE'VE HEARD YOURS, YOU'RE WELCOME TO LEAVE. BUT YOU'RE [S-26-0001 Robert A Norman, Pamala Bagwell, Mike Rice, Brett Cameron Rice, owners; Steven Allen, agent; Normans Meadows, Six (6) lots proposed. Property zoned A-1 (Agriculture). PID#s 0400320000001000, 0400320000001001, 0400320000001002, 0400320000001003, 0400320000001004, 0400320000001005, 0400320000001006, 0400320000001007 in section 32 / Township 14 / Range 4 W. (Site addresses 9294, 9313 & 9342 Bagley Road; 9532 Trammel Road, Dora, 35062)(68.9 acres +/-)] ALWAYS WELCOME TO STAY, TOO. ALL RIGHT, SO OUR NEXT SUBDIVISION CASE IS S 26 0001. [00:05:03] THE APPLICANT IS STEPHEN ALLEN. THE REQUEST IS NORMAN'S MEADOW. SIX LOTS PROPOSED. THE ADDRESS IS 92, 94, 93, 1393, 42 BAGLEY ROAD AND 9532 TRAMMEL ROAD. AND DORA. IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS SUBDIVISION CASE? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? OKAY. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, WITH AN EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, TO ALLOW LOTS FIVE AND SIX TO BE RECORDED WITH NO ROAD FRONTAGE TO CASE NUMBER S 26 0001. SECOND. OKAY. HAVE A MOTION. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION [S-26-0002 Wesley & Shanika Higginbotham; 113 Hillcrest Road Trust Action Group Enterprises INC, owners; Brian Higginbotham Subdivision, Two (2) lots proposed. Property zoned A-1 (Agriculture). PID#s 2100022014003000, 2100023004001000 in section 02 / Township 17 / Range 4 W. (Site addresses 113 Hillcrest Road & 3208 Oak Street, Adamsville, 35005)(2.1 acres +/-) ] PASSES. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SUBDIVISION CASE IS S 26 0002. THE APPLICANT IS WESLEY HIGGINBOTHAM. THE REQUEST IS THE BRYAN HIGGINBOTHAM SUBDIVISION. TWO LOTS PROPOSED. THE ADDRESS IS 113 HILLCREST HILLCREST ROAD AND 32 EIGHT OAK STREET IN ADAMSVILLE. IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION OF THIS SUBDIVISION CASE? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? WELCOME. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? ALRIGHT. HEARING NONE. MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF CASE S 26 002 WITH THE WAIVER OF A ONE ACRE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR LOT TWO SECOND. OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION. A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. OUR NEXT SUBDIVISION CASE IS S [S-26-0003 Jacob and Kayla Pair, owners; Jeffrey Wright, agent; Jacob Pair Subdivision, One (1) lot proposed. Property zoned A-1 (Agriculture). PID# 0600070000050000 in section 07 / Township 15 / Range 4 W. (Site address 8218 John Goggans Road, Dora, 35062)(16.8 acres +/-)] 26 0003 APPLICANT JEFFREY WRIGHT. THE REQUEST IS JACOB PIERCE. SUBDIVISION ONE, LOT PROPOSED AT 8218 JOHN GOGGINS ROAD IN DORA. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TODAY TO THIS SUBDIVISION CASE? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? MY PROPERTY? BUT I'M NOT. OKAY, WELL, WELCOME ANYWAY, SO. ALRIGHT. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION OF APPROVAL FOR CASE NUMBER S 26 0003 SECOND. ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. OUR NEXT SUBDIVISION CASE IS S 26 0004. [S-26-0004 Abel Mateo Hernandez, owner; Zamudio’s Addition to Lindsey Loop, One (1) lot proposed. Property zoned A-1 (Agriculture). PID# 4200093000003007 in section 09 / Township 20 / Range 4 W. (Site address 3929 Lindsey Loop Road, Bessemer, 35022)(1 acre +/-) ] THE APPLICANT IS. AND I MAY NOT PRONOUNCE IT RIGHT, BUT ABEL. MATEO HERNANDEZ. PRETTY GOOD. YES, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THE REQUEST IS ANOTHER HARD WORD. ZAMUDIO. ADDITION TO LINDSAY LOOP. ONE LOT PROPOSED, AND THE ADDRESS IS 3929 LINDSAY LOOP ROAD AND BESSEMER. IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS SUBDIVISION CASE? HEARING NONE. I KNOW THE APPLICANT IS HERE. THANK YOU. WELCOME. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? YES. MR. MISTER CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE NUMBER S 26 0004. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU EVERYONE. IT'S OUR NEXT SUBDIVISION. CASE [S-26-0005 Adam & Lauren Carter, owners; Carter Family Subdivision, Two (2) lots proposed. Property zoned A-1 (Agriculture). PID# 3100174000019001 in section 17 / Township 18 / Range 5 W. (Site address 1621 Old Rock Creek Road, Hueytown, 35023)(38.9 acre +/-) ] IS S 26 0005. THE APPLICANT IS LAUREN CARTER. THE REQUEST IS FOR CARTER FAMILY SUBDIVISION TO LOTS PROPOSED AT 1621 OLD ROCK CREEK ROAD IN HUEYTOWN. IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS SUBDIVISION CASE? OR IS APPLICANT PRESENT? ALL RIGHT. WELCOME. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION TO OF APPROVAL FOR CASE S 26 0005 SECOND. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I. ANYONE OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. SO THAT WAS FAST. I'M GOING TO QUENCH MY MINUTES. OKAY. SO NEXT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR ZONING CASES. THE STAFF WILL PRESENT THE CASE TO THE COMMISSION. AND THEN I'LL CALL FOR ANY OPPOSITION. THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE MAY BE ASKED TO COME FORWARD TO THE PODIUM AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THERE'S A TIME LIMIT FOR BOTH OPPOSITION AND THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE OF 15 [00:10:06] MINUTES. SO JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND. MY TRUSTY TIMEKEEPER HERE HAS GOT HIS CLOCK READY TO GO TO KEEP A TIME LIMIT. SO AND JUST TO REITERATE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ONLY MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS ON ZONING CASES. THE JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSION MAKES THE FINAL DECISION. SO WE'LL HEAR THE CASE HERE. MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. THEN IT'LL GO TO THE PLANNING TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION, THE MAIN COMMISSION, AND THEY'LL MAKE THE FINAL [Z-24-0056 John Cain, C. Thomas & Michael D. Burrow, owners; requests a change of zoning to R-7 (Planned Unit Development) for a garden home subdivision (77 lots proposed). Property zoned A-1 (Agriculture). PID# 0200280000002000 in section 28 / Township 14/ Range 2 W. (Site address 2131 Bone Dry Road, Warrior, 35180)(69.82 Acres +/-) ] DECISION ON IT. SO OUR FIRST QUESTION, OUR FIRST ZONING CASE TODAY IS Z 24 0056 MIGHT BE FAMILIAR TO SOME OF YOU. WE'VE HEARD IT A COUPLE OF TIMES. THE APPLICANT IS JOHN KANE. THE REQUEST IS FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING TO PR SEVEN, WHICH IS A CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 30 LOTS. PROPOSED. THAT ADDRESS IS 2132 BONE DRY ROAD AND HOOVER. MR. MORRISON, PLEASE. YES, SIR. AS WE'VE HEARD THIS CASE BEFORE, THIS WILL BE, I BELIEVE, THE FOURTH PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE'VE HAD ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE. I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR AND GO OVER EVERYTHING AGAIN. THE PROPOSED DENSITY DOES COMPLY WITH THE POLICIES OF THE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE AREA. THEY HAVE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF LOTS. THEY ORIGINALLY STARTED WITH 77, AND NOW THEY'VE GONE DOWN TO 30, AND HOPES FOR THE REDUCTION OF 30 WAS TO ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR A SECONDARY ACCESS. HOWEVER, THE COUNTY ENGINEER IS RECOMMENDING AGAIN THAT A SECONDARY OR EMERGENCY ACCESS BE PROVIDED TO A COLLECTOR ROAD FROM THE SITE, ALSO WITH CONDITIONS FOR SPRINKLER SYSTEMS REQUIRED FOR THE RESIDENTS. AS THIS AREA IS UNCOVERED BY A FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND LASTLY, THAT THE AREA, INCLUDING THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA, BE DEDICATED AS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT, BUT THUS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, AS WAS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THE LAST TIME WE HAD THE HEARING. THANK YOU, MR. MORRISON. APPRECIATE THAT. SO IS OUR APPLICANT