Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-05-2026 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Packet
Council Chambers, Fairhope Municipal Complex, 161 N Section St For more information, please visit: fairhopeal.gov/departments/planning-and-zoning Sherry Sullivan Mayor Council Members Andrea F. Booth Jack Burrell, ACMO Jimmy Conyers Joshua N. Gammon Jay Robinson Lisa A. Hanks, MMC City Clerk Kimberly Creech City Treasurer Fairhope Planning Commission Agenda October 5, 2026 – 5:00 PM COMMISSIONERS Lee Turner, Chairman Harry Kohler Kim McCormick Rebecca Bryant, Vice Chairman Hollie MacKellar John Worsham Janine Saykes, Secretary Paul Fontenot Erik Cortinas Joshua Gammon (CC) (CC) City Council Representative 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. CONSENT AGENDA • Election of Officers • Approval of 2027 Meeting Schedule • Approval of Minutes – September 10, 2026 3. REGULAR AGENDA OLD BUSINESS A. ZC 26.08 – Building Height Amendment The formation of an ad-hoc Building Height Sub-Committee for the expressed purpose of exploring a potential amendment to Building Height. NEW BUSINESS B. SD 26.17 – Sibley Place Minor Subdivision Request of the Applicant, Seth Moore Surveying, on behalf of the owner, Johan LLC, for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of Sibley Place, a 2-lot Minor Subdivision, on property zoned R-1, Low Density Single-Family District. The property is located on the west side of Main Street and north of Sibley Street and is 1.02± acres. PPIN#: 620482 C. SD 26.18 – ALDI MOP Request of the Applicant, Duplantis Design Group, PC, on behalf of the owner, ALDI, Inc of Alabama for Final Plat approval of ALDI Subdivision, a 2-lot Multiple Occupancy Project, on property zoned B-2, General Page 1 of 124 Council Chambers, Fairhope Municipal Complex, 161 N Section St For more information, please visit: fairhopeal.gov/departments/planning-and-zoning Sherry Sullivan Mayor Council Members Andrea F. Booth Jack Burrell, ACMO Jimmy Conyers Joshua N. Gammon Jay Robinson Lisa A. Hanks, MMC City Clerk Kimberly Creech City Treasurer Business District. The property is located on the northeast corner of State Highway 181 and County Road 48 and is 7.14± acres. PPIN#: 248109 D. SD 26.19 – ALDI Minor Subdivision Request of the Applicant, Duplantis Design Group, PC, on behalf of the owner, ALDI, Inc of Alabama for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of ALDI Subdivision, a 2-lot Minor Subdivision, on property zoned B-2, General Business District. The property is located on the northeast corner of State Highway 181 and County Road 48 and is 7.14± acres. PPIN#: 248109 E. SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates Minor Subdivision Request of the Applicant, Dewberry, on behalf of the owner, Veranda Capital LLC, for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of Middle Street Estates, a 2-lot Non-Administrative Re-Plat, on property zoned R-2, Medium Density Single-Family District. The property is located on the northwest corner of Middle Street and Mershon Street and is 0.69± acres. PPIN#: 58119 F. ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village PUD Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, S.E. Civil, on behalf of the owner, 181 Fairhope Ave 2023 LLC, to rezone property from PUD, Planned Unit Development to PUD, Planned Unit Development for Eastlake Village. The property is located on the west side of State Highway 181, north of Fairhope Avenue and is 75.47± acres. PPINS#: 236701, 24160, 316793 4. PUBLIC FORUM 5. ADJOURN Page 2 of 124 FAIRHOPE PLANNING COMMISSION DEADLINES 2027 AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date, 5:00 PM Submittal Deadline, 9:00 AM Monday, January 4, 2027 Tuesday, November 24, 2026 Monday, February 1, 2027 Tuesday, December 22, 2026 *Moved due to Independence Day Holiday *Moved due to Labor Day Holiday PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS ARE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, FAIRHOPE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX AT 161 N. SECTION STREET. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO SEE THAT ALL SUBMITTALS ARE MADE IN A COMPLETE AND TIMELY SEQUENCE, AND TO HAVE THE CASE PRESENTED BEFORE THE COMMISSION AT SCHEDULED MEETINGS. **INCOMPLETE SUBMITTALS WILL NOT BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA. ** Page 3 of 124 Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes September 10, 2026 – 5:00 PM Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes – September 10, 2026 1 ADMINISTRATIVE The Planning Commission met Thursday, September 10, 2026, at 5:00 PM at the City Municipal Complex, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers. Present: Staff: Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Director; Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager; Payton Rogers, Planning and Zoning Manager; Michelle Melton-Null, City Planner; and Janine Saykes, Planning Clerk. Chairman Lee Turner called the meeting to order at 5:01. CONSENT AGENDA • Approval of the Minutes – August 3, 2026 A correction was made on page 2 of the August minutes to reflect Kim McCormick was absent and did not vote on ZC 25.08. Erik Cortinas made a motion to approve the minutes. Kim McCormick seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None OLD BUSINESS A. ZC 25.08 Continuation of discussion and public hearing regarding potential amendments to Building Height. Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Director, discussed a plan to create a sub-committee to study and make recommendations regarding the Building Height amendments. Erik Cortinas stated that he thought a sub-committee was a good idea. Chairman Turner agreed. There was further discussion on the details of what would be discussed and possibilities of specific people to ask to participate on the committee. Page 4 of 124 Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes – September 10, 2026 2 John Worsham made a motion to create a sub-committee to investigate Building Height. Kim McCormick seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote. AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None B. UR 26.05 Request of Verizon Wireless for the installation of a new small cell tower in downtown Fairhope. Located within the right-of-way near 5 North Church Street. Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager, presented the request on behalf of the Applicant. This case was previously tabled in June for further study for co-location. Mr. Jeffries stated that the existing pole will be moved ten (10) feet to the north allowing more separation from an existing Right-of-Way tree. This will be replacing a pole that is already there. Right-of-Way and utilities agree with the co- location. Staff recommends Approval of UR 26.05 – 5 North Church Street with the following conditions: 1. Install a street light arm on the pole as required by ROW and Utilities; 2. A pre-construction meeting shall be held with the City prior to issuance of any permits; 3. Follow-up activities below required by staff and the applicant: a. Upon satisfactory review and approval by ROW Construction Inspector, as-builts will be submitted to the GIS technician for inclusion in GIS utility maps; 4. Provide a Traffic Control Plan to ROW Inspector prior to commencement of any work; and 5. Applicant shall contact Alabama One Call to locate all existing utilities (1000ft max per day). Chairman Turner asked if there were any questions for staff. No questions were asked. John Worsham made a motion to approve UR 26.05 – 5 North Church Street with Staff recommendations. Erik Cortinas seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None C. UR 26.07 Request of Verizon Wireless for the installation of a new small cell tower in downtown Fairhope. Located within the right-of-way near 100 North Bancroft Street. Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager, presented the request on behalf of the Applicant. This case was previously tabled in June for further study of viability to find an option on adjacent buildings or other options. Mr. Jeffries stated this request is for a new pole at the proposed location. The Applicant has stated that they have not produced another option and may need more time. Staff recommends Approval of UR 26.07 – 100 North Bancroft Street with the following conditions: 1. Install a street light arm on the pole as required by ROW and Utilities; 2. City Council approval of the proposed small cell; Page 5 of 124 Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes – September 10, 2026 3 3. A pre-construction meeting shall be held with the City prior to issuance of any permits; 4. Follow-up activities below required by staff and the applicant: a. Upon satisfactory review and approval by ROW Construction Inspector, as-builts will be submitted to the GIS technician for inclusion in GIS utility maps; 5. Provide a Traffic Control Plan to ROW Inspector prior to commencement of any work; 6. Applicant shall contact Alabama One Call to locate all existing utilities (1000ft max per day); and 7. Co-location shall be required if a viable option is determined. Chairman Turner asked if there were any questions for Staff. Joshua Gammon asked what is considered viable? Mr. Jeffries stated a location on an adjacent building on top of the parapet wall, or another pole location in the vicinity. Mr. Gammon asked if that is determined by the city or Verizon. Mr. Jeffries stated Verizon would provide the information whether it goes to City Council or comes back to the Planning Commission. There was more discussion on the options that Verizon has at this time. Chairman Turner asked the Applicant if he would like to speak. Bob Chopra representative for S.A.M., agent for Verizon Wireless requested to table UR 26.07 while they look at other colocation options in the area. Erik Cortinas made a motion to accept the Applicant’s request to table UR 26.07 – 100 North Bancroft Street until the November Planning Commission meeting. Joshua Gammon seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None D. UR 26.08 Request of Verizon Wireless for the installation of a new small cell tower in downtown Fairhope. Located within the right-of-way near 319 Magnolia Avenue. Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager, presented the request on behalf of the Applicant. This case was previously tabled in June for further study of viability to find an option on adjacent buildings or other options. The Applicant is proposing to replace an existing light pole on North Section Street south of Magnolia Avenue. Staff recommends Approval of UR 26.08 – 319 Magnolia Avenue with the following conditions: 1. Install a street light arm on the pole as required by ROW and Utilities; 2. A pre-construction meeting shall be held with the City prior to issuance of any permits; 3. Follow-up activities below required by staff and the applicant: a. Upon satisfactory review and approval by ROW Construction Inspector, as-builts will be submitted to the GIS technician for inclusion in GIS utility maps; 4. Provide a Traffic Control Plan to ROW Inspector prior to commencement of any work; and 5. Applicant shall contact Alabama One Call to locate all existing utilities (1000ft max per day). Chairman Turner asked if there were any questions for Staff. No questions asked. Page 6 of 124 Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes – September 10, 2026 4 Joshua Gammon made a motion to approve UR 26.08 – 319 Magnolia Avenue with Staff recommendations. John Worsham seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None NEW BUSINESS E. UR 26.14 Request of C-Spire for an 11.52.11 Utility Review and approval of the proposed installation of 21,739± LF fiber cable at 9020 Morphy Avenue. Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager, presented the request on behalf of the Applicant. This fiber cable installation is in the Edington Place and Fox Hollow neighborhoods. Mr. Jeffries shared the area map. Staff recommends Approval of UR 26.09 – 9020 Morphy Avenue with the following conditions: 1. A pre-construction meeting shall be held with the City prior to issuance of any permits; 2. Follow-up activities below required by staff and the applicant: a. Upon satisfactory review and approval by ROW Construction Inspector, as-builts will be submitted to the GIS technician for inclusion in GIS utility maps; 3. Provide a Traffic Control Plan to ROW Inspector prior to commencement of any work; and 4. Applicant shall contact Alabama One Call to locate all existing utilities (1000ft max per day). Chairman Turner asked that the city utilities make sure the trees are protected in the area. Mike Jeffries stated that during permitting for utility reviews, the Horticulturalist also reviews the area that is being bored. Mr. Jeffries stated that he will make sure the Right-of-Way people and Horticulturalist are aware of the Chairman’s concerns. Chairman Turner asked if there were any questions for Staff. No questions were asked. John Worsham made a motion to approve UR 26.14 – 9020 Morphy Avenue with Staff recommendations. Kim McCormick seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote. AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None Chairman Turner asked if the Verizon Applicant would like to give an update on current progress of previous projects. Bob Chopra representative for S.A.M., agent for Verizon Wireless stated that foundations have been installed on two (2) of the five (5) new small cell replacement poles being constructed. Hopefully Page 7 of 124 Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes – September 10, 2026 5 within the next two (2) months you will see them going vertical. Mr. Chopra said this will help with coverage in the city. Joshua Gammon asked what part of the city this will cover. Mr. Chopra stated the west side. Mr. Gammon asked when will customers see a noticeable impact to their cell service. Mr. Chopra said approximately sixty (60) days. F. ZC 26.09 Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, Oletha and Samuel Curry Sr., to rezone property from R-4, Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to B-4, Business and Professional District. The property is located at 763 Northrop Avenue and is 0.19± acres. PPIN#: 47629 Michelle Melton-Null, City Planner, presented the request on behalf of the Applicant. Ms. Melton-Null shared the zoning and aerial maps, as well as the survey of the subject property. The subject site has no prior history with the Planning Commission or Board of Adjustment. Ms. Melton-Null stated there have been recent zoning changes approved nearby. The property is located within the Medical Overlay District and is subject to full compliance with Article V, Section H of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Melton-Null stated there are uses on Table 3-2 that are not allowed under the current R-4 zoning that will be available with B-4 zoning that are also acceptable within the Medical Overlay District. These are: Accessory Dwelling, Mixed-Use Buildings, General and Professional Office, Mortuary or Funeral Home, Personal Storage, and Limited Manufacturing. Staff recommends Approval to City Council for ZC 26.09 - 763 Northrop Avenue to rezone property from R-4, Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to B-4, Business and Professional District. Chairman Turner asked if there were any questions for Staff. Joshua Gammon asked what the difference was between B-2 and B-4 allowances. Ms. Melton-Null stated there are several. They are listed in the staff report. There is a table listing them as well. Chairman Turner stated that a synopsis would be that B-2 is considered retail use and B-4 is considered office use. Hunter Simmons stated B-2 is more intense. Mr. Simmons stated that if there was concern with some of the allowable uses there could be specific conditions set for this in the Ordinance. Chairman Turner asked if the Applicant would like to speak. Mrs. Oletha Curry, 763 Northrop Avenue, Fairhope – stated that she has lived there for forty-four (44) years and the reason they would like a zoning change is because Thomas Hospital has taken over the area. We do not feel like we live in a community anymore. Mrs. Curry stated there is a lot going on there with the noise and traffic. Mrs. Curry said she loves Fairhope and wants to stay there and she cannot afford to move if it stays residential. The hospital has gone commercial and she feels she needs to also. Mrs. Curry feels that this will put her in a better position if she must sell. Chairman Turner opened the public hearing at 5:32 pm. Jimmy Daly, 772 Northrop Avenue, Fairhope – stated his Mother lives at this address and his sister lives next door. Mr. Daly said he sees no reason to rezone because the hospital wants the property. The hospital is going to pay whatever it takes to get it. Mr. Daly stated if you change to a business your Page 8 of 124 Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes – September 10, 2026 6 taxes are going to go up. You do not need to change it because the hospital is going to give you what you want when they decide to do it. Margaret Daly, 18735 Bell Owl Cir. Apt. C, Robertsdale– asked how this rezoning will affect the properties surrounding it. Chairman Turner said he does not think it will affect anything. Not the subject property or those around it. He thinks it is a waste of time and money, but they have a right to do it. Chairman Turner stated he does not see what they are gaining or losing because the Medical Overlay District allows the same uses as the Business and Professional District. Chairman Turner stated he cannot think of one thing that would be different. Erik Cortinas asked if they change from R-4 to B-4 how does that affect the current use if it remains a residence? Will that affect their ability to get permits, do renovations, or add sheds? Hunter Simmons stated that it could have a negative impact because it creates nonconformities. If they stay there they are fine. Mr. Cortinas stated he wants to make sure that the Applicant is aware that there cannot be changes to the house once this is rezoned. It will limit the ability to do any other work on the house, other than maintain what is there. Ruben Odom, 767 Northrop Street, Fairhope – asked if they would be getting their road fixed. They tore up the road about nine (9) months ago and it is not fixed. Hunter Simmons stated that Planning and Zoning have nothing to do with repaving. That is through the city and there is a list of repaving projects. Mr. Simmons stated he does not know what is on the list. Joshua Gammon asked why the road was torn up. Mr. Odom stated that there was sewage work done. Chairman Turner suggested Mr. Odom call Public Works. Erik Cortinas said that he will talk to the utility department. Chairman Turner closed the public hearing at 5:40 pm. John Worsham made a motion to recommend approval to City Council ZC 26.09 – 763 Northrop Avenue to rezone property from R-4, Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to B-4, Business and Professional District. Erik Cortinas seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None G. ZC 26.10 Eastlake Village – Tabled at the Applicants request Planning and Zoning Director Hunter Simmons stated the Applicant requested to table ZC 26.10. We plan to have them on the October Planning Commission agenda. H. SD 26.16 Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant Goodwyn Mills Cawood, LLC, on behalf of the owner, Eastpark LLC, for Preliminary and Final Plat Approval of South Section Townhouse Condominium, a 3-lot Minor Subdivision on property zoned R-3TH, High Density Single- Page 9 of 124 Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes – September 10, 2026 7 Family Townhouse Residential District. The property is located on the east side of Section Street, south of Fels Avenue and is 0.39± acres. PPIN#: 41038 Mike Jeffries presented the request on behalf of the Applicant. Mr. Jeffries shared the zoning and aerial maps. This project had been before the Planning Commission April 4, 2022, and July 1, 2024. The project was approved both times but never had a plat recorded to finalize the project. Mr. Jeffries stated the request is the same as before. To create three (3) condominium lots. An existing residence was modified, one new townhome is almost complete, and one condominium lot had not started construction. Staff recommends Approval of SD 26.16 South Section Townhomes Minor Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. Provide a solution for fire protection as proposed by the consultant; 2. Sidewalk and landscaping shall be installed before issuance of C/O; and 3. Add the additional drainage infrastructure at the rear of the driveway per the EOR recommendation. Chairman Turner asked if this is a Preliminary and a Final Plat? Mr. Jeffries stated yes. Chairman Turner asked for clarification on why it is also a Preliminary Plat. Mr. Jeffries stated that a Minor Subdivision is Preliminary and Final at the same time but this was never recorded. The Final Plat expired twice. Mr. Jeffries stated there are no changes but procedurally they had to go through the process again. Scott Hutchinson, Engineer of Record for Goodwyn Mills Cawood, LLC stated he cannot answer why it did not get recorded the two (2) times before. Mr. Hutchinson said he thinks it was just miscommunication. He stated that nothing has changed since the last approval. Chairman Turner opened the public hearing at 5:48 pm. David Hudgens, 205 Cain Lane, Fairhope – stated he worked for Dyas LLC, who built the condominium. The last time they built a condominium in the city was over twenty (20) years ago and it did not require the Final Plat to be recorded. They did not realize the change and therefore, it was not recorded. Chairman Turner closed the public hearing at 5:49 pm. Erik Cortinas made a motion to approve SD 26.16 South Section Townhome with Staff recommendations and recording of the Final Plat. Kim McCormick seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None Page 10 of 124 Fairhope Planning Commission Minutes – September 10, 2026 8 ADJOURNMENT Chairman Turner made a motion to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYE: Lee Turner, Paul Fontenot, John Worsham, Joshua Gammon, Harry Kohler, Kim McCormick, and Erik Cortinas NAY: None ABSTAIN: None Adjourned at 5:51pm. _________________________________ _________________________________ Lee Turner, Chairman Janine Saykes, Secretary Page 11 of 124 THIS DIGITAL PACKET HAS BEEN CONDENSED IN SIZE AND SOME DOCUMENTS MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL THE ORIGINAL PAGES. ALL SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS CAN BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC UPON REQUEST AND HAVE BEEN REVIEWED IN FULL BY PLANNING STAFF IN PREPARATION FOR THE REPORTS PREPARED FOR PLANNING COMMISSION. Page 12 of 124 Michelle Melton-Null Page 13 of 124 SD 26.17 – Sibley Place October 5, 2026 Page 1 of 6 SUMMARY OF REQUEST Request of the Applicant, Seth Moore Surveying, on behalf of the owner, Johan LLC, for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of Sibley Place, a 2-lot Minor Subdivision, on property zoned R-1, Low Density Single-Family District. The property is located on the west side of Main Street and north of Sibley Street and is 1.02± acres. SITE HISTORY “A Re-Plat of Lots 1-A and 2-A of the Re-Plat of the South 2/3 of Lot 17 in the Village of Montrose” was completed on December 6, 2023, and can be found on Slide 2925-A in the Exhibits. This re-plat moved the property line of Lot 2-B southwest. Prior to December 2023 a re-plat was completed in March 2023. This re-plat removed a historical lot line that split the parcels north-south from Main Street to Mobile Bay and can be found on Slide 2878-E, also in the Exhibits. STAFF COMMENTS The Subdivision Regulations define a minor subdivision as a “subdivision of four (4) or fewer lots where no new streets, right-of-way, or utility mains are required” (Art. 2, p. 7). Article IV, Section E(1) provides a procedural exception for minor subdivisions whereas Preliminary and Final Plats can be submitted and approved simultaneously. If approved, the Final Plat must be recorded in Baldwin County Probate within 120 days of approval. Access Both lots will be accessed from Sibley Street . Sibley Street as well as Main Street are maintained by Baldwin County. Applicant will need to obtain