Meeting discussionsStart with a topic.

And of course, people uh really like the green spaces and they would like to see more green spaces. Uh, and I have a little bit of uh to show on that here in a minute, too. And of course, parking and accessibility, the location of parking. These will continue to be concerns and things that you all have the power and the ability to negotiate with the development community to make sure these are welldesigned uh so they are complimentary to the downtown and don't overwhelm your transportation network. When we asked folks what they thought about the preferred concept on the ranking from 1 to 10, originally we asked this in our second public meeting when we had three concepts and those ranked about four, five out of 10. Um, we were really glad to see that the preferred concept rent uh significantly higher at seven out of 10, which is a really positive uh thing to see as part of a process like this. We also asked folks what they thought about King Street. People told us that they love the the walkability, the outdoor dining, the Jono Mile um on things that they'd like to see uh improved. They told us that they'd like to see more of what's already there. So, more bike parking, um you know, more space for outdoor popups or dining. And then there are still some concerns about how does this work during rush hour. And there are some design elements that you all can consider. But of course, King Street is not uh meant to be an arterial road. It's a kind of a low stress street to for walking and biking through your downtown. And connectivity is something that we'll continue to hear about.

is a code amendment uh dealing with the film industry. Section 22-323 regarding requirements for processing applications for film production permits and section 22-328 regarding appeals of application denials and suspension and revocation of film production permits and other provisions. Mr. U mayor in addition to film production this as you read will apply for application denials as well as proceeded for requiring a suspension revocation of those film permits. Staff after review recommends approval of ordinance 2026-005. This will be a code amendment to chapter 22 business article 9 of smrna court of ordinances for film industry the section 22-323. Anybody want to make a motion on item J? Move approval by Miss Hines. Do I have a second? Second by Mr. Gold. Everybody, please vote. And that's approved. 70. All right. Item 10 is a consent agenda.

This is just for a temporary building that has to be reboted on by this council. Yes, the the building is already on site. They moved into the site, brought the um the fuel tank and then the building and the storage um ConX box. We identified it. We've issued a notice violation and this is the sort of the method to getting compliance at this point. So they have their business license. They're operating to clear up the code violation. We're here today trying to correct that. Any other discussion from council? All right. I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Mayor, thank you. Um, while I sympathize with the plight of the people that live adjacent to this property, um, we're not here to reszone this property or or anything else. And this property owner has a right to to use this property to its best use. So, with that, I make a motion to approve item 7DZ25-013. Motion to approve. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Gould. Everyone, please vote. Let's hope our voting systems work. Miss Wilkinson. We're going to have to take a look at our voting system. Huh. That is approved 6 to one with Councilman Oglesby voting in the negative. All right, that completes our um community development items and we'll move on now to formal business. Thank you all for being here for the time earlier uh meeting with council. Um item 8A, this is authorization for on call services, low voltage, fiber optic security, access control, and AV systems. Uh Mr. Jones, any background, please? Uh, mayor, we sent out an RFQ and we had multiple vendors respond uh for the low voltage service and uh using the criteria, the selection criteria provided in an RFQ, this was narrowed down to uh two particular uh vendors to provide support.

I'm going to invite the next citizen here and then I've got a couple of comments I'd like to make. Mitchell Young, 2075 Nancy Circle, City Property Maintenance. Welcome. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. My name is Mitchell Young. I live at 2075 Nancy Circle and I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm here because of a concern regarding city-owned property that borders my property. For years, the city regularly maintained this drainage gully. However, about two years ago, I was informed by the public works director and my council representative that the city would no longer maintain it and that the responsibility would essentially fall on me. I respectfully disagree with that decision. This is not my property. It is city property and it serves a public purpose as part of the city's drainage system. Since maintenance stopped, aggressive invasive plants have spread throughout the gully and these invasive plants are now encroaching onto my property, creating an ongoing burden that should not be expected that I should not be expected to manage. Furthermore, it was suggested at that meeting that I use chemicals to kill the plant life in the gully. I chose not to do so due to the personal cost and the potential environmental impacts as it does feed into a creek system. Beyond the impact on my yard, I am also concerned about the drainage itself. The purpose of this gully is to move storm water safely. As vegetation continues to grow unchecked, there is an increased risk that the flow of water could become obstructed. Delaying maintenance today could result in a much larger and more expensive problem in the future if drainage is compromised. I'm not asking the city to do anything extraordinary. I am simply asking that the city resume maintaining its prop own property as it did for many years.