HERE OKAY. THANK YOU. AND IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY? OKAY. PLEASE COME UP AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND TELL ME WHAT'S ON YOUR MIND. ALRIGHT. SO MY NAME IS DUANE WALLEY. I'M THE CITY CLERK FOR THE CITY OF KIMBERLY, AND I'M HERE IN REPRESENTATIVE OF THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL. THIS CASE IS NOT SIMPLY ABOUT ONE SUBDIVISION, IT'S ABOUT CONSISTENCY IN PLANNING, CLARITY AND PROCESS AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE IMPACTS OF GROWTH. IN NOVEMBER OF 2025, THE CITY FORMALLY SUBMITTED A WRITTEN OPPOSITION TO THIS REZONING REQUEST. THAT POSITION REMAINS UNCHANGED. UPON REVIEWING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTED WITH THIS APPLICATION, THE CITY HAS NOTED THAT ANOTHER PORTION OF THE MAP REFERENCED A PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION OF PRC COTTAGE DISTRICT. THAT DESIGNATION IS NOT IN ZONING CURRENTLY BEFORE YOU TODAY. ITS APPEARANCE, THOUGH, RAISES ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS REGARDING THE ULTIMATE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND POTENTIAL FUTURE DENSITY THAT MAY BE CONTEMPLATED AT THIS PROPERTY AT AMENDMENT. AT A MINIMUM, THIS CREATES AMBIGUITY. AMBIGUITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN, ABOUT THE FULL SCOPE OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. THE CITY CONTINUES TO OPPOSE THE PROPOSAL BECAUSE IT'S INCONSISTENT WITH THE COUNTY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, INCOMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING AGRICULTURAL LAND USES, AND WOULD IMPOSE SUBSTANTIAL INFRASTRUCTURE BURDENS ON THE CITY OF KIMBERLY. ALTHOUGH THIS DEVELOPMENT LIES OUTSIDE OUR MUNICIPAL LIMITS, EVERY PRIMARY ACCESS POINT RELIES UPON ROADWAYS OWNED, MAINTAINED, AND FUNDED EXCLUSIVELY BY THE CITY OF KIMBERLY. THESE ARE CITY STREETS PAID FOR BY CITY RESIDENTS, CITY TAXPAYERS. YET THEY WOULD FUNCTION AS THE SOLE ACCESS ROUTE FOR A COUNTY APPROVED DEVELOPMENT. IN ADDITION, THE NEIGHBORING SUBDIVISION THAT WOULD SERVE AS ACCESS POINT IS FULLY PROTECTED BY THE CITY OF KIMBERLY FOR FIRE, POLICE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES. AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, WHEN EMERGENCIES OCCUR IN THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, CALLS FOR SERVICE WILL VERY LIKELY ROUTE TO INVOLVE OUR CITY RESOURCES. THIS CREATES A FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS ISSUE. THE CITY WOULD BE EXPECTED TO RESPOND IN MOMENTS OF CRISIS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES DO. YET THE CITY WOULD HAVE NO JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY OVER THE DEVELOPMENT AND NO DEDICATED REVENUE STREAM TO OFFSET THOSE SERVICES RENDERED. GROSS SHOULD NOT CREATE SITUATIONS WHERE RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY ARE SEPARATED FROM COST AND ACCOUNTABILITY. TO DATE, THERE HAS BEEN NO COORDINATION WITH THE CITY REGARDING ROADWAY CAPACITY, TRAFFIC MITIGATION, PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACTS, OR LONG TERM INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE IF THE COUNTY CHOOSES TO MOVE FORWARD. DESPITE THESE CONCERNS, THE CITY RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT ANY APPROVAL BE EXPRESSLY CONDITIONED UPON JEFFERSON COUNTY ASSUMING FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, RESURFACING, LONG TERM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS OF ALL INGRESS AND EGRESS ROADWAYS UNDER CITY OWNERSHIP THAT SERVE THIS [00:15:01] DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICE RESPONSIBILITIES BE CLEARLY DEFINED. ABSENT SUCH PROTECTIONS, APPROVAL WOULD EFFECTIVELY TRANSFER THE FINANCIAL AND SERVICE BURDEN OF A COUNTY ZONING DECISION INTO KIMBERLY. TAXPAYERS WHO HAVE NO AUTHORITY OVER THAT DECISION. THE CITY IS NOT OPPOSED TO GROWTH. WE ARE OPPOSED TO GROWTH THAT IS INCONSISTENT, UNCLEAR, AND UNFUNDED. FOR THOSE REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY URGE THE COMMISSION TO DENY THIS REZONING REQUEST IF IT PROCEEDS RESPONSIBLY. RESPONSIBILITY MUST BE EXPLICIT, ENFORCEABLE, AND IN WRITING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. I APOLOGIZE. 9317 CEDAR HILL ROAD WARRIOR, ALABAMA 35180. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF THIS REZONING CASE? SO I WILL MENTION FOR THE RECORD THAT I HAVE MORE THAN A FEW PAGES OF OPPOSITION ON THIS CASE THAT WE'VE RECEIVED OVER THE SEVERAL TIMES THAT WE'VE HEARD THIS CASE. SO THOSE ARE NOTED, AND I THINK MOST OF US REMEMBER THOSE. SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR YOUR COMMENTS. NOT HEARING ANY OPPOSITION. I'D LIKE THE APPLICANT, MR. CAIN, TO COME UP AND TELL US, WHY DON'T YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR CHANGES AND WHY YOU MADE YOUR CHANGES AND YOUR THOUGHTS ON HELPING OUT THE CITY OF KIMBERLY. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN. MY FIRST MY NAME IS JOHN CAIN. I LIVE AT 848 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE IN GARDENDALE, ALABAMA. I KNOW THIS CASE IS IS GONE WAY BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT I'M ACCUSTOMED TO DEALING WITH JEFFERSON COUNTY. I'VE BEEN DEVELOPING JEFFERSON COUNTY SINCE 1983, AND THIS IS BY FAR THE THE CRAZIEST CASE I'VE I'VE EVER SEEN. I KNOW WE'VE GOT SOME NEW FACES UP THERE, AND SO I JUST I'D LIKE TO JUST START OFF BY REMINDING EVERYBODY THAT THIS SUBDIVISION ORIGINALLY WAS DEVELOPED UNDER THE GUIDELINES. AND THEN INSIDE THE JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRST SECTOR AND AND SECOND SECTOR, THE ACCESS POINT THAT I HOLD AND IS ALWAYS BEEN CONSISTENT WAS PUT IN PLACE AN ENGINEERED AT THE ORIGINAL TIME OF THE PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO OF FRANKLIN PARK. SO MY ACCESS POINT AND UTILITY ACCESS IS NEVER CHANGED. I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE SUBDIVISIONS THAT WAS ANNEXED IN BY LEGISLATIVE ACTION. WE'VE WE'VE GONE OVER THAT BEFORE. BUT FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT MEANS THAT THE CITY OF KIMBERLY DIDN'T OWN ANY PROPERTY CONTIGUOUS TO THIS PROPERTY. AND SO THEY WENT TO THE LEGISLATURE, AND THE LEGISLATURE ACTUALLY ANNEXED THIS PROPERTY THROUGH LEGISLATIVE ACTION WITHOUT OUR EVEN KNOWING. MEANING WE NEVER EVEN GOT A ANY TYPE OF NOTIFICATION. I KNOW Y'ALL NOTIFY EVERYBODY WITHIN 500FT OF WHAT I'M DOING, BUT I NEVER GOT ANY KIND OF NOTIFICATION WHATSOEVER THAT THERE WAS THAT LEGISLATIVE ACTION IN PLACE. WE'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY SINCE 2007. THAT'S A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. WE ORIGINALLY HAD A PUD ZONING ON IT IN THE VERY BEGINNING, BUT DUE TO ECONOMIC SITUATIONS, YOU ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN 0708. IT WASN'T FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE TO CONTINUE ON AT THAT POINT. WE'VE WE'VE COME ACTUALLY, FROM WHAT I THINK IS 99 LOTS DOWN TO 77, DOWN TO 46 AND NOW DOWN TO 30. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN GET IT TO BE MORE COMPETITIVE OR MORE COMPLIANT THAN, THAN WHAT'S IN THAT ADJACENT SUBDIVISION. ALL THE LOTS, THE STANDARD SIZES ARE, MATTER OF FACT, PROBABLY EVEN A LITTLE BIT LARGER THAN WHAT'S IN THE ORIGINAL PLAT. MY MY DENSITY IS ACTUALLY LESS THAN WHAT'S ORIGINALLY IN PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO. I DON'T KNOW HOW ANY BETTER. I DID TAKE MR. BROWN'S SUGGESTION. I DID HAVE AN HOUR LONG MEETING WITH THE NEW MAYOR, MAYOR DIXON OF THE CITY OF KIMBERLY, AND I, WE I THOUGHT WE WE, I GUESS, AGREED TO DISAGREE ON SEVERAL THINGS. HE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE THE TROUBLES THAT I HAD WITH THE CITY OVER THE PAST NUMBER OF YEARS, MEANING THAT I'VE WE'VE MY ME AND MY PARTNERS HAVE DEVELOPED, WE'VE BUILT WE'VE WE'VE DONE A LOT OF THINGS OUT IN KIMBERLY AND, AND WE JUST THINK WE JUST GOT THE RAW END OF THE DEAL SEVERAL TIMES. AND [00:20:02] THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. AND I'M NOT UP THERE BEGGING THEM TO, TO GET INTO THEIR CITY. I LIKE TO I LIKE TO SAY THIS, I THINK THE MAYOR'S INTENTIONS ARE WELL, I THINK THAT HE'S TRYING TO DO WHAT HE CAN TO PROTECT IT. I LIKE FOR FOR Y'ALL TO UNDERSTAND THAT JEFFERSON COUNTY AND AND WHAT Y'ALL DID IN THE ORIGINAL PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO, THE CITY OF KIMBERLY HAS $0 AND I MEAN $0 IN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THAT'S BASED BINDER SEALCOAT EVERYTHING THAT'S OUT THERE TODAY WAS DONE UNDER Y'ALL'S GUIDELINES. SO IT'S NOT LIKE I'M PUTTING AN ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON WHAT THEY NOW SAY IS, KIMBERLY, BECAUSE THEY DECIDED TO COME INTO THE CITY OF KIMBERLY THROUGH LEGISLATIVE ACTION. WE ALL KNOW THAT. WE SITTING HERE, Y'ALL DO THIS ON A ON A DAILY BASIS IN THERE. OF COURSE, YOU YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BOND THAT ROAD. AND WE'RE ONLY GOING A VERY IF YOU'LL PULL UP THE MAP AGAIN FOR ME, MICHAEL, IF YOU'LL NOTICE WE'RE ONLY WE'RE ONLY TRAVELING A VERY, VERY, VERY SHORT DISTANCE FROM BONE DRY ROAD. NOW, I WASN'T AWARE, BUT MAYBE THE THE CITY CLERK CAN TELL ME WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY OF KIMBERLY HAS TAKEN OVER THE MAINTENANCE FOR BONE DRY ROAD. SORRY QUESTIONS FOR ME, NOT FOR HIM. ALL RIGHT. MAYBE YOU CAN TELL ME THEN WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY OF KIMBERLY WHICH ACCESSES THIS SUBDIVISION IS NOW MAINTAINED BY THE CITY OF KIMBERLY. OKAY, I CAN'T TELL YOU, BUT I'LL ASK HIM IN A MINUTE. AND SO MY POINT IS, MY POINT IS, IS WHERE WE COME IN ON FRANKLIN DRIVE. THERE'S ONLY A VERY SHORT ROOM IN THERE. ALL THE REST OF SUBDIVISION GOES TO THE LEFT HAND SIDE. SO WE'RE ONLY TRAVELING A VERY SHORT DISTANCE TO WHERE IT WAS STUB STREET, WHICH I THOUGHT IT WAS ENGINEERED AND DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB IN THE IN THE VERY BEGINNING. MEANING THAT WHEN THIS WHEN THIS PHASE WAS TO BE PUT IN, THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO TRAVEL THE LEAST AMOUNT OF DISTANCE AND NOT THROUGH ALL THE, ALL THE, THE HOMES THERE IN ORDER TO GET TO WHERE THE STUB STREET WAS LEFT. SO I DON'T I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND. I REALLY DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE AT THIS POINT, OTHER THAN I UNDERSTAND THE CITY OF KIMBERLY IN THERE. THEY WANT THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. THAT MEANS THAT THEY WANT THE TAX DOLLARS THAT COMES OFF OF THE OF THE MATERIALS THAT THE HOUSES ARE BUILT. THEY WANT TO BE IN TOTAL CONTROL. NOW, THROUGH THE CONVERSATION WITH THE MAYOR, MY UNDERSTANDING IS ONCE THEY'VE HAVE HAVE ADOPTED SOMETHING IN THROUGH LEGISLATIVE ACTION, IT TAKES A UNANIMOUS VOTE FROM THEIR MAYOR AND THEIR CITY COUNCIL. EVEN IF I WANTED TO TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY OF KIMBERLY, WHICH I'M GOING TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I'VE NEVER SEEN UNANIMOUS OF ANYTHING UP THERE. SO I STAND HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY, AND AND I'M JUST I'M ASKING FOR TO THAT I FEEL LIKE I'VE GOT AS GOOD A SITUATION UP THERE AS ANYBODY COULD POSSIBLY HAVE. AND I'LL ASK THIS. I KNOW THE CITY CLERK DOESN'T KNOW THIS, BUT THERE WAS SEVERAL. I THINK THERE'S 6 OR 7 OF THOSE LOTS THAT WHEN THEY ANNEXED IN THROUGH LEGISLATIVE ACTION THAT WERE NOT TAKEN IN. SO THAT MEANS Y'ALL STILL HAVE RESIDENTS THAT ARE IN UNINCORPORATED LOTS IN THAT SUBDIVISION. NOW, I ASK THE CITY CLERK, IF YOU DON'T MIND FOR ME, HOW DO HOW DO THOSE PEOPLE PAY FOR ARE Y'ALL ARE Y'ALL STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIRS? SO NOT MY DEPARTMENT, BUT SO I THINK YOU'VE ADDRESSED HIS COMMENTS WELL ENOUGH FOR US. SO THANK YOU. I THINK WE HAVE I'M SORRY, I DON'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT WE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU. BUT IF YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE YOU WANT TO ADD, PLEASE. NO, NO. I'M FINE. I'M I'M HERE TILL Y'ALL RING THE BELL ON ME. OKAY? ALRIGHT. SO WHO WOULD WHO HAS QUESTIONS? OKAY, WELL GO AHEAD. I HAVE A FEW. I ALWAYS LIKE TO GO LAST. YOU GO. ALL RIGHT, MR. KANE, THERE ARE TWO THINGS OR THREE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO ASK AND MAKE SURE OF THAT KIND OF THAT WILL COME UP AFTER THIS WHEN YOU GET TO THE SUBDIVISION SIDE OF IT. SO ONE THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THE UNDERSTANDING IS YOU'VE REDUCED THE LOTS TO 30 LOTS, BUT THERE IS STILL A REQUIREMENT FOR THE SECONDARY ACCESS FOR A FOR FIRE AND MEDICAL THAT'S STILL ON STILL ON THIS. SO THAT, THAT THAT RESTRICTION HASN'T GONE AWAY. WELL MY, MY QUESTION IS IS AT THIS LAST MEETING AND WE CAN PULL UP THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING, WE SAT HERE [00:25:01] AND WE I ASKED THE SPECIFIC QUESTION. I SAID, IF I GO DOWN TO 30 LOTS OR LESS, WHICH IS IN THE NEW FIRE CODE THAT Y'ALL HAVE ADOPTED, THE 2024 FIRE CODE, IT SAYS SPECIFICALLY IN THAT FIRE CODE THAT THAT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT. I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. THE COUNTY ENGINEERS COME BACK AND SAID, WE STILL NEED TO HAVE THAT. AND I ASSUME I ASSUME BECAUSE IT'S IT'S CONNECTING TO ANOTHER SUBDIVISION. HE'S NOT HERE TO TO ANSWER THAT. BUT THAT'S WHAT I THAT'S MY ASSUMPTION. SO MY QUESTION IS TO Y'ALL, IS THE COUNTY WILLING TO SUPERSEDE THE WHAT THEY'VE ADOPTED. IN OTHER WORDS, GO BEYOND WHAT'S WHAT THEY'VE RECENTLY NOT? I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT WAY BACK WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT THEY'VE RECENTLY ADOPTED THIS. I'M NOT GOING TO ANSWER FOR THE ENGINEER, BUT I WILL SAY THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS IS PRIORITY. WELL, WE CAN WE CAN GO ALL OVER THIS SUBDIVISION. AND I'VE BEEN DEVELOPING SINCE 1983. THIS IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR FOR NORTH JEFFERSON COUNTY OR ANY OTHER PLACE. OKAY. YOU KNOW, IF WE GO RIGHT UP THE STREET TO JEFFREY JERSEY PARK, IF WE GO RIGHT UP THE STREET TO DOBBS FERRY, IF WE GO RIGHT UP THE STREET TO ANY OF THESE SUBDIVISIONS OR WHATEVER IT IS THEY THEY'RE COMING THROUGH ORIGINALLY THROUGH DALLAS FERRY, AND YOU CAME THROUGH THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO GO TO. AND THAT'S A MASSIVE SUBDIVISION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOUSANDS OF HOMES. SURE. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 30. JUST JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT CONDITION IS STILL THAT CONDITION IS STILL THERE. A PART A PART OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS IS THE ENGINE. CAN THE CAN Y'ALL GET THE ENGINEER DOWN HERE TO ANSWER IF HE'S WILLING TO SUPERSEDE WHAT'S WHAT Y'ALL HAVE ADOPTED, SIR? WELL, I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION YOU WANT TO ASK, BUT I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER COOK KUSH IS DYING TO TALK. I HAD TWO OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY, I'LL LET YOU FINISH. OKAY, SO MY OTHER TWO QUESTIONS AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT QUESTIONS. THEY'RE MORE OF A LETTING YOU KNOW. SO WHEN YOU GO INTO THE SUBDIVISION SIDE OF THIS, TRAFFORD HAS ALREADY SAID THAT THEY CAN'T PROVIDE MEDICAL AND FIRE PROTECTION FOR THIS. THEY DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES. SO THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE COVERED AT SOME POINT TO BE ABLE TO GET THE SUBDIVISION GOING. AND THEN ALSO THE CITY OF KIMBERLY, BECAUSE WE ARE GOING THROUGH THEIR STREET, WILL LIKELY HAVE TO SIGN THE PLAT. AGAIN. I'VE DEVELOPED IN GARDENDALE WARRIOR, KIMBERLY. I'VE DEVELOPED IN ALL THESE SMALL MUNICIPALITIES OUT THERE. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S NEW. I'M IN EVERY OTHER CASE. I'VE BEEN ALLOWED TO BOND THE STREET GOING IN, AND I'VE BEEN ABLE TO IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONAL WEAR AND TEAR ON THAT, I'VE BEEN ABLE TO TO TO PUT A MAINTENANCE BOND UP, JUST LIKE Y'ALL REQUIRE TO BE ABLE TO, TO HANDLE THOSE TYPE SITUATIONS. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S, THAT'S OUT OF THE ORDINARY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT HAPPENS EVERY DAY HERE. RIGHT? I UNDERSTAND I'M JUST YOU'VE HEARD WHAT THE CITY, THE CITY OF KIMBERLY'S THOUGHTS ON IT ARE. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PROBABLY SIGN THE PLAT AS PART OF THIS SUBDIVISION CASE. WELL, THEY'RE THEY'RE FULL. I MEAN, I'M NOT I DON'T REALLY WANT TO EXPRESS THIS, BUT THEY'RE THEY'VE BEEN IN THE NEWS LATELY, I MEAN, AND THEY'VE BEEN THEY'VE BEEN SUED AND TAKEN BEFORE ON SOME OF THESE STUFF BEFORE. AND SO THEREFORE, IF THEY'RE NOT WILLING TO, TO AT LEAST TREAT ME AS LIKE THEY WOULD EVERYBODY ELSE, THEN, THEN I'LL HAVE THAT OPTION TO GET, YOU KNOW, JURISDICTIONAL RELIEF. YEAH. THAT IS YOUR OPTION. THAT'S YOUR OPTION. I WAS JUST MAKING I'M JUST MAKING YOU AWARE OF THOSE THINGS. OKAY. THAT CAREER POINTS. IT DOES. OKAY. COMMISSIONER KUSH, THE 30 LOT SUBDIVISION IS INDEPENDENT AND INDEPENDENT SUBDIVISION. IF YOU WERE DEVELOPING THIS OFF OF ROAD AND ABOUT 30 LOTS, YOU WOULD NOT NEED TO TO HAVE ANOTHER COMPUTER VISION ACCESS POINT HERE IS CLEARLY NOT THE SAME. AGAIN, WE YOU WE JUST HAD THIS CONVERSATION. I MEAN THIS IS ON VIDEO. LAST TIME I'VE ASKED A SPECIFIC QUESTION, THAT QUESTION WAS IF I GO DOWN TO 30 LOTS OR LESS, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS GOES AWAY. Y'ALL SAID YES TO ME. Y'ALL CAN PULL IT UP AND VIEW IT. THE BEST PART ABOUT THIS NEW TECHNIQUE Y'ALL GOT? YOU CAN GO BACK AND SEE IT ALL. THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER IT. WELL, I PROMISE I'LL WATCH Y'ALL EVERY TIME Y'ALL ARE UP, I WATCH IT. I CAN GO TO EVERY VIDEO AND I CAN FAST FORWARD TO MY CASE AND WATCH IT ALL. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND. SO MY MY AGAIN MY QUESTION IS THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S NOT DONE IN JEFFERSON COUNTY ON A DAILY BASIS. JUST BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE LIKE SAYING THAT BONE DRY ROAD, Y'ALL MAINTAIN IT. WELL, HOW DO THEY PAY YOU? OR HOW DO YOU GET MONEY? OR HOW DOES KIMBERLY PAY YOU FOR THEM? DRIVING ON BONE DRY ROAD IN ORDER TO GET TO FRANKLIN PARK SUBDIVISION? IT IS MAINTAINED. OKAY, WELL THEN THAT MEANS IT'S [00:30:05] NOT MAINTAINED BY KIMBERLY. RUN DRY ROAD IS NOT. THE REST OF THOSE STREETS ARE AGAIN IN THERE. I DIDN'T CAUSE THIS. THEY CAUSED THIS. YOU KNOW. I MEAN, I DIDN'T GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND GET ANNEXED IN. I'M NOT SITTING HERE SAYING THAT I WANT THE MONEY. IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY MONEY MADE OFF THIS SUBDIVISION. YOU JUST HEARD WHAT HE SAID, I WANT IT, WE WANT IT. WE WANT FINANCIAL BENEFIT. OKAY, COMMISSIONER KUSH, IS THAT EVERYTHING? I HAVE NOTHING, OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS? I HAVE JUST ONE, MR. CHAIRMAN. GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER. MR. KANE, WOULD IT SOUNDS. WOULD YOU BE IS IS IS JUST GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN OF HAVING THAT SECONDARY ACCESS ACCEPTABLE AGAIN? AGAIN, MR. BROWN? I MEAN, YOU ALL KNOW Y'ALL BEEN AT THIS FOR A LONG TIME HERE ON THIS PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION. IF THEY WANT TO GO BACK AND, AND ME GIVE THEM ACCESS AND THEY WANT ME TO GO BACK TO 99 LOTS, THAT MAKES FINANCIAL SENSE. BUT Y'ALL CUT ME ALL THE WAY BACK DOWN TO 30 LOTS ON 70 ACRES. SO. AND I DID THAT IN ORDER TO I THOUGHT THE THE CONSENSUS WAS IS IF I GOT DOWN TO THAT NUMBER THAT THAT WENT AWAY, BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS IN THE 2024 FIRE CODE. AND SO I'M JUST TELLING YOU, IF Y'ALL WANT TO APPROVE ME FOR FOR 99 LOTS, I'LL GIVE YOU WHATEVER YOU WANT. IF I THANK YOU FOR THAT, I DON'T I DON'T SPECIFICALLY RECALL THE NUMBERS FROM FROM THE LAST HEARING, BUT I, I DO RECALL, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THAT I HAD VOTED IN TO SUPPORT IT. RIGHT. BUT THAT WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS A THE PLAN WAS TO HAVE THAT SECONDARY ACCESS. THERE WERE MORE THAN 30 HOMES. 77. 77. THANK YOU. SO THERE WAS THAT THAT PLAN WAS THERE. AND FOR ME, I AM NOT AS WELL VERSED AS MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS OR YOU ARE ON THE TECHNICAL PART OF DEVELOPMENT. BUT PUBLIC SAFETY DOES MATTER. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I HAVE TO BE ABLE TO LAY MY HEAD DOWN AT NIGHT AND SLEEP WELL AND KNOW THAT I DIDN'T MAKE A DECISION OR CONTRIBUTE TO JEOPARDIZING THE SAFETY OF PEOPLE WHO WEREN'T EVEN IN THE ROOM. AND THAT'S WHY THAT'S WHY IT'S SUCH A BIG DEAL. SO TO ME, IF, IF, IF I KNEW THAT THAT SECONDARY ACCESS WAS THERE AND IF YOU HAD AND THE PLAN WAS FOR 77 HOMES, EVEN THOUGH I LIKE BIG LOTS, I'M COUNTY, I'M NOT CITY, I COULD I COULD GET BEHIND THAT. REGARDLESS OF THE RELATIONSHIPS WITH KIMBERLY, I WISH THEY WERE BETTER. MAYBE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD THAT IN THE FUTURE. BUT IF YOUR GOAL HERE IS AN APPROVAL, SECONDARY ACCESS MIGHT BE THE BEST ROUTE. WELL, AGAIN. AND THERE WE DELAYED THIS HEARING IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO GO BACK TO THE LAST TIME. I HATE TO TELL YOU THIS, I'VE NEVER SPENT THIS KIND OF TIME ON ANY TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. GOING ALL THE WAY BACK TO 1983 HERE, YOU KNOW, AND. YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT EVERYBODY WOULD LOVE ME TO GO AWAY. AND I'M, I'M ALMOST TO THE AGE THAT THAT'S PROBABLY CLOSER THAN I WOULD LIKE TO THINK. BUT NO, BUT I THINK THAT I'VE GIVE YOU AS GOOD A PRODUCT AND AS COMPARABLE A PRODUCT. IS THERE EVER GOING TO THEY'RE EVER GOING TO SEE. AND SO I DID THAT BASED ON THE FACT THAT WHAT THE REGS ARE TODAY AND, AND WHAT THAT SAYS IN THAT 2024 FIRE CODE THAT NOBODY'S ADOPTED, BUT Y'ALL, I MEAN, EVERYBODY'S ON 2004, NINE, 15, 12. Y'ALL WENT ALL THE WAY TO 24. BUT I'VE MET THAT CONDITION. AND SO I WOULD JUST I WOULD JUST AS SOON GET THROUGH THIS MEETING, Y'ALL TURN ME DOWN AND GO ON TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND TAKE MY CHANCES. THANK YOU, MR. CAIN. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. HANG ON. I HAVEN'T HAD MY TURN. I ALWAYS GO LAST. OKAY, SO. MR. CAIN, I APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR POINTS AND YOUR DISCUSSIONS AND YOUR EXPERIENCE AND HOW MUCH WE HAVE OR HOW MANY TIMES WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS. IT'S A LOT FOR ALL OF US. OKAY. IT'S ENOUGH THAT I DON'T REMEMBER ALL OF THEM. OKAY. AND I HAVEN'T GONE BACK AND LOOKED AT THE VIDEOS. BUT, YOU KNOW, I REMEMBER DISCUSSING THE CODE AND THE 30 VERSUS MORE VERSUS THE, THE SECONDARY ACCESS POINT AND. I WAS EXPECTING WHEN THIS WAS COMING BACK TO US THAT IT WAS STILL GOING TO BE THE 77 LOTS WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. I WASN'T EXPECTING IT TO COME BACK AT 30, SO BUT IT HAS AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR GOAL FOR THAT IS SO THAT YOU CAN ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR THE [00:35:04] SECONDARY ACCESS POINT. PER THE FIRE PROTECTION CODE. IF I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING WHAT WE WENT WE STARTED AT 99, WENT DOWN TO 77. THE LAST TIME THAT WE WERE HERE WAS 46. OKAY. SO WHAT I DID WAS I WENT FROM 46 DOWN TO DOWN TO 30 TO MEET THAT CRITERIA. SO WE WENT FROM 99, 77, 46, 30. OKAY. I'M GOING TO ASK THE STAFF A QUESTION REAL QUICK. SO WE ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR ONE OF THESE SWITCH. HOW MANY HOUSES WAS IT 4646. SO THE LAST ONE WE ACTUALLY APPROVED. BUT BECAUSE OF A ERROR WE'RE HAVING TO REHEAR IT. NOW WE'RE HEARING 30 HOUSES INSTEAD OF 46. SO. HERE'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT OKAY. 30 IS NOT GOING TO WORK WITHOUT A SECONDARY ACCESS POINT. 