consent from Baldwin County for the driveways. The Baldwin County Engineer signature block has been added to the Final Plat. Utilities Water is available through Daphne Utilities. Sewer and gas are available through Fairhope Utilities. Riviera can provide electricity. Drainage There are 10’ drainage and utility easements on the northern sides of the lots and on Lot 2’s western boundary. SUBDIVISION CONSIDERATIONS Standards of Review: In accordance with Article V.B.2 of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations the Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; Page 14 of 124 SD 26.17 – Sibley Place October 5, 2026 Page 2 of 6 b) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; c) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; d) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or e) The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of SD 26.17 – Sibley Place Preliminary and Final Plat with the following conditions: 1. Record Final Plat with Baldwin County Probate within 120 days of approval. Page 15 of 124 EXHIBITS SD 26.17 – Sibley Place October 5, 2026 Page 3 of 6 Excerpt from Table 3-2: Dimension Table – Lots and Principle Structure Dimension, District or Use Zoning District Min. Lot Area / Allowed Units Per Acre (UPA) Min. Lot Width Front Setback Rear Setback Side Setback Street Side Setback Max. Total Lot Coverage by All Structures Max. Height R/A 3 acres/ - 198’ 75’ 75’ 25’ 50’ none 30’ R-1 15,000 s.f./ - 100’ 40’ 35’ 10’ b 20’ 40% 30’ a R-1a 40,000 s.f./ - 120’ 30’ 30’ 10’ b 20’ 25% 35’ R-1b 30,000 s.f./ - 100’ 30’ 30’ 10’ b 20’ 25% 35’ R-1c 20,000 s.f./ - 80’ 30’ 30’ 10’ b 20’ 25% 35’ R-2 10,500 s.f./ - 75’ 35’ 35’ 10’ b 20’ 37% 30’ a Page 16 of 124 EXHIBITS SD 26.17 – Sibley Place October 5, 2026 Page 4 of 6 Proposed Plat Page 17 of 124 EXHIBITS SD 26.17 – Sibley Place October 5, 2026 Page 5 of 6 Slide 2878-E Green line is lot line that was removed Page 18 of 124 EXHIBITS SD 26.17 – Sibley Place October 5, 2026 Page 6 of 6 Slide 2925-A Green line is lot line that was removed Page 19 of 124 !"#$% & '$()*+ , - ! . ! /()*+ , - ! 0!1 /2 34 5$$67/$ 2 ! /#7 5 ! 7 .) $8 ) ! #$! -% / $- 10! / / ! /; - -- $+ !,$- /- !%====================== >?>@ABC>D EFGH> C>I@JCQROSNRTUVWXNRYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZQ[OXNK\M]NRYZZZZZOPQROSNRTUVWXNRYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZcTLTNYZZZZZZZZZZZZZ dbSYZZZZZc\]_beb`bOXKLMNYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ`bXQhLTYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZKOfiOT`jkXbT`YZZZZZZZZZZZZOYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZa\RRNXTdOXbXlYZZZZZZZZZZZZ m@F>JnH C@ C>I@JCQhLTM\`T]N`blXN_]UT[NSROSNRTUOWXNR]NPORNLggNSTLXgN]UT[NabTUOPoLbR[OSN^\T[ORbpN_^lNXTYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZQ[OXNK\M]NRYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZcTLTNYZZZZZZZZZZZZZ dbSYZZZZZQNR`OXYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZm>qA>DrCJC> C>I@JCobRMYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZQ[OXNK\M]NRYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZcTLTNYZZZZZZZZZZZZZ dbSYZZZZZQNR`OXYZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZNNaLhg\hLTbOXYsNPNRNXgNYVR_bXLXgNtuvw\RN`YPUT[LTxLMT[NSROSNRTUOWXNRjhNL`N[Oh_NROPT[NL]OeN_N`gRb]N_SROSNRTULX_[NRTT[b`ShLTTOT[NabTUPORRNebNWfyxPSROSNRTUb`OWXN_]UoLbR[OSNcbXlhNzL{aORSfRbpN_cbXlhNzL{RNSRN`NXTLTbeN`[Lhh`blXT[b`LSShbgLTbOXfZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZTUVWXNRjiNL`N[Oh_NRQRbXTN_KLMN cblXLT\RN € ‚ƒ„……†‡ˆ‰ŠZZZZZZZZZZZZŽ ‘’“”•–—˜™š—›œšžŸ ¡¢£¤¥¦§¥¨©ª«…¬®…ƒ†¬‰¯‹‰°±²‡³Œ²‹ ²Œ‰²‹²‹‹‹²‹‡‰¯‹‹‰ ´²‰‘¢’Ÿµ ž¢µ ž¢‘¶ž·¢¸š¹º¨§»¼½¨¾¼¦¿¿¿§§§À‘¢Á’š ¹‘’›œšžŸ ¡¢£¤¥¦§¥¨‘¢’Ÿµ ž¢µ ž¢‘¶ž·¢¸š¹º ¨§»¼½¨¾¼¦¿¿¿§§§À‘¢Á’š ¹‘’›œšžŸ ¡¢£¤¥¦§¥¨‘¢’Ÿµ ž¢œ¹¤¤ÃÄ‘Ÿš¡Â ¹¢Åµ¢ÆÇ¢žÈ Page 20 of 124 Th i s S u r v e y i s c o p y r i g h t © 2 0 2 6 M O O R E S U R V E Y I N G , I NC . C o p y i n g t h i s S u r v e y is s t r i c t l y p r o h i b i t e d . Not to Scale Page 21 of 124 Page 22 of 124 Board of Directors Selena Vaughn, Chairman Tim Patton, Vice Chairman Billy Mayhand, Secretary/Treasurer Mayor Robin LeJeune Councilman Joel Coleman GENERAL MANAGER Scott Polk 900 DAPHNE AVENUE · P.O. BOX 2550 · DAPHNE, ALABAMA 36526 · (251) 626-2628 FAX (251) 621-3052 “YOUR HOMETOWN UTILITY” July 2nd, 2026 Skip Jones Johan LLC RE: NW Corner of Sibley St. & Main St., Daphne AL Daphne Utilities has reviewed the location for the referenced site. We greatly appreciate your cooperation throughout this process. Please be advised that any modifications or alterations to the approved plan require another review. This review ensures that these changes do not adversely affect our utility operations. Daphne Utilities can provide the following services: • Water To facilitate a smooth connection to our facilities, we would like to bring to your attention the following essential details: Connection Fees: Our Administrative Manager at Daphne Utilities will assess capacity fees and aid with construction fees. Before any connection to our facilities, fees must be paid in full. Contact Alex Godfrey at 251- 626-2628 Inspections: Once all the required fees have been paid, the connection process shall be coordinated with Daphne Utilities. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any inquiries or concerns. Johnny Grimes Planning & Technology Manager Page 23 of 124 Page 24 of 124 RIVIERA UTILITIES 413 East Laurel Avenue - Foley, AL 36535 Phone (251) 943-5001 July 7, 2026 Johan, LLC c/o Skip Jones RE: PIN 620482 This letter is to confirm based on the site plan received; Riviera Utilities is willing and able to provide electric service to the above referenced property. Riviera Utilities requires a 10’ easement along all side property lines and a 15’ easement along all front and rear property lines. Please ensure all property plats reflect the easements. Upon final design, Riviera Utilities will provide estimates for service fees and system installation requirements to meet all Riviera specifications. Please contact the following Riviera employees concerning costs and requirements. Name Department Email Wes Abrams Electric wabrams@rivierautilities.com If you have any questions or comments, contact Riviera Utilities at 251-943-5001. Thank you, Tony L. Schachle Jr. Page 25 of 124 THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 451 Pecan Ave, PO Box 429, Fairhope, AL 36532 251-928-8003 | www.fairhopeal.gov | planning@fairhopeal.gov 1 of 1 Sherry Sullivan Mayor Council Members Andrea F. Booth Jack Burrell, ACMO Jimmy Conyers Joshua N. Gammon Jay Robinson Lisa A. Hanks, MMC City Clerk Kimberly Creech City Treasurer Notification Letter September 18, 2026 RE: SD 26.17 Sibley Place Minor Subdivision Subdivision of 2 Lots, 1.02± acres PPIN #: 3747 Description: Applicant, Seth Moore Surveying, on behalf of the Owner, Johan LLC for Preliminary & Final Plat approval of Sibley Place, a 2-lot Minor Subdivision on property zoned R-1, Low Density Single-Family Residential District. The property is located on the west side of Main Street, north of Sibley Street. Dear Property Owner, State law requires all property owners adjacent to property being considered for subdivision approval to be notified by certified mail. The Baldwin County Revenue Office provided your information as a current adjacent property owner to the subdivision request detailed above and illustrated on the attached preliminary plat. This letter is to notify you that the City of Fairhope Planning Commission will hold a public hearing regarding the above request at 5:00 PM in the Council Chambers located in the Fairhope Municipal Complex at 161 N. Section Street on October 5, 2026. Should any desire to provide written comments prior to the public hearing ALL written comments and/or presentation materials MUST be received by the Planning Department by no later than noon on September 28, 2026, in order to ensure adequate time for review and distribution to the Planning Commission. Written comments/materials received after this deadline may not be included in the advance report packet but may be submitted for the record at the public hearing. A detailed staff report and application materials will be posted online during the week prior to the public hearing at www.fairhopeal.gov under the Agendas and Minutes tab. FRAUDULENT & SUSPICIOUS EMAILS The City of Fairhope Planning Department is aware of fraudulent emails impersonating City Staff and Commission members requesting payment for permits or services via wire transfer. Please note that the City of Fairhope will never request payment of any kind via wire transfer and application fees will always be processed prior to a case going before any Board or Commission. If you receive a suspicious message please notify the Planning Department right away and do not click any links, open attachments, or send any payment or personal information. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact the Planning Department. Cordially, Janine Saykes Janine Saykes Planning Clerk Page 26 of 124 Page 27 of 124 SD 26.18 – ALDI MOP October 5, 2026 SUMMARY OF REQUEST Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, Duplantis Design Group, PC, on behalf of the owner, ALDI, Inc of Alabama for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of ALDI MOP, a 5-Unit Multiple Occupancy Project, on property zoned B-2, General Business District. The property is located on the northeast corner of State Highway 181 and County Road 48 and is 7.14± acres. SITE HISTORY The property was before the Commission May 4th, 2020 and September 10th, 2020 for a minor subdivision. Issues with the recording rendered the plat null and void by Baldwin County. The property received preliminary approval for a 5-unit MOP October 4th, 2021. The property was annexed into the City January 26th, 2026. STAFF COMMENTS The purpose of this request is to approve and finalize the 5 unit MOP as previously approved. Issues with Baldwin County and recording of a previous plat and jurisdictional changes were some challenges that had to be overcome. These challenges contributed to the delay of the overall project. One unit, the ALDI store, has been built along with the required infrastructure improvements, highway improvements, and drainage network. Required easements are reflected on the MOP plat. Utilities Upgrades and utility infrastructure were previously installed with previous MOP approval. City of Fairhope is the provider for Water, Sewer, and Gas. Riviera is the power provider and AT&T for communications. Traffic Traffic improvements were installed with previous MOP approval. Drainage Master drainage system installed with previous MOP approval. A small retaining wall has to be constructed along the eastern side of the retention pond to achieve the required elevation. The wall shall be completed as a condition of this approval. Tree & Landscaping 10% greenspace was required for the project. The majority was provided with the initial build. The remaining 9,717 SF will be included in the future development. A note is included on the plat. Page 28 of 124 SD 26.18 – ALDI MOP October 5, 2026 SUBDIVISION CONSIDERATIONS Standards of Review: In accordance with Article V.B.2 of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations the Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; b) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; c) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; d) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or e) The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of SD 26.18 ALDI 5-Unit MOP with the following conditions: 1. Revise the drainage easement along the north property line to match the 2-lot minor subdivision plat. 2. Add note to Site Data: Maximum of 5 units allowed per City of Fairhope Multiple Occupancy approval. 3. Add note for Ingress/Egress easement over the property. 4. Add signature block on plat for County Engineer. 5. Alteration of retaining wall is completed. Page 29 of 124 !"#$%&""" ' (%")*+, - . !" " / ! 0")*+, - . !" 1!2 03 "45 "6%%7" " " " " 80% 3 ! 0$"8 "" " 6 ! "8 " " /* %"9 * ! $"80 :% " " ;3%! .&" " 0 %." 2"1! 0 0 !" 0"< . " " .. %," !-%. 0."" = %" 2" !&"">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>" " ?