They are installing a 10-ft sidewalk with two foot grass strip along Cumberland Boulevard and they're adding an additional entrance um with a del lane to the north of the property. Storm water detention will be um contained on the site and there will be a four-level parking deck that's within the multif family development, 675 parking spaces. So they'll be broken down for the multif family and the hotel use. There's five variances requested to allow an increase in the maximum 20 foot side setback of the hotel building. Two, to allow an increase in rental units exceeding 15% of the total number of residential units. Three, allow an increase in res residential density from 25 units to 70 units per acre. for to allow an increase in building height from 66 to 150 ft and five a reduction in the minimum front setback from 50 feet to 15 ft. Staff supports all those variances. These are some rending renderings just to provide scale of the property. And um some renderings of the property and then these are the elevations they've submitted with the application from all sides. These are pictures of the subject property as it currently is. and some adjacent properties along Cumberland Boulevard. Staff is recommending approval of the reszoning from tourist services to mixed use for the mixeduse development with 212 hotel rooms and 328 multif family units. We believe it's in line with the Spring Road LCI study that was adopted by council. I'll summarize these conditions because there's 32 of them, but 1 through 12 are standard conditions regarding the architectural components and tree plantings, um, decorative street lights. 11 is are the special conditions regarding the setbacks for the buildings. 12 through 15. They will have to meet fire, water, and sewer uh sew storm water and traffic improvements. They'll be um at the developer's expense. As mentioned, they will install a diesel lane.

I mean it would depend on their site plan. They may need variances, but it would be an allowable use under the zoning ordinance. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions of Joey? Okay. I'd like to invite the applicant up now. Hello. Hi. You need to swear her in. Okay. Hi. Good evening. You'll just state your name for the rest. Yes. My name is Melissa Marilla. Um, thank you everyone for your time here. Uh, the soccer team is a hard act to follow. [laughter] Um, as Joey explained to everyone, uh, since our project was submitted the first time, we've made several, uh, significant changes. And I won't go through everything in in detail. Joey's covered a lot of things. Um, here on our first slide, we basically show the first uh, site plan that was submitted and our final site plan. All of the changes that we made are represented by the um the green check marks here. This is the final site plan that shows the uh dog park that was moved to the uh western side of the um of the development and the detention pond moved to the lower southern side. Uh we led the corner of um Argo Road and Camp Highland um an empty space so that there's plenty of visibility there um since traffic was a big concern of everyone. This is uh our fire truck um turn exhibit just showing how the um the southern entrance on Argo Road allows for the fire truck to have um plenty of room to go in and turn around and come out. Um, following the discussions with the city staff and and also considering public input, we re we relocated the playground and the dog park, as I mentioned, to the um to the western side of the development and the detention pond to the southern side.

There'll be a 5-ft sidewalk with two-ft grass strip that goes um down Davenport in front of these houses and then continues around the corner on Argo Drive. These are the proposed locations of the uh water quality uh facilities for storm water and there's no variances requested uh with with this resoning. These are the proposed home elevations. These are the same elevations that were proposed with the uh with the resoning to the north and then pictures of the subject property and then adjacent properties. Community development is recommending approval of the resoning from R20 to R8 conditional uh for three single family homes at a density of 4.28 28 units per acre with following conditions um from sta standard conditions from section 1201. Uh number one being dealing with the composition of the homes. Number two, uh requiring the utilities to be underground. Number three, uh the developers responsible for any traffic improvements. Number four, no burring of debris on site. Uh number five, uh compliance with the city's tree ordinance. Six and seven uh or six deals with uh those tree plans being developed by a landscape architect. Number seven, all areas common areas are to be solded and landscaped. Eight is just a planting schedule for each of those lots with either three four three-inch caliber trees or three 4-inch caliber trees. There's some special conditions. Number nine deals with the setbacks um outlined earlier. 10 uh establishes the minimum lot size at at 9600 square ft. 11 establishes the minimum lot width at 50 ft. And then 12 requires a minimum driveway length of 22 feet from building face to back of sidewalk. Uh 13 requires the sidewalk along Argo and Davenport. Uh 14 requires the developer be responsible for any sanitary uh sewer or water improvements deemed necessary by public works.