46 WAS APPROVED AND WOULD WORK WITH A SECONDARY ACCESS POINT. SO IT'S REALLY COMING DOWN TO THE SECONDARY ACCESS POINT. AND YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED 46. THAT'S PRECEDENCE FOR YOU. AND I CAN I CAN I ASK ONE QUESTION IN THERE. SURE. MY ENGINEER I'M ASSUMING Y'ALL HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A CONVERSATION, BUT MAYBE NOT MUCH. DID. WAS THERE ANYTHING MISCOUCHE THAT THAT IT LOOKED LIKE TO YOU ON THAT 46 THAT YOU, THAT YOU AND BRIAN THE ENGINEER COULD WORK OUT? I MEAN, WAS THERE ANYTHING ONLY CONVERSATION I HAD WITH HIM WAS AND AND I CUT HIM OFF BECAUSE I SAID, I'M JUST TIRED. I JUST WANT TO GO TO THE 30 AND THEN IT DOESN'T AFFECT ME, YOU KNOW? SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS IN THAT 46, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'VE SEEN THAT WOULD BE AFFIXED TO WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE TODAY? EVERY TIME, ALL THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BUT THE SECONDARY ACTIONSCRIPT. FIVE. WELL, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO SET A REAL PRESENCE HERE FELLAS, YOU KNOW, AND LADIES BECAUSE THAT MEANS ANYTHING THAT EVER COMES THAT HAS TOPOL ISSUES THAT EVER HAS ANYTHING ELSE IN THERE. YOU'VE LOCKED YOURSELF IN RIGHT HERE TODAY. SO I'M GOING TO JUST LEAVE IT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE, OF THE COMMISSION. WELL, I WANT TO ASK YOU ONE, ONE DIRECT QUESTION. OKAY. SO. THE DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF HOUSES THAT YOU WOULD, YOU COULD PROPOSE. IS THAT SECONDARY ACCESS POINT JUST OFF THE TABLE PERIOD. I'VE BEEN CONFUSED AND AND AND MISS KUSH KNOWS I'VE BEEN CONFUSED THE WHOLE ENTIRE TIME. BECAUSE THE FIRST TIME THAT Y'ALL SAID, I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING A ROAD ALL THE WAY AROUND THE EXISTING, THAT WHAT WOULD BE THE EXISTING LOTS. AND THEN I WAS TOLD THAT THAT WASN'T CORRECT. NOW TO ME, A FIRE AND AND AMBULANCE AND ALL THAT IN THERE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S WHAT THAT REQUIREMENT LOOKS LIKE, BEING HONEST, BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT THE TOLL POLE AROUND THAT EDGE. THAT'S A BEAUTIFUL FLAT RIDGE IN THERE. BUT WHEN YOU GET OFF THE SIDE OF THE HILL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO AND 300FT OF DESCENT. OKAY. LET'S PAUSE RIGHT THERE FOR A SECOND. COMMISSIONER KUSH. YES. CAN CAN YOU BRIEFLY STATE WHAT WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR A SECONDARY ACCESS FOR THIS APPLICATION? ACCESS TO ANOTHER COLLECTOR ROAD, NOT TO LINCOLN PARK DRIVE. THAT REGIONAL. SO WHAT ROAD IS THAT? CORRECT. FRANKLIN PARK DRIVE IS THE SOUTHERNMOST ROAD OF THAT. I'M GOING TO CALL IT THE HORSESHOE OF HOUSES IN THE MIDDLE. YES. THE SOUTHERNMOST ROAD IS FRANKLIN ROAD. WELL, WHAT IS ANOTHER COLLECTOR ROAD? FAR FROM? AGAIN, WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION AT LEAST FIVE TIMES. I DON'T OWN THAT PROPERTY. I EVEN WENT TO DRUMMOND. DRUMMOND COAL OWNS THAT PROPERTY. I GUESS THAT WOULD BE TO THE SOUTH OR TO THE EAST, AND HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THEM. OKAY. THEY'RE EVENTUALLY PROBABLY GOING TO DEVELOP THEIR LAND. I WOULD ASSUME THEY HAVE SO FAR. THAT'S WHAT PART OF JERSEY PARK THAT THEY NOW HAVE OVER. THERE WAS [00:40:02] PART OF DRUMMOND'S HOLDINGS OVER THERE. OKAY, MR. KANE, I JUST WANT TO PAUSE YOU. I MEAN, I WAS TRYING TO ASK A SIMPLE QUESTION. NOW WE'RE BACK TO BONE DRY, THOUGH. WELL, HE'S EXPLAINED WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO WHAT'S NEEDED FOR A SECONDARY ACCESS POINT. YOU SAID YOU WEREN'T SURE. SO YOU UNDERSTAND. WHAT HE SAID IS THAT WE'RE RIGHT BACK TO BONE DRY. HANG ON. IS THAT ON THE TABLE OR OFF THE TABLE? CAN YOU DO IT OR DO YOU WANT TO OR NOT? I DON'T OWN ANY PROPERTY. SO THAT'S A NO. AND AND MY ACCESS POINT IS NEVER BEEN UP THERE. MY ACCESS POINT IS EXACTLY WHERE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN. OKAY. SINCE 2007, SINCE I BOUGHT IT, IT'S EXACTLY HOW Y'ALL LEFT IT WHEN IT WAS ENGINEERED OUT ORIGINALLY. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. KANE. I THINK WE UNDERSTAND. WE GOT ALL WE NEED. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW AND ASK, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSIONERS BEFORE WE BEFORE I ASK FOR A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. IF NOT, MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? MR. CHAIRMAN, RECOMMENDED MOTION FOR DENIAL ON CASE NUMBER S. I'M SORRY, Z 24 0056, DUE TO LACK OF SECONDARY EMERGENCY ACCESS PROVIDED TO COLLECTOR ROAD. ALL RIGHT, HAVE A MOTION. MAY I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. I'M GOING TO CALL FOR. ROLL. LET'S DO A ROLL CALL. AND I ARE IN FAVOR IS IN FAVOR OF DENIAL. I IN FAVOR DENIAL. I, PATRICK GILBERT I JOSEPH ANDREWS, I. KENNETH KUSH I KENNY MCMURRAY. MEMBER BROWN I IN LOWRY I SORRY. SO MOTION PASSES ACTUALLY UNANIMOUSLY TO RECOMMEND DENIAL TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR YOUR TIME AND PATIENCE AND GOING THROUGH THIS ONE. WE WENT A LITTLE BIT OVER ON IT, BUT IT WAS NECESSARY TO COVER THE INFORMATION WE NEEDED TO COVER. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO [Z-25-0034 Yasmin Chemin, owner; requests a change of zoning to I-1 (Light Industrial) to allow twenty (20) warehouse units. Property zoned C-1 (Commercial). PID# 2900314000012000 in section 31 / Township 18/ Range 3 W. (Site address 2940 Shannon Wenonah Road, Bessemer, 35022)(0.45 Acres +/-) ] TO OUR NEXT ZONING CASE IS Z 25 0034. THE APPLICANT IS YASMEEN. AND I'M NOT GOING TO PRONOUNCE YOUR LAST NAME RIGHT. SO IT STARTS WITH A C. SO REQUEST THE CHANGE OF ZONING FROM I ONE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL I'M SORRY TWO I-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO ALLOW 20 WAREHOUSE UNITS. THIS IS AT 2940 SHANNON WINONA ROAD, BESSEMER. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 2012 BY 24 PUBLIC STORAGE UNITS. IF YOU LOOK TO THE NORTHEAST, THERE IS A PUBLIC MINI WAREHOUSE STORAGE FACILITY LOCATED THERE. IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED C ONE. IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR, OCTOBER 9TH, 2025. PUBLIC STORAGE UNITS WERE ALLOWED IN THE C ONE ZONING DISTRICT, BUT SINCE THEN THERE ARE NO LONGER ALLOWED IN THE C-1 ZONING DISTRICT. THEY'RE ALLOWED ONLY IN THE INSTITUTIONAL AND ANYTHING A LITTLE HIGHER THAN THAT ZONING DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSAL IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH OR NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE OF QUARTER COMMERCIAL QUARTER, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REZONING CASE? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? WOULD YOU PLEASE COME UP AND FIRST TELL ME YOUR NAME AND HOW TO PRONOUNCE THE LAST NAME? YASMIN. SHAMIM. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE. 940 SHANNON. WIN ON THE ROAD. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS TOWARDS THE PRESENTATION OF THE CASE BY STAFF? NOT AT THE MOMENT. WE ARE JUST TRYING TO HAVE USED TO THE LAND BECAUSE LAST YEAR IT WAS REZONED TO COMMERCIAL. AND WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO WATER THERE. THE CLOSEST PIPE IS 400M, 400FT. SO IT MAKES THE PLAN NOT VERY FEASIBLE TO OUR INITIAL PLAN. THAT WAS WAREHOUSE. WE'RE JUST SWITCHING TO A PROJECT THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO HAVE SOMETHING GOING ON IN THAT LAND WITHOUT USING THE WATER. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND SO IS AS THEY JUST PRESENTED, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A REZONING TO I-1, WHICH IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THAT'S THE ZONING FOR WAREHOUSE UNITS, AND IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED C-1 FROM YOUR PREVIOUS REZONING CASE. AND WE HAVE A LAND USE PLAN THAT [00:45:08] BASICALLY SAYS THAT THIS IS A I GET THE RIGHT WORDS HERE. RESIDENTIAL, SUBURBAN, RESIDENTIAL. IS THAT RIGHT? COMMERCIAL. COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR. OKAY. I'M SORRY. TOO MANY CASES TODAY. SO ANYWAY, IT'S A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AND INDUSTRIAL IS NOT ALLOWED IN THAT ZONE. SO THE RECOMMENDATION TO STICK WITH OUR PLAN AND ZONING IS NOT TO REZONE TO AN INDUSTRIAL ZONING IN THAT AREA. SO IT'S NOT IT'S NOT ALLOWED. YOU CAN'T REZONE IT TO INDUSTRIAL IS CORRECT. SO. MICHAEL, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED TO ADD? NO. SO I MEAN THAT'S THAT'S THE THAT'S THE CURRENT PLAN. YES. SO I MEAN THERE ARE OTHER USES FOR THE LAND. AND IF YOU WANT TO AFTER THE MEETING, YOU CAN TALK TO THE STAFF AND ASK ABOUT WHAT OTHER USES YOU COULD HAVE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO I MEAN. IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW OUR RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THIS. THAT THE, THE ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY? NO. THAT'S ALL OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO. ALL RIGHT, SO MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE, MR. CHAIRMAN? MOTION TO RECOMMEND DENIAL FOR CASE Z 25 0034, DUE TO NOT BEING COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN. MAY I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? ALL RIGHT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I, I. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES FOR DENIAL. UNANIMOUS. OKAY, OUR NEXT ZONING CASE. AND JUST IN CASE IT WAS ON THE AGENDA, WE HAD A ZONING CASE Z 26 0001 THAT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. SO IF ANYBODY WAS HERE FOR THAT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HEAR THAT CASE. THE [Z-26-0002 Terrance Ingram, owner; requests a change of zoning to INST-3 (Institutional) for a supervised residential group home for ages 14-18. Property zoned R-6 (Single Family). PID# 2200101005003001 in section 10/ Township 17/ Range 3W. (Site address 4531 Embry Road, Birmingham, 35207)(0.76 Acres +/-)] ZONING CASE IS Z 26 0002. THE APPLICANT IS TERENCE INGRAM. IT'S A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING TO INSTITUTIONAL THREE FOR A SUPERVISED RESIDENTIAL GROUP HOME FOR AGES 14 TO 16 AT 4531 EMORY ROAD, BIRMINGHAM. GO AHEAD. YES, SIR. THE APPLICANT ALSO IS ALSO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. THE RESIDENT CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF SIX BEDROOMS, FOUR BATHS, A BONUS ROOM, AN OFFICE, TWO KITCHENS, TWO LAUNDRY AREAS, THREE DRIVEWAYS THAT ARE COLLECTIVELY ACCOMMODATE UP TO SIX VEHICLES. THIS GROUP HOME WOULD ACTUALLY CONSIST OF YOUTH AGES 14 THROUGH 18. THERE WOULD BE REFERRED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. THERE WOULD BE 24 HOUR SUPERVISION THAT WOULD BE IN ROTATION AT THIS LOCATION. AS FAR AS THE THE LAND USE. THE THE, THE, THE, THE LAND USE PROPOSES THAT THE INSTITUTIONAL ZONING SHOULD PROVIDE SERVICES SUCH AS SOCIAL MEDIA, MEDICAL, MENTAL AND REHABILITATIVE LAND USES, AND THE FUTURE LAND USE FOR THIS DESIGNATION IS SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THIS AS WELL. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS REZONING CASE? EVERYBODY HERE. RIGHT. OKAY. SO I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU A PIECE OF GOOD WISDOM WHEN WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE IS THAT YOU'RE ALL CERTAINLY WELCOME TO SPEAK. WE DO HAVE 15 MINUTE LIMIT FOR EVERYBODY. SO IF YOU HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE OR SEVERAL REPRESENTATIVES THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK, AND THEN THAT'S THE FIRST THING. AND THEN SO DO I KNOW YOU. 15 MINUTES TOTAL NOW 15 MINUTES PER PERSON. TOTAL. YES. SO GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS NORMAN DIXON. I LIVE AT 4817 LEO LANE IN THE NORTH SMITHFIELD MOUNT GREENLEAF COMMUNITY. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF OPPOSITION AGAINST THIS BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A RESIDENCE THAT'S SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. IT'S BEEN THAT WAY FOR YEARS. AND THE THING HERE IS OUR COMMUNITY. WE HAVE FIRST AND SECOND GENERATION ALREADY MOVING BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY. AND SO THIS WILL CAUSE FOR US TO OPEN UP OTHER DOORS FOR OTHER BUSINESSES THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO COME INTO OUR COMMUNITY. SO WE ARE REALLY TOTALLY AGAINST THIS BEING REZONED TO INSTITUTIONAL THREE. WE REALLY, REALLY RESPECT THE ASK YOU TO [00:50:04] CONTINUE TO ALLOW IT TO BE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN THERE FOR YEARS. WE HAVE 400 HOMES THERE. WE DO LIVE IN A NICE COMMUNITY. WE DO ON OUR OWN FIRE DEPARTMENT AS WELL. AND SO THIS WOULD NOT EVEN MATCH UP WITH WHAT WE HAVE HERE. BUT AS I SAID EARLIER, WE DO HAVE AT LEAST A THIRD. SOME THIRD GENERATIONAL KIDS ARE MOVING BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY AFTER THEIR PARENTS ARE DECEASED. AT THE PRESENT TIMES, WE DO HAVE A ANOTHER GENERATION THAT'S ACTUALLY BUILDING A HOUSE ON THEIR PARENTS PROPERTY. RIGHT NOW. TWO OF THE SONS ARE ACTUALLY BUILDING THERE. SO THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD NOT BE COMPATIBLE TO WHO WE ARE AS NORTH SMITHFIELD, MOUNT GREENLEAF COMMUNITY. SO AS I SAID, WE RESPECTFULLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, BUT ALSO WE ARE TOTALLY AGAINST THIS BEING REZONED TO INSTITUTIONAL THREE. THANK YOU, MR. DIXON. SO IF SO, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. AND IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO ADD THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM THAT, YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME UP. AND YOU KNOW THE FIRST PART. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. I'M ANGELA SANDERSON, 4717 NORTH SMITHFIELD DRIVE. I AM ACTUALLY ONE OF THE THE GENERATIONAL CHILDREN THAT ARE COMING BACK TO THEIR PARENTS HOME. AND AS THE GENTLEMAN SAID, WE ARE ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED TO THIS. AGAIN, I'M COMING FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK, WHERE I HAVE BEEN IN HEALTH CARE AND DEALT WITH THE 14 TO 16 YEAR OLD GENERATION OF CHILDREN. AND EVEN WHEN THEY'RE ILL, THEY CAUSE ISSUES. AND SO THOSE THAT ARE GOING TO BE WELL WILL CAUSE THOSE ISSUES. SO AGAIN, I GET THE 24 HOUR SUPERVISION AND SO FORTH AND SO ON. BUT YOU WE WILL NOT HAVE ANY CONTROL ONCE THEY ARE PERMITTED OFF THE COMMUNITY. AND AGAIN, OUR ELDERLY POPULATION, THEY ARE THEY'RE HERE TO LIVE OUT THEIR GOLDEN YEARS, NOT TO BE LOOKING ON THE SIDE OR BEHIND THEMSELVES WHEN THEY WALK OUT OF THEIR RESIDENCE TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE THINGS GOING ON. AND I GET IT, IF THE IF THE PARENTS OF THESE CHILDREN THAT ARE GOING TO BE IN THIS RESIDENTIAL HOME CAN'T CONTROL THEM, HOW DO THEY FEEL THAT SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT? OKAY, SO THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME. ALL RIGHT. AGAIN, YOU'RE WOULD SOMEONE ELSE LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON SOMETHING ADDING TO THAT PLEASE. AND BY THE WAY, Y'ALL HAVE A GREAT COMMUNITY SHOWING UP LIKE THIS. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS CAROLINE SMITH AND I LIVE AT 4831 HUDSON AVENUE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ON OUR CONCERNS REGARDING THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FROM OUR RESIDENTIAL TO I THREE INSTITUTIONAL TO ALLOW FOR A SUPERVISORY HOME, WE RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THIS LETTER TO FORMALLY OBJECT TO THE PROPOSED REZONING. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS EXISTED FOR MORE THAN 65 YEARS OR MORE, AND WE HAVE PERSONALLY. I HAVE PERSONALLY LIVED IN THIS IN MY HOME FOR OVER 50 YEARS. DURING THAT TIME, THE AREA HAS CONSISTENTLY REMAINED AN RC SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. IT HAS LONG BEEN A STABLE, QUIET AND WELL-ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD. TODAY, THE MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY ARE SENIOR CITIZENS, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT MANY OF US HAVE RAISED OUR CHILDREN HERE AND IN SOME CASES, OUR GRANDCHILDREN AS WELL. AND BEFORE THEY'VE MOVED AND THEY'VE ESTABLISHED HOMES AND THEIR OF THEIR OWN. NOW, AT THIS STAGE IN OUR LIVES, WE DEEPLY VALUE THE STABILITY, THE SAFETY AND THE PEACEFUL CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE KNOWN FOR DECADES. WE ARE CONCERNED THAT CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION TO AN INSTITUTIONAL THREE INSTITUTION WOULD ALTER THE ESTABLISHED CHARACTER OF OUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA. AS LONGTIME HOMEOWNERS AND TAXPAYERS, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR OUR COMMUNITY LEADERS TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR EXISTING RC ZONING AND TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOR OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION HAS BEEN OCCUPIED IN ITS CURRENT FORM FOR APPROXIMATELY 3 TO 4 YEARS FOLLOWING RENOVATION. IN CONTRAST, THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY HAS REMAINED CONSTANTLY ZONED AS AN RC RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY FOR MANY DECADES. WE BELIEVE MAINTAINING THE CURRENT ZONING IS IMPORTANT TO PRESERVING THE COMMUNITY, THE EXPECTATIONS AND THE LONG [00:55:06] STANDING CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. FOR THESE REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU DENY THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE AND ALLOW OUR COMMUNITY TO REMAIN OUR SIX SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THAT YOU DO FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS NAKIA ROSS. I LIVE AT 4824 ROAD. I'VE BEEN DEPLOYED THREE TIMES TO IRAQ. I SERVED IN THE MILITARY FOR 12 YEARS. MY MOTHER SERVED FOR 33. AND AS VETERANS, I WOULD IMPLORE YOU TO DENY. I COMMEND THE INGRAMS ON WHAT THEY'RE DOING, BUT OUR COMMUNITY IS NOT THE PLACE TO DO IT. AS A MILITARY VETERAN, I HAVE BEEN IN CHARGE OF MANY, MANY YOUNG PEOPLE, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT IT TAKES TO DISCIPLINE THEM AND MOLD THEM. BUT IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT IS NOT THE PLACE TO DO IT. THERE ARE MANY PLACES THAT YOU CAN DO THIS, BUT IT TAKES A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PERSON AND A LONG TERM TYPE OF PATIENCE TO MOLD SOMEONE THAT NEEDS THAT TYPE OF NURTURING, NURTURE AND A A. I'M GETTING FLUSTERED IN THE THE THOUGHT OF HAVING TO TRY TO VERBALIZE WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY, BECAUSE IT REALLY TAKES A COURAGE, A REAL COURAGE TO TRY TO DO THIS. AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY, LIKE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FILLED WITH MY AUNTS AND UNCLES AND GRANDPARENTS, AND I AM FOURTH GENERATION. I CAME BACK HOME TO TAKE CARE OF MY MAMA THAT HAD STROKE AND SEIZURES. I DIDN'T THINK THAT I WOULD COME, I DIDN'T, I WANTED TO MATCH MY MOM AND HER YEARS. I TOLD HER THAT I WOULD, BUT I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE BECAUSE I GOT HURT WHEN I WAS IN IRAQ. SO I, I APPRECIATE WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO, BUT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT THE PLACE TO DO IT. I'M RAISING MY DAUGHTER HERE, AND I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO CONTEND WITH THE CHILDREN THAT NEED A DIFFERENT TYPE OF NURTURING THAT I'M NOT WILLING, NOT WILLING, BUT DON'T HAVE THE THE PATIENCE TO GIVE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF MY MOM AND TAKE CARE OF THESE PEOPLE THAT HAVE GIVEN THEIR LIVES TO A DIFFERENT TYPE OF THING THAT THEY HAVE TO DO AND RAISE THEIR CHILDREN NOW. SO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS QUIET AND PEACEFUL, AND OUR CHILDREN NEED THAT TYPE OF QUIET AND PEACEFUL. SO I WOULD EMPLOY THEM TO TRY TO FIND ANOTHER PLACE TO DO IT AND NOT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M SORRY. ALL RIGHT. SO AGAIN, IF WE STILL GOT SOME TIME LEFT, IF SOMEBODY HAS ANYTHING DIFFERENT TO ADD, PLEASE COME UP AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. MY FIRST TIME SPEAKING. SO I'M VERY WELCOMING. I'M KEN, SO I'M GLAD YOU'RE HERE. TAKE YOUR TIME. CLARENCE ROGERS, JUNIOR. 49 MARIGOLD AVENUE. MY MOM RECENTLY PASSED THREE YEARS AGO TODAY. IT'S HER BIRTHDAY. SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS, MA'AM. I NEVER LEFT HER. I STAYED IN HER HOUSE. NOW, I ALSO HAD MY CHILDREN. THREE GIRLS AND A BOY. STAY WITH ME. THEY GO TO THE SCHOOL. I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT MY KIDS WHEN THEY GO OUTSIDE. I LOVE THAT I WANT THEM TO EXPERIENCE EVERYTHING THAT I EXPERIENCED IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I WANT THEM TO EXPERIENCE EVERYTHING FROM THE SCHOOL SYSTEM TO WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, JUST THE PEACEFULNESS OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I LOVE THAT ABOUT MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I KNOW MOST OF THESE PEOPLE DOWN THE STREET. MY BEST FRIEND MOTHER RIGHT THERE. I LOVE THAT WE DON'T HAVE NO PROBLEMS, DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS. AND I KNOW WITH SOME CHILDREN ESPECIALLY, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS. AND. I JUST I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, US BEING ZONED OUT BECAUSE WE, WE, WE JUST RECENTLY WENT THROUGH THAT LAST COUPLE YEARS. AND IF THOSE DISRUPTIVE KIDS GO TO THAT SCHOOL, THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT MY CHILDREN AND WHAT SCHOOL THEY GET ZONED FOR, IT'S LITTLE STUFF LIKE THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW, I JUST MY, MY, MY MAIN REASON IS THE PROTECTION OF MY CHILDREN AND PROPERTY [01:00:06] VALUE HAVING, YOU KNOW, JUST BEING PEACEFUL. I JUST I JUST WANT PEACE. I LOVE IT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT. WE GOT ABOUT FOUR MORE MINUTES, BUT I'VE HEARD EVERYBODY. AND I GET THE WHOLE FEELING FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. BUT YOU'RE WELCOME TO HAVE A COUPLE MORE DAYS IF YOU WANT. BUT I NEED TO GIVE THE APPLICANT A FEW MINUTES TO. PLEASE, SIR. GO AHEAD. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. I WON'T TAKE UP FOUR MINUTES. I PROBABLY TWO MINUTES. MY FAMILY OWNED SEVERAL ACRES OUT THERE. MOST PEOPLE CALL IT CAT MOUNTAIN, AND WE'VE BEEN THERE SINCE THE EARLY 50S. WE'VE SEEN THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD COME UP. IT'S IT'S. I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT GOT THE NICKNAME CAT MOUNTAIN. MAYBE BECAUSE IT'S QUIET LIKE A CAT. BUT ANYWAY, WE LIKE FOR IT TO STAY. EXCUSE ME. WE'D LIKE FOR IT TO STAY THAT WAY. YOU KNOW, WE I KNOW HOW COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES CAN COME IN AND DIVIDE A NEIGHBORHOOD UP, AND IT HAS AN EFFECT ON THE PROPERTY VALUE AS WELL. SO WE JUST WITH ALL MY HEART WOULD LIKE FOR IT TO STAY THAT WAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR. WE NEED YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. MY NAME IS LEROY WILLIAMS. MY ADDRESS IS 1344 57TH STREET WEST, BIRMINGHAM. 35228. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. WILLIAMS. I TOOK A MINUTE. 30S. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS WILL BE OUR LAST OPPOSITION COMMENT. OKAY. I'LL CLOSE THE DOOR. MY NAME IS BRYANT HILL. I'M 4836 HUDSON AVENUE. MY WIFE IS A SECOND GENERATION OF NORTH SMITHFIELD MANOR. WE BUILT OUR HOME THERE 28 YEARS AGO. FIRST OF ALL, WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL TO YOU PICKING UP THE TRASH, BUT WE'RE NOT VERY GRATEFUL. LEAVING BY FLYING J. THE SECOND THING IS, IS THAT, AS YOU ARE AWARE, ANY AGE BETWEEN THE AGE OF 14 TO 18, THAT'S COMING UP FROM THE ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION, THEY COME IN WITH TROUBLE. THEY COME IN AUTOMATICALLY, AND THAT'S A PRICE ON THEIR HEAD. AND ANY ENTITIES OR BUSINESS, YOU DO BUSINESS FOR MONEY, YOU'RE NOT DOING BUSINESS FOR CARE. BECAUSE IF THAT WAS, YOU WOULD DEVELOP A GROUP HOME AWAY FROM OUR RESIDENTS. BUT WE STAY AT AND MAKE IT A PERMANENT PRIMARY RESIDENCE BECAUSE WE THOSE KIDS AND THOSE KIDS AGE OUT IN 19, THE ONLY PLACE THEY KNOW TO HANG AROUND IS WHERE THEY CAME BACK. AND THAT'S WHEN TROUBLE STARTS, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO AGE OUT. AND ONCE THEY AGE OUT, THEY HANG AROUND. THEY FIND SOMETHING ELSE OTHER TO DO OTHER THAN GOING TO THE MILITARY OTHER THAN FINDING EMPLOYMENT. THAT'S WHEN THEFT AND CRIME STARTS. WE DON'T WANT THAT IN NORTH SMITHFIELD MANOR, GREENLEAF HEIGHTS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR COMMENTS TODAY. WE APPRECIATE IT. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? WOULD YOU COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE, AND I'LL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY. IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS. YES, SIR. MY NAME IS TERRENCE INGRAM. I'M THE APPLICANT AT 4531 EMBURY ROAD. I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING, AND I ESPECIALLY WANT TO THANK MY NEIGHBORS FOR SHOWING UP. AND I'VE LISTENED INTENTLY TO EVERYTHING THAT THEY'VE SAID. I ALSO WANT TO THANK MISS CONNIE FOR HER GREAT WORK, ACTING AS MEDIUM BETWEEN ME AND THE COMMISSION HERE. I'VE HEARD A LOT THAT I HAVEN'T HEARD BEFORE. I KNOCKED ON SEVERAL DOORS AFTER MAKING THIS APPLICATION, AND SO I WANT TO STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION. OKAY. BUT I DO WANT TO ADDRESS A FEW THINGS THAT I HEARD IN THE SPIRIT OF TRANSPARENCY, FORTHRIGHTNESS, AND ALSO EQUITABILITY. ONE, THE INTENT WAS TO DO GOOD, THAT THAT WAS OUR SOLE INTENT. MY SISTER WHO'S HERE WITH ME TODAY, SHE'S A 20 YEAR ACTIVE DUTY MAJOR IN THE AIR FORCE, AND SHE'S A SOCIAL CARE PROFESSIONAL, A SOCIAL WORKER AND MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELOR BY PROFESSION. I RECENTLY OBTAINED A JOB IN DC AND I HAVE TO MOVE TO DC AS A RESULT OF THAT JOB. SHE CAME TO ME AND SHE SAID, TERRENCE, IF WE CAN KEEP THIS HOME IN THE FAMILY, IT WOULD GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALWAYS HAVE A PLACE HERE. IF YOU WERE TO RETURN TO BIRMINGHAM. AND SO AS A RESULT, WE BEGAN TO BRAINSTORM, WELL, HOW CAN WE KEEP THE HOME IN THE FAMILY AND DO GOOD? AND THIS IS WHERE WE ARRIVED. SO I WANT TO STATE [01:05:04] THAT. I ALSO WANT TO SAY, AS IT RELATES TO DH, THIS IS WHAT I MEAN WHEN I SAY I WANT TO SPEAK IN THE SPIRIT OF EQUITABILITY, CHILDREN CAN BE DISPLACED FOR VARIOUS REASONS. AND IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THEY ARE TROUBLED OR THAT THEY ARE DYSFUNCTIONAL BECAUSE OF FAMILY CIRCUMSTANCE OR ISSUE. I'M JUST SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE CHILDREN BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT HERE TO SPEAK UP FOR THEMSELVES. I ALSO JUST HEARD THE GENTLEMAN SAY THAT WHEN I PICK UP TRASH, BECAUSE I DO DO THAT IN THE COMMUNITY, THAT I LEAVE IT AT FLYING J. I HAVE NEVER LEFT ANY TRASH AT FLYING J. I STARTED A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION SEVEN YEARS AGO WORKING WITH YOUNG PEOPLE. WE'VE GRADUATED YOUNG MEN BETWEEN THE AGES OF 14 TO 18 YEARS OLD WHO ARE NOW AT VARIOUS HBCUS, WHO HAVE ENTERED THE WORKFORCE, WHO HAVE OBTAINED CREDENTIALS IN HVAC AND MECHANICS AND OTHERWISE. AND SO THAT IS THE WORK THAT I DO. I HAVE PAID THOSE YOUNG MEN WHEN THEY'RE IN OUR PROGRAM, BETWEEN 2 TO $3000 OUT OF MY OWN POCKET OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS TO PICK UP THAT TRASH. AND WHEN WE PICK IT UP, WE TAKE IT TO A DUMP SITE WHERE WE'VE BEEN APPROVED TO LEAVE THAT TRASH THERE. I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT, BECAUSE I THINK THE THEME ON WHICH I'M SPEAKING THIS MORNING IS A THEME OF DOING GOOD. THAT IS WHAT ALL OF THIS WAS ABOUT. BUT NOW THAT I'VE HEARD MANY OF THE COMMENTS THAT I HAVE NOT HEARD BEFORE, I'VE BEEN ABLE TO OBTAIN CLARITY. AND WITH THAT CLARITY, I'VE ALSO BEEN ABLE TO OBTAIN SOME MISALIGNMENT, PERHAPS IN VALUES, MAYBE EVEN IN FAITH, THAT I WAS ACTING COMPLETELY IN GOOD CONSCIENCE. AND HAD I KNOWN UPFRONT THAT THESE ISSUES WERE IN THE MINDS OF MY NEIGHBORS, I WOULD HAVE NEVER PURSUED IT TO THIS EXTENT. THE LAST THING I'D LIKE TO SAY IS IN RELATION TO TAXES, BECAUSE THERE WAS ONE PERSON, AS WE WERE KNOCKING DOORS, WHO SAID THAT SHE FEARED AS AN ELDERLY WOMAN THAT THIS COULD INCREASE HER TAXES AND MAKE AFFORDABILITY HARDER AND MORE DIFFICULT IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND SO WHAT I DID IS I CAME HERE TO THE COUNTY ON TWO DIFFERENT OCCASIONS. I SPOKE TO THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, AND I SPOKE TO THE TAX ASSESSOR OFFICE, BOTH OF WHICH ASSURED ME THAT THE WAY VALUATIONS AND TAXES ARE DETERMINED IS BASED UPON THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY, AND THAT IF ANYTHING WERE TO IMPACT THE TAXES, IT WOULD LIKELY BE MY SELLING THE HOME AT A HIGHER RATE OR A HIGHER PRICE THAN THE AVERAGE PRICES OF HOMES IN THE COMMUNITY. SO I WANT TO CLOSE BY LETTING MY NEIGHBORS KNOW THAT THE REASON I MOVED INTO THIS COMMUNITY AND RENOVATED THAT DISTRESSED PROPERTY, TO THE DEGREE THAT I DID, IT WAS A WHOLESALE, MASSIVE UNDERTAKING THAT ALMOST WIPED ME OUT IN MORE WAYS THAN I CAN DISCUSS RIGHT NOW WAS BECAUSE OF THE HISTORY OF THAT HOME THAT THAT THAT THE KNOLLS WERE THERE TRYING TO CREATE A DIFFERENCE, MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE LIVES OF THEIR GRANDCHILDREN. AND I THOUGHT, WHAT A REDEMPTION STORY, WHAT A REDEMPTION SONG FOR THAT SAME HOME, TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR OTHER YOUNG PEOPLE WHO WERE DISPLACED, TO HAVE A BETTER OUTCOME THAN WHAT THE HOME REPRESENTS NOW, HISTORICALLY. BUT I BELIEVE IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND I WISH OUR VALUES WERE MORE ALIGNED. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT, I'M FOR THE COMMUNITY MORE THAN I'M FOR MYSELF. AND SO I'LL CONCLUDE BY SAYING I RESPECTFULLY WITHDRAW THIS APPLICATION. MR. INGRAM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR REMARKS TO MICHAEL. IS THERE ANY BUSINESS WE NEED TO DO WITH RELATED TO THE WITHDRAWAL? JUST WITHDRAW THE PUBLIC HEARING, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE ONE LAST CASE [26001M / MISC250757 Ruben Ortiz-Galeana and Mayra Campos-Salazar, owners; request a special use permit for a mobile home for family use only in addition to an existing mobile home. Property zoned A-1 (Agriculture). PID# 0900032007001001 in section 03/ Township 15/ Range 1W. (Site address 8810 Mountain Street N, Pinson, 35126)(5.35 Acres +/-)] TO HEAR TODAY, AND IT'S A SPECIAL USE CASE. THE STAFF IS GOING TO PRESENT THE CASE TO THE COMMISSION. AND THEN WE'LL CALL FOR ANY OPPOSITION. AND THE APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE MAY BE ASKED TO COME FORWARD TO THE PODIUM TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THE CASE NUMBER IS 26 001M SLASH M I SC 250757. THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE RUBEN ORTIZ AND MYRA CAMPOS. THIS IS [01:10:05] A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR MOBILE HOME FOR FAMILY USE ONLY. IN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING MOBILE HOME AT 8810 MOUNTAIN STREET NORTH, PINSON, ALABAMA. GO AHEAD CONNIE, WHEN YOU'RE READY. WELL, LET'S LET EVERYBODY CLEAR OUT OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, CONNIE, TALK LOUD OVER THEM, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. I CERTAINLY WILL TRY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING WHERE THERE'S AN EXISTING MOBILE HOME ON THE PROPERTY AND TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. THE THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SECOND MOBILE HOME FOR IN-LAWS. ACCORDING TO OUR ZONING REGULATIONS, SPECIAL USE IS ALLOWED ANYTIME WE'RE ADDING AN ADDITIONAL MOBILE HOME ON THE PROPERTY. IT HAS TO BE OWNER OCCUPIED OR OCCUPIED BY AN IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER. THIS, LIKE I SAID, THIS IS GOING TO BE OCCUPIED BY THE IN-LAWS. IT REQUESTS A MINIMUM OF ONE ACRE FOR TWO MOBILE HOMES. THIS LOT IS 5.35 ACRES AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY HERE IN OPPOSITION OF THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT? ALL RIGHT. DID THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS? OKAY. MAY I HAVE A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I RECOMMEND A MOTION FOR APPROVAL ON CASE NUMBER 2601 M SPECIAL USE SLASH MISCELLANEOUS 250757 SECOND. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I. ANYONE OPPOSED? ALRIGHT. MOTION PASSES. THAT CONCL * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.