@?ABCD?E FGHI? D?JAKD LMNO PQ RSPTOSUV WXYOSZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[R\PYO L]N^OSZ [[[[[[[[[[[ _``SOaa PQ RSPTOSUV WXYOSZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ bcUVZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ dUMUOZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[ ecTZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ RSPTPaO` d]^`cfcacPY LMNOZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ LPg _hSOa cY RiMUZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ LPg jPUaklYcUaZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ RMShOi LPZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ b]SSOYU ePYcYmZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ nAG?KoI DA D?JAKD RiMU N]aU ^O acmYO` ^V U\O TSPTOSUV PXYOS ^OQPSO MhhOTUMYhO ^V U\O bcUV PQ pMcS\PTO LMNO PQ _]U\PScqO` _mOYUZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[R\PYO L]N^OSZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ _``SOaaZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ bcUVZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ dUMUOZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[ ecTZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ bPYUMhU ROSaPYZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ n?rB?EsDKD? D?JAKD LMNO PQ pcSNZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[R\PYO L]N^OSZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ _``SOaaZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ bcUVZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ dUMUOZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[ ecTZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ bPYUMhU ROSaPYZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ RiMU pOO bMih]iMUcPYZ tOQOSOYhOZ WS`cYMYhO uvwx dcmYMU]SOaZ y hOSUcQV U\MU y MN U\O TSPTOSUV PXYOSkiOMaO\Pi`OS PQ U\O M^PfO `OahSc^O` TSPTOSUV MY` \OSO^V a]^NcU U\ca TiMU UP U\O bcUV QPS SOfcOXg zyQ TSPTOSUV ca PXYO` ^V pMcS\PTO dcYmiO {M| bPSTg MY M]U\PScqO` dcYmiO {M| SOTSOaOYUMUcfO a\Mii acmY U\ca MTTichMUcPYg [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ RSPTOSUV WXYOSkjOMaO\Pi`OS RScYUO` LMNO dcmYMU]SO [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ }MUO pMcS\PTO dcYmiO {M| bPSTg ~yQ _TTichM^iO Page 30 of 124 Page 31 of 124 kimley-horn.com 11 North Water Street, Suite 9290, Mobile, AL, 36601 (251)-263-8350 August 20, 2026 Erik Cortinas Building Official / Floodplain Administrator City of Fairhope 555 S. Section Street Fairhope, AL 36533 Re: ALDI Fairhope Permit No. LND21-000135 Dear Mr. Cortinas, Please accept this letter for the completed ALDI grocery store located at the northeast corner of the intersection of SR-181 and CR-48. Based on visual observations and review of completed as-built surveys, it is our opinion that all work appears to be in general conformance with the design plans except the stormwater pond top of bank elevations. Based on review of the top of bank elevations presented on the as-built survey, some areas are below the minimum elevation of 108.00. To correct this deficiency, an additional retaining wall is required to provide proper storm event peak stage freeboard for the 100-year storm event. Kimley-Horn has submitted preliminary retaining wall concept drawings (attached to this letter by reference) for the review and approval by the City of Fairhope. Once this new pond retaining wall concept plan has been approved by the City, Kimley-Horn will prepare formal construction documents and submit to the City for formal permitting. Once the retaining wall has been constructed, a revised asbuilt survey will performed to verify the constructed retaining wall meets the 108.00 minimum elevation. Please contact me at 407-409-7007 or Matthew.Gillespie@kimley-horn.com should you have any questions. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Matthew Gillespie, P.E. #34176 Page 32 of 124 kimley-horn.com 11 North Water Street, Suite 9290, Mobile, AL 36602 251.436.1776 June 16, 2026 Hunter Simmons Director of Planning City of Fairhope 555 S. Section Street Fairhope, AL 36533 Re: ALDI Fairhope Permit No. LND21-000135 Dear Mr. Simmons, Please accept this letter as a final certification regarding the landscape of the above referenced project. It is our opinion that the ALDI landscape on-site meets the design intent of the approved landscape plans. Any landscape material beyond this date will be maintained and replaced in accordance with the ordinance by the property owner. Please contact me at 251-436-1776 or adam.martin@kimley-horn.com should you have any questions. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. S. Adam Martin, P.L.A. #902 Page 33 of 124 !"! # $"% &'()* + &, -./0123-.45637389./019:1;546;4;5< ' =>/3?@?A@?B?C3DEFG3HI J>0K23H5.6L3I;38M>0K45:1;546;4;5<N3O/93-PM538K9PM5:11QR9;9P< 7S4K3I;3T66>523U7386Q66>5:11QR9;9P<N3-.>/5R.6>3T>4K389Q>4K:11QR9;9P<N3V/5>/93D?3U6>P/5 8V/5>/9D?U6>P/5:1;546;4;5<N3IM/63H>643U6>P/538IM/6H>64U6>P/5:1;546;4;5<N3J6>/237>/9 H38M6>/6:1;546;4;5< G3449.P6K3W?3IJX Y6Q/K3JK13Y664563Z3?[FBCCDCC3H\V]23]K9;;R1^N _``a b cdefbghijekblmfbginoefenpm``qbmrrhgkhsbmbrntg`hbnubqhmifbmvnabmpsbkdhbwnpsblmfbih`hmfhsbnp xmptmiqbyzab{z{|ablderdbefbkqgerm``qbnphbqhmibmukhibginoefenpm`bmrrhgkmprh}b~bdmohbmkkmrdhsbkdh wnpsbih`hmfhb`hkkhibunibhohiqnphfbihuhihprh}b~bmjbpnkbmlmihbnubmpqbntkfkmpsepvbeffthfabmfblh lnt`sbpnijm``qbih€teihbmpqbeffthfbknbwhbihfn`ohsbwhunihbginoefenpm`bmrrhgkmprhbmpsbmpqbkdmk minfhbmukhilmisbknbwhbrniihrkhsbwhunihbih`hmfepvbkdhbwnps} b cdmp fa ‚ƒ„…†‡‚ƒˆ‰Š‹‹Œ Ž†„‡ †Ž ˆ‰‡‘„’„“†Ž ”ntkdlhfkb•hvenpb–b—nwe`hb_ihm _`mwmjmb˜hgmikjhpkbnubcimpfgnikmkenp ™uuerhšb{|y›œšz›žŸŸ b b ¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©ª«¬¦®¯°±²¦³´¦µ¶¨©ª«·®¸¹©º´®º·º±´·°´»®¼ ½¾¿À¥¦Á¯»¨®¹·²¬¦Â±¶¨»·¨²¦ÃĬ¦ÃÅÃĦÆÇÈɦ³ Ê£¥¦ËÌÍΦϩ殦µ«Í©Ð¶®¸¹¹ÑÒʹͩм ÓÔ¥¦ÕÖ·«¦³´¦×±±¨º®¬¦ØÕ¦µ±Ñ±±¨º®¸¹¹ÑÒʹͩм٦ϯ¨Ì®º©Ò¯±¨¦×¨·«º¦µÍѨ·«º¸¹¹ÑÒʹͩм٦ÚÌ®º¨Ìͺ¦Ææر¨Ð̺® µÚÌ®º¨ÌͺÆÃر¨Ð̺®¸¹©º´®º·º±´·°´»®¼Ù¦³©¶Ì°±¦¨±·¦Ø±¨Ð̺®¦µ³©¶Ì°±¨±·Ø±¨Ð̺®¸¹©º´®º·º±´·°´»®¼Ù¦§±¨º©°©Û¬¦Õ¨Ìͦ µ¶±¨º©°©Û±¸¹©º´®º·º±´·°´»®¼ ½ÜÝÞ¾ÔÀ¥¦ß±Ç¦ß±à»±®º¦á©¨¦âÚãÁ¦Ï©«Í»¨¨±«Í±¦â±ä±¨¦å¦âÚæ¦Ø¨©ç±Íº¦èéßêëìë¦í¦Ïßêî쬦·̨¯©Ò±ï b ðer a b ”niiqab~ñohbwhhpbntkbnubkdhbnuuerhbkdefblhh bmpsbrmkrdepvbtgbnpbhjme`f}b b ˜miiepòxhihjq›bómpbqntbginoeshb—i}bónjwfbmpbtgsmkhbnpbkdefbih`hmfhôb b õ.4K3L2 {ò{šò{öab š||b_— ~pwn÷b›bðer bónjwfb›b™tk`nn dkkgfšòòntk`nn }nuuerh}rnjòjme`òepwn÷òesò__ _øv______ùúû˜ümgjür{wq_ó€_óý{þüÿvz_h |únxy ™zÿkuiûe ðv__û˜t|~v__ôpmkeoh hifenpyò|Page 34 of 124 !"# $% "&% '( )$ &*#'$% %+'& ,--./ 0.01234 55 ,--./ 367722- 8 9 9 : ;<=>?@ABCD@EFGHI@JKCFGHILMMNOCPCFGQ RSTU?@VFKMWXY@Z[H\]W\X@^_Y@^`^a@bc`_@dV e=?@f\FgKY@dIhi[X@VP@JH\FgKWILMFjPIjWj[PWiP]IQ kl?@mnWK@VP@o[[\jIY@pm@J[N[[\jILMMNOCPCFGQq@Eh\BIjFOh[\@o\WKj@JCN\WKjLMMNOCPCFGQ RrstSlU?@u[c@u[v][Ij@wF\@dxyz{@EFKC]\\[KC[@x[|[\@}@dxy~@p\F[Cj@€ u‚ƒbƒ@„@Eu‚…bY@ZWB\hFO[† ‡ ˆ ‰ Š ‹ 5 Š 8 Š Œ 5 Ž Š Œ 5 Ž 5 ‘Œ ‘ Œ ŠŠ Š ˆ ’+“” •' *– —˜ ™"&+'$ —$'š"“% › & œ"$ šž,064/ Ÿ-763Ÿ4 ›ž06403.4733 Œ‘¡Š Œ -27- ¢ ˆ ‘ˆ £ -1173 ¤¥¦§¨©§ª«¬«¥¨«®¤«¯«°¤ ±²³´µ¶·³¸µ¹ºµ¸»¼½¸¹¸·¾·³¸¿¼ Œ Š Š ˆ 5 ˆ À Š 5 Œ 5 Œ Š ,/ Á5 Š ˆ ˆ Š ˆ ‘ ˆ ‘ 5 Œ Š ‘ Á5 ˆ Š ,Ÿ36/ ..277Ÿ7 0À02À01ˆ ŸÂ66 Á ‘ Ã Ä 8 Œ‘ ŠÂÀÀ 55 ŒÀŒÀ ‘ ÃÀÀ£‰ÅÆÇŠŒÇ0‘8 8È0ÉÇÊ7Ë‹6Å 4Ì7Ê5 ÆËÄ‹Æ6ÁŽ Ë Í 0À6Page 35 of 124 ! ! "#$%& ! '!$!( !& !") & ! $ &%"* & %! $! " + + ,-./01234516789:1;<4789:=>>?@4A478B CDEF01GH3>IJK1GL9HMIHJ1NOK1PQPR1STUN1VW X.01YH7Z<K1V:[\LJ1WA1;9H7Z<I:=>7]A:]I]LAI\AM:B ^_01`aI<1WA1bLLH]:K1c`1;L?LLH]:=>>?@4A478Bd16[H3:]7@[LH1bHI<]1;4?HI<]=>>?@4A478B CefgD_F01hLT1hLiML:]1j7H1Vklmn167<4MHHL<4L1kLoLH1p1Vklq1cH7rL4]1sthuNSN1v16huwSK1GI3H[7@Lx y "z ( ! { " |}~€ ‚ƒ„…†€‡ˆ ‰Š‹}‚Œ€‡Œ‚ Š~Ž€ ‹ ‘ŠŒ ’“”•–—˜™š›œ–š™—ž “•–—œ•šŸœ—›šš $& " $ š¡›š¢£) ¤¥ &¤¦š§§›š ¨©ª«¬«®¯°±¯©¬¯²¨¯³¯´¨ µ¶·¶ ¸¹ º¶ zœ$ %¤ ¤ » $ % $ ”˜"¼ % ! ¤ % !¤ % ¤&! ¤ & $ &"¼ ¤ ”™š–˜ŸŸ¡œ››™›" ! ! "#$%& ! '!$!( !& !") & ! $ &%"* & %! $! " + + ,-./01YH7Z<K1V:[\LJ1WA1;9H7Z<I:=>7]A:]I]LAI\AM:B CDEF01GH3>IJK1GL9HMIHJ1NOK1PQPR1STP½1VW X.01234516789:1;<4789:=>>?@4A478B ^_01`aI<1WA1bLLH]:K1c`1;L?LLH]:=>>?@4A478Bd16[H3:]7@[LH1bHI<]1;4?HI<]=>>?@4A478B CefgD_F01hLT1hLiML:]1j7H1Vklmn167<4MHHL<4L1kLoLH1p1Vklq1cH7rL4]1sthuNSN1v16huwSK1GI3H[7@Lx ¥"¾ $&¤ ¼ % !¿! À !&& % ! & % ! ¿! " •»•¡»•§¤™Á––¥ ¼ & ÂœÃ(¾ $&œ¢! ( Á»» ! (" " $»$» & »»(¦ÄÅÆÀÇ $Ç•&%¾¿¾È•#Ç*›ÉÊ–Å Ë—(y¢›*ÆÉÃÊÆÀ!–¼Ì É Í š»–Page 36 of 124 !"#$%&'($)*+,-$./'*+,-01123'4'*+5 6789#$:;<=-1>?@$AB,=<>=?$CD@$DEDF$GHEIHJI$KL M!#$N=*O/@$P-;QB?$L4$.,=*O/>-01*R4-R>RB4>Q4<-5 ST#$UV>/$L4$WBB=R-@$KU$.B2BB=R-01123'4'*+5X$);=&-R*3;B=$W=>/R$.'2=>/R01123'4'*+5 6YZ[7T9#$\B]<B-R$^*=$P_`a:$)*/'<==B/'B$_BbB=$c$P_`d$K=*eB'R$fg\hCiC$j$)\hGi@$A>&=;*3Bk l m m m nol p qrsr t qursrv wq xstwquxsv y n m z w y { no m | } p ~ m no m uu m m p { m nol z l no z nolt v { m € ‚ƒ„…†‡ˆ‰Š„‹Œ Ž † „‹ †‘Ž‚’„“” ”•Ž –—t~˜rv™š›œ˜s™rš“—~˜rœ~sxœr›ss {žm šŸ›š q { nš ›s ¡¢£¤¥¦¤§¨©ª¨¢¥¨«¡¨¬¨¡ ~®~Ÿ®~ ™|˜˜ l{œ¯ w{œ |®® ® ® {® ® nm °±o² ²~{ wz w³~y²m› ´p˜°µr¶ › ± ´¯pm ±o˜lm · ´ ¸ x®˜Page 37 of 124 !" "# $%"! "" ! " &'()! * "" "* % " +* +" ! + "()! $" &,-.'//011,1( 23 45 6 3 7 ""% ! $""! $8 * 8 ! ! * (9 + " * ":* * ;! *+! *(< +! * " " + (= +! * %! *! !( > > ?@ABCDE 8 ! * "! * %F (G" ;; * * %F * ! ";8 !( ?@ABCDE 8 ! * "! * %F (G" ;; * * %F * ! ";8 !( H#H0#HI ,J..7K )+LM;N+O* ; J##* ;(!!(##+L#"#77;7P%777777QRSTU UH+ 7NV7NWH9U=%17XY.RZ[;\O1= ! SXMY%77ST*.)%77] $X ^ .#.Page 38 of 124 Page 39 of 124 Page 40 of 124 Page 41 of 124 Page 42 of 124 Page 43 of 124 Page 44 of 124 Page 45 of 124 ! " # $ %&' # $( )*+,-./012,3)*+4-./0125617/8292:14;<= >?8,@A@BA@B@C,DDEFB,GH I J.+,K4,L..?*2,3JLMNMOJ -5617/8292:14;<=P,N9.?,J1?,3N9.?4J1?5617/8292:14;<= -89,Q06*,32906*577;R9490=P,H1?,S4,G9?.012,3H1?4G9?.0125617/8292:14;<=P,>1681,T1.?* 3>16814T1.?*5617/8292:14;<=P,)1:,U89*2,3)1:4U89*25617/8292:14;<=P +2.?4*8002*5V18?+R.14;<,3+2.?4*8002*5V18?+R.14;<= WXYZ[ \ ]^_`aXb\cdebfg\`dhi\bdf\j^kh\^bg\lhmnXfi\odefif^b`Xbp\dm\dfjhmaXihq\^iidYX^fh`\aXfj\fjXi `hkh_dlnhbfr \ s\tdbXbp\khmXuXY^fXdb\a^i\Ydnl_hfh`\lmXdm\fd\YdbifmeYfXdb[\^b`\^f\fj^f\fXnh\fjh\l^mYh_\a^i ebtdbh`r \ si\^\mhie_f[\bd\lhmnXfi\ahmh\Xiieh`\vg\fjh\cdebfg\udm\fjXi\lmdwhYfr \ ]^ih`\db\dem\mhYdm`i[\fjhmh\^mh\bd\defif^b`Xbp\lhmnXfi[\vdb`i[\dm\ebmhid_kh`\Xfhni\mh_^fh`\fd fjXi\iXfh\aXfj\]^_`aXb\cdebfgr \ x_h^ih\_hf\ei\Zbda\Xu\gde\bhh`\^bgfjXbp\uemfjhm\umdn\dem\duuXYhr \ yzy{zy|[\}~}\x€ €^X_\ \WXYZ\cdnvi\ \‚ef_ddZ jffli~zzdef_ddZrduuXYhrYdnzn^X_zX`zssZsƒpssssss„…†‡ˆ^lnˆYyvgsc‰scŠy‹ˆŒp shŽw…d }Z ‚ Œfum†XŽWwpss‚‘`p’ass“b^fXkhŽhmiXdb”}ry • }zPage 46 of 124 !" #$ ! % $ & $ ' ( )))*+ " ! , ! )-).-)/ +0*+ 1 1 2 3 4 "56 2 7 (60-- 899 4 84"-" - -:::;$::::::<=>'#("#4)5: ?: @)A#B$C: DE*=F+G7CB 9!> D3E$::7H$I::J K D !6 L+8)CM )-*Page 47 of 124 !"# $% &!"!'()* +(,!"!'()*-./0123*4)5*"6/0%7)89 :;<= >'31/6? >!.'5/'6 @A? @A@B CADEF GH I J)(# K!2L/* +J)(#%K!2L/*-./0123*4)5*"6/0%7)89M N54O!' "5/'" +N54O!'% "5/'"-./0123*4)5*"6/0%7)89 PQ *4)L.(-117,4%4)LM H/'O R% G4'!L/* +H/'O%G4'!L/*-./0123*4)5*"6/0%7)89 :STU;Q= >VD W!X5!(" Y)' $!Z!' )Y [)*45''!*4! \ G$]^ &')_!4" /" W`CaC b [W`ca? >/3'#),!? G$ defghij k lmijn om pq r s jsp t suemsv hsmsv p ew xh ps oj h uh o sn ew suemsv mj ytosi s t e hs s m hsmsv eq gesj ze K34O [)L.( +*4)L.(-117,4%4)L9 :;<= V!1*!(1/6? >!.'5/'6 Ca? @A@B CADA@ GH I !"# $% &!"!'()* +(,!"!'()*-./0123*4)5*"6/0%7)89 PQ H/'O R% G4'!L/* +L/'O%/4'!L/*-./0123*4)5*"6/0%7)89 :STU;Q= W!D W!X5!(" Y)' $!Z!' )Y [)*45''!*4! \ G$]^ &')_!4" /" W`CaC b [W`ca? >/3'#),!? G$ gem ov e mvms to s {|}~€ ‚ƒ„…†‡~q k h yy xhvos s ihms pes ysmsv ieos i mijmsv msj ysmsv em om q ˆ ‰ Šsmsv ‹y wus hwmw Šm ‰q dh t pmsv hy pme uh s e Œh pq gesj q Ž‡ ƒ …‘’“”ƒ•{ „~€Ž…ƒ•…–~‡}ƒ— € ˜~ ™š ›› œ —šš siožvyiqio Ÿ ze Šm ¡¢£¤¥£¦§¨©§¡¤§ª §«§¬ fšf kŠ Šm lmij ®o Ÿh j eyffh jqttmiqiofom fmf j v ‹¯°±²yo²iu ®Œ ®³´²µv ¶x¯dj·Ÿµt°m¶lxv Ÿv¸p ¹smw¶msºq» fPage 48 of 124 !" "# $%" ! "" ! " &'( )! * "" "* % " +* +" ! + "( )! $" &,-.' //011,1( 23 45 6 3 7 " "% ! $"" ! $ 8 * 8 ! ! * ( 9 + " * ": * * ; ! * +! *( < + ! * " " + ( = + ! * % ! * ! !( > > ?@ABCDEFGHDIJKLM NOPQCDRSTUMVWXYDZ[LUTWUXD\]YD]^]_D`a^bDcd eACDf[gSDhiDc[g[UMJjDkMl[g[UMJjmLWnVoFjGJTjgXWnipJqr stCDdWUHDuiDvGU[KWjDkKWUHiWGU[KWjmLWnVoFjGJTjgXWnipJqr NwxyOtQCDz[{T[MgD|JUDh[}[UDJ|DIJjGTUU[jG[D~Dvh€DcUJ [GgDWgDfz‚\ƒ\D„DIz‚`ƒYDZWFUSJl[YDvh …" 7! ) % * % "% 7†‡) ˆ " ! ‰ <* Š-Š &‰<‹Š-Š' " Œ* <" /- &Œ<‹/-' 9 7†( 7 ! * * % 8 Œ ! 9 8 * " + ! ! * ! Ž"8 Œ* ( "" +* " * ( ‰ ! Œ ;" Œ* ! !8% ( 7 * " 8 ˆ " " ‘( * "% * " * % ‹!‹8 % " % $* * $8 ! ( ’* ! "" % "% * ! ˆ " ! " $ " *+ "* ( “8$ 8 " % 8 7†‡) " + "* * " * $8( ” * ;8 8 ! ! * * ! * ! 7†‡) " * * " * " 8 8 $" ( ; ( •–—˜™š›œšžŸ™ ¡ ¢£¤–›¥™ ¥›¦£—§™¨©¤©ª£¥ «¬&‘.Š' ,1.-,Š ® ¨¬‘.Š‘-/Š1-- +¯""% ( 01 ’" ‰ <" °+ 7† ±±1- ²³´µ¶·µ¸¹º»¹³¶¹¼²¹½¹¾² ‘#‘/#‘± Š .Š ”° ° ¿; Œ+ ’* ; ##* ;(!!(##"#77;7†%777777“ÀÁ‡Â ‘+ 7Œ 7ŒÃ‘9Â=%17Ĉ.ÀÅŠ;Æ’1= ! ÁÄ¿ˆ%77’-"%Ç877È $Ä ÉŠ(‘1Ê /#.Page 49 of 124 !" "# $%" ! "" ! " &'( )! * "" "* % " +* +" ! + "( )! $" &,-.' //011,1( 23 45 6 3 7 " "% ! $"" ! $ 8 * 8 ! ! * ( 9 + " * ": * * ; ! * +! *( < + ! * " " + ( = + ! * % ! * ! !( > > ?@ABCDE 8 ! * " ! * %F ( G " ; ; * * %F * ! " ;8 !( H#H/#HI JK.J GL L M; N+ O* ; K##* ;(!!(##"#77;7P%777777QRSTU UH+ 7NV7NWH9U=%17XY.RZJ;[O1= ! SXMY%77O-"%\877] $X ^J(H1_ .#.Page 50 of 124 BY DA T E AS S H O W N RE V I S I O N S No . DA T E SHEET NUMBER CH E C K E D B Y SC A L E DE S I G N E D B Y DR A W N B Y KH A P R O J E C T DA T E : LI C E N S E D P R O F E S S I O N A L © 2 0 2 6 K I M L E Y - H O R N A N D A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . 11 N O R T H W A T E R S T R E E T R S A B A T T L E H O U S E T O W E R , SU I T E 9 2 9 0 , M O B I L E , A L 3 6 6 0 2 PH O N E : ( 2 5 1 ) 2 6 3 - 8 3 5 0 WW W . K I M L E Y - H O R N . C O M AL D I MA T T H E W S . G I L L E S P I E AL L I C E N S E N U M B E R AL A B A M A FA I R H O P E 34 1 7 6 - 20 2 6 / 0 8 / 1 1 LA W R E N C E R D ID L W E I L D D R VICINITY MAP GAYFER RD EXT FARIHOPE AVE BL U E B E R R Y L N ST A T E H W Y 1 8 1 LO W R Y D R NO R T H W O O D S T KNOLLWOOD AV SITE LAWLER & COMPANY SURVEY LEGEND NORTH EX I S T I N G CO N D I T I O N S EX-1 Digitally signed by Matthew S Gillespie DN: CN=Matthew S Gillespie, dnQualifier=A01410C0000019BEB54136C005013FE, O=KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC, C=US Reason: I am approving this document Date: 2026.08.14 11:38:02-04'00' Page 51 of 124 EX-2 B EX-2 B EX - 2 A EX - 2 A E TI N A-A E TI N B-B BY DA T E AS S H O W N RE V I S I O N S No . DA T E SHEET NUMBER CH E C K E D B Y SC A L E DE S I G N E D B Y DR A W N B Y KH A P R O J E C T DA T E : LI C E N S E D P R O F E S S I O N A L © 2 0 2 6 K I M L E Y - H O R N A N D A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . 11 N O R T H W A T E R S T R E E T R S A B A T T L E H O U S E T O W E R , SU I T E 9 2 9 0 , M O B I L E , A L 3 6 6 0 2 PH O N E : ( 2 5 1 ) 2 6 3 - 8 3 5 0 WW W . K I M L E Y - H O R N . C O M AL D I MA T T H E W S . G I L L E S P I E AL L I C E N S E N U M B E R AL A B A M A FA I R H O P E 34 1 7 6 - 20 2 6 / 0 8 / 1 1 LA W R E N C E R D ID L W E I L D D R VICINITY MAP GAYFER RD EXT FARIHOPE AVE BL U E B E R R Y L N ST A T E H W Y 1 8 1 LO W R Y D R NO R T H W O O D S T KNOLLWOOD AV SITE LAWLER & COMPANY SURVEY LEGEND NORTH CO N C E P T U A L RE T A I N I N G W A L L EX-2 Page 52 of 124 THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 451 Pecan Ave, PO Box 429, Fairhope, AL 36532 251-928-8003 | www.fairhopeal.gov | planning@fairhopeal.gov 1 of 1 Sherry Sullivan Mayor Council Members Andrea F. Booth Jack Burrell, ACMO Jimmy Conyers Joshua N. Gammon Jay Robinson Lisa A. Hanks, MMC City Clerk Kimberly Creech City Treasurer Notification Letter September 18, 2026 RE: SD 26.18 ALDI Multiple Occupancy Project Subdivision of 2 Lots, 7.14± acres PPIN #: 248109 Description: Applicant, Duplantis Design Group, PC, on behalf of the Owner, ALDI Inc. of Alabama for Final Plat approval of ALDI Subdivision, a 2-lot Multiple Occupancy Project on property zoned B-2, General Business District. The property is located on the northeast corner of State Highway 181 and County Road 48. Dear Property Owner, State law requires all property owners adjacent to property being considered for subdivision approval to be notified by certified mail. The Baldwin County Revenue Office provided your information as a current adjacent property owner to the subdivision request detailed above and illustrated on the attached preliminary plat. This letter is to notify you that the City of Fairhope Planning Commission will hold a public hearing regarding the above request at 5:00 PM in the Council Chambers located in the Fairhope Municipal Complex at 161 N. Section Street on October 5, 2026. Should any desire to provide written comments prior to the public hearing ALL written comments and/or presentation materials MUST be received by the Planning Department by no later than noon on September 28, 2026, in order to ensure adequate time for review and distribution to the Planning Commission. Written comments/materials received after this deadline may not be included in the advance report packet but may be submitted for the record at the public hearing. A detailed staff report and application materials will be posted online during the week prior to the public hearing at www.fairhopeal.gov under the Agendas and Minutes tab. FRAUDULENT & SUSPICIOUS EMAILS The City of Fairhope Planning Department is aware of fraudulent emails impersonating City Staff and Commission members requesting payment for permits or services via wire transfer. Please note that the City of Fairhope will never request payment of any kind via wire transfer and application fees will always be processed prior to a case going before any Board or Commission. If you receive a suspicious message please notify the Planning Department right away and do not click any links, open attachments, or send any payment or personal information. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact the Planning Department. Cordially, Janine Saykes Planning Clerk Page 53 of 124 Page 54 of 124 SD 26.19 – ALDI Minor Subdivision October 5, 2026 SUMMARY OF REQUEST Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, Duplantis Design Group, PC, on behalf of the owner, ALDI, Inc of Alabama for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of ALDI Subdivision, a 2-lot Minor Subdivision, on property zoned B-2, General Business District. The property is located on the northeast corner of State Highway 181 and County Road 48 and is 7.14± acres. SITE HISTORY The property was before the Commission May 4th, 2020 and September 10th, 2020 for a minor subdivision. Issues with the recording rendered the plat null and void by Baldwin County. The property received preliminary approval for a 5-unit MOP October 4th, 2021. The property was annexed into the City January 26th, 2026. STAFF COMMENTS The purpose of this request is to divide the property into two lots as previously approved. Utilities Upgrades and utility infrastructure were previously installed with previous MOP approval. City of Fairhope is the provider for Water, Sewer, and Gas. Riviera is the power provider and AT&T for communications. Traffic Traffic improvements were installed with previous MOP approval. Drainage Master drainage system installed with previous MOP approval. Tree & Landscaping Sidewalks and landscaping installed with previous MOP approval. Page 55 of 124 SD 26.19 – ALDI Minor Subdivision October 5, 2026 SUBDIVISION CONSIDERATIONS Standards of Review: In accordance with Article V.B.2 of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations the Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; b) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; c) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; d) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or e) The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of SD 26.19 ALDI minor subdivision. Page 56 of 124 !"#$%&""" ' (%")*+, - . !" " / ! 0")*+, - . !" 1!2 03 "45 "6%%7" " " " " 80% 3 ! 0$"8 "" " 6 ! "8 " " /* %"9 * ! $"80 :% " " ;3%! .&" " 0 %." 2"1! 0 0 !" 0"< . " " .. %," !-%. 0."" = %" 2" !&"">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>" " ?@?ABCD?E FGHI? D?JAKD LMNO PQ RSPTOSUV WXYOSZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[R\PYO L]N^OSZ [[[[[[[[[[[ _``SOaa PQ RSPTOSUV WXYOSZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ bcUVZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ dUMUOZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[ ecTZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ RSPTPaO` d]^`cfcacPY LMNOZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ LPg _hSOa cY RiMUZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ LPg jPUaklYcUaZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ RMShOi LPZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ b]SSOYU ePYcYmZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ nAG?KoI DA D?JAKD RiMU N]aU ^O acmYO` ^V U\O TSPTOSUV PXYOS ^OQPSO MhhOTUMYhO ^V U\O bcUV PQ pMcS\PTO LMNO PQ _]U\PScqO` _mOYUZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[R\PYO L]N^OSZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ _``SOaaZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ bcUVZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ dUMUOZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[ ecTZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ bPYUMhU ROSaPYZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ n?rB?EsDKD? D?JAKD LMNO PQ pcSNZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[R\PYO L]N^OSZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ _``SOaaZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ bcUVZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ dUMUOZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[ ecTZ [[[[[[[[[[[[ bPYUMhU ROSaPYZ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ RiMU pOO bMih]iMUcPYZ tOQOSOYhOZ WS`cYMYhO uvwx dcmYMU]SOaZ y hOSUcQV U\MU y MN U\O TSPTOSUV PXYOSkiOMaO\Pi`OS PQ U\O M^PfO `OahSc^O` TSPTOSUV MY` \OSO^V a]^NcU U\ca TiMU UP U\O bcUV QPS SOfcOXg zyQ TSPTOSUV ca PXYO` ^V pMcS\PTO dcYmiO {M| bPSTg MY M]U\PScqO` dcYmiO {M| SOTSOaOYUMUcfO a\Mii acmY U\ca MTTichMUcPYg [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ RSPTOSUV WXYOSkjOMaO\Pi`OS RScYUO` LMNO dcmYMU]SO [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ }MUO pMcS\PTO dcYmiO {M| bPSTg ~yQ _TTichM^iO Page 57 of 124 Page 58 of 124 THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 451 Pecan Ave, PO Box 429, Fairhope, AL 36532 251-928-8003 | www.fairhopeal.gov | planning@fairhopeal.gov 1 of 1 Sherry Sullivan Mayor Council Members Andrea F. Booth Jack Burrell, ACMO Jimmy Conyers Joshua N. Gammon Jay Robinson Lisa A. Hanks, MMC City Clerk Kimberly Creech City Treasurer Notification Letter September 18, 2026 RE: SD 26.19 ALDI Minor Subdivision Subdivision of 2 Lots, 7.14± acres PPIN #: 248109 Description: Applicant, Duplantis Design Group, PC, on behalf of the Owner, ALDI Inc. of Alabama for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of ALDI Subdivision, a 2-lot Minor Subdivision on property zoned B-2, General Business District. The property is located on the northeast corner of State Highway 181 and County Road 48. Dear Property Owner, State law requires all property owners adjacent to property being considered for subdivision approval to be notified by certified mail. The Baldwin County Revenue Office provided your information as a current adjacent property owner to the subdivision request detailed above and illustrated on the attached preliminary plat. This letter is to notify you that the City of Fairhope Planning Commission will hold a public hearing regarding the above request at 5:00 PM in the Council Chambers located in the Fairhope Municipal Complex at 161 N. Section Street on October 5, 2026. Should any desire to provide written comments prior to the public hearing ALL written comments and/or presentation materials MUST be received by the Planning Department by no later than noon on September 28, 2026, in order to ensure adequate time for review and distribution to the Planning Commission. Written comments/materials received after this deadline may not be included in the advance report packet but may be submitted for the record at the public hearing. A detailed staff report and application materials will be posted online during the week prior to the public hearing at www.fairhopeal.gov under the Agendas and Minutes tab. FRAUDULENT & SUSPICIOUS EMAILS The City of Fairhope Planning Department is aware of fraudulent emails impersonating City Staff and Commission members requesting payment for permits or services via wire transfer. Please note that the City of Fairhope will never request payment of any kind via wire transfer and application fees will always be processed prior to a case going before any Board or Commission. If you receive a suspicious message please notify the Planning Department right away and do not click any links, open attachments, or send any payment or personal information. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact the Planning Department. Cordially, Janine Saykes Planning Clerk Page 59 of 124 Payton Rogers Page 60 of 124 SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates October 5, 2026 Page 1 of 7 SUMMARY OF REQUEST Request of the Applicant, Dewberry, on behalf of the owner, Veranda Capital LLC, for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of Middle Street Estates, a 2-lot Non-Administrative Re-Plat, on property zoned R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District. The property is located on the northwest corner of Middle Street and Mershon Street and is 0.69± acres. SITE HISTORY The subject site was included as a portion of Lot 1 Block 3 of the 1926 Coleman’s Subdivision. In 1942 the subject site was included as Lots 17 and 18 of the Fairhope Colored Subdivision. There have be no recent Planning Commission or Board of Adjustment cases associated with this site. STAFF COMMENTS The purpose of this request is to create two (2) legal lots of record from two (2) existing historical lots (Lots 17 and 18 in Fairhope Colored Subdivision). The site will be served by Fairhope Utilities for Electric, Water, Sewer, and Gas. As proposed, both Lots 1 and 2 will front on Mershon Street, a local street servicing residential land uses and illustrating a compliant 66-foot right-of-way (ROW) on the Preliminary Plat, which should be retained on the Final Plat, if approved. Lot 1, being a corner lot, has side street frontage along Middle Street. Another local street servicing residential land uses. Right-of-way (ROW) along Middles Street varies, however, in an effort to align the ROW with that of Dogwood Subdivision West of the subject site dedication of 6.33± feet of the proposed Lot 1 along Middle Street should be required, if approved . The preliminary plat illustrates a compliant minimum lot width for all proposed lots and properly labels lot area for all lots in both square feet and acres. If approved, this information should be retained on the Final Plat; or provision of a table on the Final Plat with the same information will suffice. Additionally, the preliminary plat illustrates a 35-foot front yard setback for both lots along Mershon Street, 10-foot side yard setbacks, and 35-foot rear yard setbacks for all proposed lots, and a 20-foot side street side yard setback for Lot 1 in compliance with Article V Section E.4.a of the Subdivision Regulations and Article III Section C.1. of the Zoning Ordinance. All setbacks as illustrated should be retained on the Final Plat. Various drainage and utility easements are depicted on the preliminary plat. If approved, a note should be placed on the Final Plat stating that no structures shall be constructed in any easement without permission of the easement holder. It should be noted that the preliminary plat illustrates a 60-foot right-of-way (ROW) on the north side of proposed Lot 2, labeled “to be vacated”. This ROW was included in the historical Coleman’s Subdivision from 1926, however, the 1946 subdivision Fairhope Colored Subdivision does not include this ROW. Currently the City of Fairhope does not have any utility infrastructure within the area and has no plans for expanding the roadway. As such, if approved, the applicant should remove the “to be vacated” label and shall coordinate with Planning Staff to address any ownership issues regarding the ROW as determined by the Fairhope City Attorney. Page 61 of 124 SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates October 5, 2026 Page 2 of 7 Citizen Comments During the public comment period staff received a number of letters from property owners concerned primarily with the existing drainage of stormwater across the subject site and the immediate vicinity and how future development of the proposed lots, if approved, may exacerbate these problems. All citizen comments received prior to posting of this report may be viewed in their entirety within this packet. Utilities Water and sewer connections will be subject to all applicable tap fees and system development charges (SDCs), and any required infrastructure improvements will be the developer’s responsibility. Gas service installation for the subdivision will also be determined based on final drawings. Drainage Due to the small scale of the proposed 2-lot minor subdivision a drainage plan was not provided nor required. It should be noted, however, that the subject site includes a 4-foot wide natural drainage/discharge canal which crosses Lot 2 from northeast to southwest. Over time this canal has partially filled with sediment causing the water to sheet flow out across the subject site and the abutting property to the west before entering into the ROW along Middle Street. Wetlands No wetland report was submitted by the applicant nor was one required for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision. However, as the site has known drainage issues Staff requested a 3rd party review through Wetland Resources Environmental Consulting. The complete report can be found included in this application package. The 3rd party reviewer included the following assessment within their report regarding the existing drainage canal (a.k.a. “stream channel”): The stream channel was examined on September 3rd and 8th by the undersigned. This stream channel originates to the east of the subject parcel and crosses through a culvert near the northeast parcel corner. The channel crosses the parcel in a southwest direction and exits along the west property line near its midpoint. See Figure 3, the surveyor’s plat showing the channel. The stream channel and its flood plain have obviously experienced significant depositional input (sedimentation) over a long period of ti me. Water was present in a depressional area just west of the culvert and in other minor depressions along the channel. The channel is more defined in the upstream area near the culvert, then becomes less defined with an obvious flow pattern that widens significantly downstream. At the point where flow leaves the parcel along the west boundary, there are no distinct streambanks and the flow path is approximately 50 ft. wide. Water flows across the adjoining parcel, exiting near the southwest corner, then into a ditch along the north side of Middle Street, which flows to the west. At the intersection of Middle Street and Valley Street, water flow continues through culverts and into the Tatumville Gully stream channel. See Figure 4, a screen shot from The National Map website, with the approximate flow path shown. While a defined stream bed and banks are lacking in part of the segment north of Middle Street, it is obvious that significant water flow occurs as a result of significant rainfall events. Historic and potentially recent sedimentation has filled what was likely a natural stream channel in the past, causing sheet flow or braided flow through the sediment-filled flood plain. No wetlands are present. While no wetlands are present on site the stream channel does qualify as a “Watercourse” per the City of Fairhope Wetlands Ordinance No. 1370. As such, a 20-foot buffer along the top of bank and sedimentation limits as illustrated on the preliminary plat, shall be required. If approved, a note should be included on the final plat stating that no structures shall be constructed within the 20-foot watercourse buffer. Page 62 of 124 SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates October 5, 2026 Page 3 of 7 SUBDIVISION CONSIDERATIONS Standards of Review: In accordance with Article V.B.2 of the City of Fairhope Subdivision Regulations the Planning Commission shall not approve the subdivision of land if the Commission makes a finding that such land is not suitable for platting and development as proposed, due to any of the following: a) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and/or the City’s Zoning ordinance, where applicable; b) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or any other plan or program for the physical development of the City including but not limited to a Master Street Plan, a Parks Plan, a Bicycle Plan, a Pedestrian Plan, or the Capital Improvements Program; c) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with these Regulations; d) The proposed subdivision is not consistent with other applicable state or federal laws and regulations; or e) The proposed subdivision otherwise endangers the health, safety, welfare or property within the planning jurisdiction of the City.” Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of SD 26.20 Middle Street Estates Minor Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. Dedication of 6.33± feet of right-of-way of Lot 1 along Middle Street; 2. Provision of a note on the Final Plat stating that no structures shall be constructed in any easement without permission of the easement holder; 3. Provision of a note on the Final Plat stating that no structures shall be constructed within the 20-foot watercourse buffer; and 4. Coordinate with Planning Staff to address any ownership issues regarding the 60 -foot right-of-way on the northside of Lot 2, as determined by the Fairhope City Attorney. Page 63 of 124 EXHIBITS SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates October 5, 2026 Page 4 of 7 Excerpt from Table 3-2: Dimension Table – Lots and Principle Structure Zoning District Min. Lot Area / Allowed Units Per Acre (UPA) Min. Lot Width Front Setback Rear Setback Side Setback Street Side Setback Max. Impervious Area k Max. Total Lot Coverage by All Structures Max. Height R/A 3 acres/ - 198’ 75’ 75’ 25’ 50’ none 30’ R-1 15,000 s.f./ - 100’ 40’ 35’ 10’ b 20’ 45% 40% 30’ a R-1a 40,000 s.f./ - 120’ 30’ 30’ 10’ b 20’ 30% 25% 35’ R-1b 30,000 s.f./ - 100’ 30’ 30’ 10’ b 20’ 30% 25% 35’ R-1c 20,000 s.f./ - 80’ 30’ 30’ 10’ b 20’ 30% 25% 35’ R-2 10,500 s.f./ - 75’ 35’ 35’ 10’ b 20’ 42% 37% 30’ a R-3 7,800 s.f./ - 65’ 30’ 35’ 8’ b 20’ 40% 35% 30’ R-3 PGH 4,000 s.f./ - 40’ 20’ 15’ 10’ b 10’ 37% 32.50% 30’ R-3 TH 20,000 s.f./ - 80’ 20’ 35’ 20’ c 20’ 50% 45% 30’ R-4 10,500 s.f. 75’ 30’ 35’ 10’ b 20’ 30% 30’ R-5 10,500 s.f. 75’ 30’ 35’ 10’ b 20’ 30% 30’ R-6 2 acres with a max. of 5 acres i/ - 250’ 25’ 20’ 20’ b 25’ N/A 30’ B-1 None/ - none 20’ d 20’ none e 30’ B-2 None/ - none 20’ d none f none e 30’ k B-3a 7,500 s.f./ - 60’ 30’ 35’ 10’ 30% 30’ B-3b 7,500 s.f./ - 60’ 20’ 20’ none e none 30’ B-4 None/ - none 20’ 20’ 10’ 30’ M-1 None/ - none none g none f none e none 45’ M-2 None/ - none none g none h none h none 45’ PUD See Article V., Section A. HTD See Article V., Section I. a. Structure may exceed the building height provided the lot width is increased by 10 feet for each additional foot in height. b. Where a driveway is in the side, and extends past the front of the principal structure, the side setback shall be 15 feet. Driveways shall not be within three (3) feet of the side lot line. The area between the side lot line and driveway shall be vegetated and remain pervious. c. A minimum side yard, as required by Article III, Section D.2 may be located within the 20-foot side setback. d. Where a lot abuts residential property on both sides, the front setback shall be in line with adjacent structures. e. Where a lot abuts residential property, the side setback shall be 10 feet. f. Where a lot abuts residential property to the rear, the rear setback shall be 20 feet. g. In the case of existing adjacent establishments, the setback shall be the average within 100 feet on either side of the proposed structure. h. Where a side or rear lot abuts residential districts, the setbacks shall be determined on an individual basis. i. R-6 Districts may be larger than five (5) acres provided they meet all the special design requirements of Article V., Section D.5. j. Central Business District 40 feet. k. For purposes of this article, the term "impervious area" means the developed area of the lot, including house and accessory structures, as well as surfaces that do not allow the free passage of water through the material into the ground. The term "impervious area" shall include, without limitation, sidewalks, driveways, parking areas, decks, and patios, unless such surfaces are constructed of materials that allow passage of water into the ground at a rate equal to the pre-developed condition. Page 64 of 124 EXHIBITS SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates October 5, 2026 Page 5 of 7 Preliminary Plat Page 65 of 124 EXHIBITS SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates October 5, 2026 Page 6 of 7 1926 Coleman’s Subdivision Page 66 of 124 EXHIBITS SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates October 5, 2026 Page 7 of 7 1942 Fairhope Colored Subdivision Page 67 of 124 Page 5 of 10 APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL Application Type: Village Subdivision Minor Subdivision Informal (No Fee) Preliminary Plat Final Plat Multiple Occupancy Project Property Owner / Leaseholder Information Name of Property Owner: _______________________Phone Number: ___________ Address of Property Owner: ________________________________________________ City: ____________________________ State: _____________ Zip: ____________ Proposed Subdivision Name: ________________________________________________ No. Acres in Plat: _______________________ No. Lots/Units: ___________________ Parcel No: _______________________________ Current Zoning: ___________________ Authorized Agent Information Plat must be signed by the property owner before acceptance by the City of Fairhope Name of Authorized Agent: ______________________Phone Number: ____________ Address: _________________________________________________ City: ____________________________ State: _____________ Zip: ____________ Contact Person: ______________________ Surveyor/Engineer Information Name of Firm: __________________________________Phone Number: ____________ Address: _________________________________________________ City: ____________________________ State: _____________ Zip: ____________ Contact Person: ______________________ Plat Fee Calculation: Reference: Ordinance 1269 Signatures: I certify that I am the property owner/leaseholder of the above described property and hereby submit this plat to the City for review. *If property is owned by Fairhope Single Tax Corp. an authorized Single Tax representative shall sign this application. ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Property Owner/Leaseholder Printed Name Signature ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Date Fairhope Single Tax Corp. (If Applicable) VERANDA CAPITAL L L C 1507 CAPTAIN ONEAL DR DAPHNE AL 36526 251.599.7590 Middle Street Estates 20.85 ac. R2 DEWBERRY 25353 Friendship Road Daphne AL 36526 Aaron Collins Dewberry Engineers Inc. 25353 Friendship Road Daphne AL 36526 Victor Germain 251.929.9803 251.316.6042 05-46-03-37-0-015-037.000 BRUCE BIGLER Attachments: Articles of Incorporation or List all associated investors Date of Application: ____8/11/2026__________________ 8/11/2026 Page 68 of 124 B AAMALA MA GER I TO VIC R L. N 25353 Friendship Road Daphne, AL 36526 251.990.9950 fax 251.929-9815 LOT 1 LOT 2 Page 69 of 124 Fairhope Public Utiliti es ~ n c i/Membe rs drea Faust Booth k Burrell my Conyers huaGammon Robinson August20,2026 Re: Middle Street Estates, Pin: 58119, Parcel: 05-46-03-37-0-015-037.000, Single Residence, Fairhope, AL. This letter of availability is only valid based on what was proposed at the utility review meeting. Any changes or deviations of the proposed plan will require another utility review. This statement of availability remains effective for twelve (12) months from the date of this letter; at which time it shall expire and automatically be withdrawn. Water & Sewer: Based upon review of the proposed development, water and sewer service by Fairhope Public Utilities is currently available. All tap fees and system development charges (SDC's) will apply, and all necessary infrastructure improvements will be at the developer's expense. ~ Morefield Wate:astewater Superintendent Wes Boyett Natural Gas Superintendent Daryl Morefie ld Water/Wastewater Superintendent Be n Patte rson Electric Superinte ndent 555 S. S E C TI O N S T REET, FAIRHOPE, A L ABAMA 36532 • 257.928.8003 • FA I R H OPEAL .GOV Page 70 of 124 Page 71 of 124 Page 72 of 124 September 8, 2026 Hunter Simmons City of Fairhope Post Office Drawer 429 Fairhope, Alabama 36533 Subject: Third-Party Review Lots 17 & 18, Fairhope Colored Section Middle Street Estates (PIN: 58119) Fairhope, Baldwin County, Alabama Dear Mr. Simmons: As requested, Wetland Resources has conducted a third-party review related to the above-described 0.85-acre residential parcel located north of Middle Street and west of Mershon Street in Fairhope. The purpose of the review was to determine if the drainage feature through the property is considered a “watercourse” as defined by the Fairhope Subdivision Regulations and/or Ordinance No. 1370. If the drainage feature meets the definition of either or both, then a buffer may be required. The Fairhope Subdivision Regulations define a Watercourse as, “Any depression serving to give direction to a flow of water, having a bed and well-defined banks and which shall, upon the rule or order of the Planning Commission also include other generally or specifically designated areas where flooding may occur. The flow of water need not be on a continuous basis, but may be intermittent, resulting from the surface runoff of precipitation.” In the Fairhope Subdivision Regulations, p. 59, part 4.b. Stream Buffers, it further states, “A Buffer layer in the City’s GIS system has been developed to show Buffer limits along streams within the City’s Planning Jurisdiction. The following Buffer widths used to develop the Buffer layer for streams, are shown in the following table and are measured from the top of bank as defined in Article II of these Regulations. Buffer widths for ponds, Mobile Bay, jurisdictional wetlands as determined by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management and the Army Corps of Engineers, and any lakes, ponds, and isolated wetlands are also shown in the table. The Buffer requirement applies to streams beginning at a point where the drainage area is 100 acres or greater.” The drainage area of the stream that crosses the subject parcel is well under 100 acres. Ordinance No. 1370 defines Watercourses as, “Rivers, streams, intermittent streams, ditches, brooks, channels, lakes, ponds, manmade ponds, estuarine waters, swamps, bogs, vernal pools, playas, and all other bodies of water, natural or artificial, intermittent or permanent, public or private which have defined banks and water at least a portion of the year.” This ordinance requires a 20 ft. buffer. The USGS topographic map shows the drainage feature that crosses the property to be within a topographic swale that slopes toward Tatumville Gully, a stream channel that flows to Mobile Bay. See Figure 1. Soils within the drainage feature are mapped as Lv – Local Alluvial Land, a non-hydric soil that can have up to 10% unmapped inclusions of a Bibb soils, which is hydric. See Figures 2(a), 2(b), and 2(c). Page 73 of 124 The stream channel was examined on September 3rd and 8th by the undersigned. This stream channel originates to the east of the subject parcel and crosses through a culvert near the northeast parcel corner. The channel crosses the parcel in a southwest direction and exits along the west property line near its midpoint. See Figure 3, the surveyor’s plat showing the channel. The stream channel and its flood plain have obviously experienced significant depositional input (sedimentation) over a long period of time. Water was present in a depressional area just west of the culvert and in other minor depressions along the channel. The channel is more defined in the upstream area near the culvert, then becomes less defined with an obvious flow pattern that widens significantly downstream. At the point where flow leaves the parcel along the west boundary, there are no distinct streambanks and the flow path is approximately 50 ft. wide. Water flows across the adjoining parcel, exiting near the southwest corner, then into a ditch along the north side of Middle Street, which flows to the west. At the intersection of Middle Street and Valley Street, water flow continues through culverts and into the Tatumville Gully stream channel. See Figure 4, a screen shot from The National Map website, with the approximate flow path shown. While a defined stream bed and banks are lacking in part of the segment north of Middle Street, it is obvious that significant water flow occurs as a result of significant rainfall events. Historic and potentially recent sedimentation has filled what was likely a natural stream channel in the past, causing sheet flow or braided flow through the sediment-filled flood plain. No wetlands are present. See the photos below taken during the site visits. A stream assessment tool used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, Regulatory Division is the North Carolina Division of Water Quality’s “Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins.” This methodology was used to assess this stream channel. Based on the overall assessment score of 18, this stream appears to be ephemeral. An ephemeral stream is described by this assessment method as, “A feature that carries only stormwater in direct response to precipitation with water flowing only during and shortly after large precipitation events. An ephemeral stream may or may not have a well-defined channel, the aquatic bed is always above the water table, and stormwater runoff is the primary source of water. An ephemeral stream typically lacks the biological, hydrological, and physical characteristics commonly associated with the continuous or intermittent conveyance of water.” The completed stream assessment form is at Figure 5. Based on all of the above, it appears that a 50 ft. buffer is not required due to the size of the watershed. However, a 20 ft. buffer seems appropriated based on the requirements of Ordinance No. 1370. If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Gena Todia Page 74 of 124 Figure 1. USGS Topographic Map Figure 2(a). USDA NRCS Soil Map SITE Page 75 of 124 Figure 2(b). USDA NRCS Soil Map Legend Figure 2(c). USDA NRCS Soil Map Unit Legend Page 76 of 124 Figure 3. From Dewberry Boundary Survey and Replat Page 77 of 124 Figure 4. The National Map with 3DEP Hillshade Stretch Layer (https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/) with the Stream Flow Path Approximated (blue line) SITE Page 78 of 124 Figure 5. Stream Assessment Form Page 79 of 124 Site Photos – September 3 & 8, 2026 View of the stream channel, looking west from the culvert under Mershon Street. Just downstream from the pool shown above and the culvert under Mershon Street. Page 80 of 124 Continuing downstream there remains a defined bed and banks with water standing in depressions. Continuing downstream, wrack lines are seen where debris has been obstructed by tree roots. Page 81 of 124 Further downstream the channel has been filled with sediment. Flow spreads out through a wider area. Light-colored sand can be seen in some areas, indicating that sedimentation is continuing. Another view of the same area as above. Page 82 of 124 Sandy sediment is present throughout the flood plain in the western area of the parcel with no defined stream channel. Another view of the same area as above. Page 83 of 124 Dense vegetation obscures the point where water flows from the parcel to the roadside ditch. Sandy sediment has been carried to this point. Looking west from the point where water flows from the parcel to the west into the roadside ditch. The culvert and driveway lead to the adjacent parcel to the west of the subject parcel. Page 84 of 124 Water from the stream also flows across the driveway and down its west side to the roadside ditch. Looking west from the driveway shown above along the roadside ditch that carries flow to Tatumville Gully. Page 85 of 124 Concrete flume and culverts at the west end of the ditch along the north side of Middle Street. Tatumville Gully, looking south from the intersection of Middle Street and Valley Street. Page 86 of 124 From:Thomas Toombs To:planning Cc:Payton Rogers; Janine Saykes Subject:SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates – Written Comments from Adjacent Owner Thomas Toombs Date:Sunday, September 27, 2026 8:27:18 PM Thomas Toombs 26481 Kensington Place Daphne, AL 36526 Cell: 251-455-3617 September 27, 2026 City of Fairhope Planning & Zoning Department Attn: Planning Commission 451 Pecan Avenue, P.O. Box 429 Fairhope, AL 36532 Via email: planning@fairhopeal.gov RE: SD 26.20 – Middle Street Estates Minor Subdivision Re-Subdivision of 1 Lot, 0.69± acres – PPIN #58119 Public Hearing: October 5, 2026 Dear Members of the Planning Commission: I own the property immediately north of the subject lot on Mershon Street (Lots 1 and 2, Virgie Smith Subdivision, Slide 2353-D, held by me and DPT LLC), across the unnamed right-of-way. I am also the developer of the Dogwood Subdivision (Slide 2367-F), which abuts the same right-of-way. I do not oppose re-subdividing this property into two conforming R-2 lots. I ask the Commission to address two concerns. 1. Drainage The plat shows a natural drainage channel crossing the property, with a 20-foot buffer from the building sites. In my view, the water problem on this lot is largely man-made. The City's culvert under Mershon Street, and the way Mershon and Middle Streets were built, create an artificial dam at the edge of these lots. Water directed by that culvert now flows across the street and across Ms. Rose Collins’ driveway to the west. I appreciate the proposed drainage buffer. As the adjoining owner, however, I want it on record that added impervious surface, fill, driveways, and sidewalks on this site could cause water to back up onto my property, where it does not today. I request that appropriate drainage improvements be incorporated into the plat as a condition of approval, carrying the water along the roads, or directly to the property line and into the Middle Street ditch. 2. The Unnamed Right-of-Way Page 87 of 124 The tax map shows the existing lot of record at approximately 223 feet by 147 feet. The proposed plat labels the full 66-foot unnamed right-of-way "to be vacated" and places all of it in the new corner lot, extending that lot to approximately 273 feet along Mershon Street. The plat's site data (0.85 acres) also exceeds the 0.69 acres stated in the notice, consistent with the right-of-way being added to this parcel. I request that the right-of-way be divided along its centerline: 33 feet to the corner lot and 33 feet to my adjoining lots to the north, and that the plat be revised to reflect that division. For context: when I developed the Dogwood Subdivision, this unnamed right-of-way was discovered. We took the portion adjoining that subdivision through a City Council resolution and the required advertising process to have it vacated. At that time, City Planning Staff chose not to address the remainder, and I did not yet own the property to the north. I purchased Virgie Smith's property after we built the Dogwood Subdivision. I plan to attend the hearing on October 5. Please feel free to call me at 251-455-3617 to discuss. Sincerely, Thomas Toombs Page 88 of 124 Page 89 of 124 Page 90 of 124 Page 91 of 124 Page 92 of 124 Page 93 of 124 Page 94 of 124 Page 95 of 124 Page 96 of 124 Page 97 of 124 Page 98 of 124 Page 99 of 124 Page 100 of 124 THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 451 Pecan Ave, PO Box 429, Fairhope, AL 36532 251-928-8003 | www.fairhopeal.gov | planning@fairhopeal.gov 1 of 1 Sherry Sullivan Mayor Council Members Andrea F. Booth Jack Burrell, ACMO Jimmy Conyers Joshua N. Gammon Jay Robinson Lisa A. Hanks, MMC City Clerk Kimberly Creech City Treasurer Notification Letter September 18, 2026 RE: SD 26.20 Middle Street Estates Minor Subdivision Re-Subdivision of 1 Lot, 0.69± acres PPIN #: 58119 Description: Applicant, Dewberry, on behalf of the Owner, Veranda Capital LLC, for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of Middle Street Estates, a 1-lot Minor Re- Subdivision on property zoned R-2, Medium Density single-Family District. The property is located on the northwest corner of Middle Street and Mershon Street. Dear Property Owner, State law requires all property owners adjacent to property being considered for subdivision approval to be notified by certified mail. The Baldwin County Revenue Office provided your information as a current adjacent property owner to the subdivision request detailed above and illustrated on the attached preliminary plat. This letter is to notify you that the City of Fairhope Planning Commission will hold a public hearing regarding the above request at 5:00 PM in the Council Chambers located in the Fairhope Municipal Complex at 161 N. Section Street on October 5, 2026. Should any desire to provide written comments prior to the public hearing ALL written comments and/or presentation materials MUST be received by the Planning Department by no later than noon on September 28, 2026, in order to ensure adequate time for review and distribution to the Planning Commission. Written comments/materials received after this deadline may not be included in the advance report packet but may be submitted for the record at the public hearing. A detailed staff report and application materials will be posted online during the week prior to the public hearing at www.fairhopeal.gov under the Agendas and Minutes tab. FRAUDULENT & SUSPICIOUS EMAILS The City of Fairhope Planning Department is aware of fraudulent emails impersonating City Staff and Commission members requesting payment for permits or services via wire transfer. Please note that the City of Fairhope will never request payment of any kind via wire transfer and application fees will always be processed prior to a case going before any Board or Commission. If you receive a suspicious message please notify the Planning Department right away and do not click any links, open attachments, or send any payment or personal information. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact the Planning Department. Cordially, Janine Saykes Janine Saykes Planning Clerk Page 101 of 124 City of Fairhope Planning Commission Oc tober 5, 2026 ZC 26.10 -Eastlake PUD Project Name: Eastlake PUD Site Data: 75.47 acres Project T'f.e.e: Rezone property from PUD, Planned Unit Development to Planned Unit Development-Mixed Use for Eastlake Village Jurisdiction: Fairhope Planning Jurisdiction Zoning_ District: PUD, Planned Unit Development PPIN Number: 236701,24160,316793 General Location: West side of State Highway 181, north of Fairhope Avenue Surve'{_or ot Record: S.E. Civil Eng_ineer ot Record: S.E. Civil Owner L Develoe.er: 181 Fairhope Ave 2023 LLC School District: Fairhope Elementary School Fairhope Middle and High Schools Prej!ared b�: Hunter Simmons r -Road D Parcel D Corporate Limit � WWE � WWE Page 102 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 1 of 19 SUMMARY OF REQUEST Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, S.E. Civil, on behalf of the owner, 181 Fairhope Ave 2023 LLC, to rezone property from PUD, Planned Unit Development to PUD, Planned Unit Development for Eastlake Village. The property is located on the west side of State Highway 181, north of Fairhope Avenue and is 75.47± acres. SITE HISTORY The Subject Property was conditionally annexed into the City of Fairhope in November 2019 as a Planned Unit Development (PUD)(Ord. 1664), known as the Klumpp PUD. The Klumpp PUD was amended in April 2021 (Ord. 1708) and received Preliminary Plat approval in November 2021, which has since expired. The Klumpp PUD was once again amended in December 2022(Ord. 1764). The Applicant came before the Planning Commission in October 7, 2024 to present ZC 24.06 Eastlake Village PUD, but withdr ew that application in favor of the current proposed application. STAFF COMMENTS The Fairhope Zoning Ordinance states that generally, a Planned Unit Development (PUD) is intended to offer flexible development for comprehensively planned projects; encourage innovation to further the goals of the comprehensive plan; allow mixed-use development; encourage land conservation and more efficient use of open space. An application for a PUD is required to provide documents pursuant to Article V, Section A, of the Zoning Ordinance, collectively known as a Master Development Plan. A Master Development Plan is submitted with this application; however, there is an existing PUD for the Subject Property as noted above, which does not expire. Comparisons between the approved PUD (Klumpp) and the proposed PUD (Eastlake Village) are inevitable and this report will highlight those differences where applicable. It is also worth noting that the Zoning Ordinance was recently amended (August 7, 2026), which included amendments to Article V, Section A – Planned Unit Development. This application was initially received prior to those amendments and was reviewed for compliance with the Zoning Ordinance in place at time of application, which was last updated on June 3, 2025. The Subject Property is bordered to the northwest by the adjoining White Grove Subdivision, zoned R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District, and bordered to the southwest by property zoned R-A Residential/Agriculture District. The Subject Property adjoins Idlewild Subdivision (R-2) to the south, separated by the Fairhope Avenue right-of-way (ROW) as well as various properties comprising the southwest intersection of Fairhope Avenue and US 181, all zoned B-2, General Business District. Property on the northeast corner of Fairhope Ave/US 181 is also zoned B-2 (currently ALDI). Other properties across US 181 are zoned by Baldwin County and include B-1, B-2, and RA zoning districts. Adjacent properties north of Gayfer Rd Ext are zoned B-3 and RSF-E by Baldwin County. Both Fairhope and Baldwin County zoning maps are shown below. Page 103 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 2 of 19 Comprehensive Plan Review The Subject Property is located within a Suburban Mixed-Use Center, which can accommodate a mix of land uses and development patterns that are ideally more concentrated than other Suburban areas. Suburban Mixed-Use Centers should be master planned developments where uses are interconnected with streets and blocks rather than separated into individual pods. Generally, the more concentrated density/intense uses should be located near the Fairhope Ave/US 181 intersection and transition to lower density/less in tense uses as distance from the Fairhope Ave/US 181 epicenter increases. The table below summarizes the application’s compliance with the Suburban Mixed-Use Center Place Type requirements within the Comprehensive Plan. Compliance With Comp Plan Lot Sizes Yes Minimum Front Setbacks Yes Preservation of Sensitive Natural Features Yes Provision of Usable Common Open Space Yes Multi-Modal Connectivity Yes Residential Lot Sizes Yes Preventing a Street Frontage Dominated by Garages Yes Uses Yes Streets Yes Parking Yes Height No Fairhope Zoning Map Baldwin County Zoning Map Page 104 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 3 of 19 Generally, the proposed plans are consistent with the Suburban Mixed -Use Center Place Type, with one notable exception. The applicant has requested a three (3) story hotel with a maximum height limit of sixty (60) feet. The Suburban Mixed-Use Center recognizes that some exceptions may be made to the typical 30 foot building height limit, but buildings should still be limited to three (3) stories and a forty (40) feet maximum height. Page 105 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 4 of 19 Comparison with Previous and Current Approved Plans 2019 Plan Generally, the current and previously approved plans provided for commercial outparcels with some limitations in use. Other than connected roads and sidewalks, there was little integration between the uses were categorized into three pods (or units), which a practice our 2024 Comprehensive Plan warns against. An apples-to-apples comparison between the three plans is difficult, but the below table highlights a few key metrics among the three plans. *It should be noted that the 2022 plan included minor amendments and is not shown above due to space limitations. Metric 2019 Klumpp 2021 Klumpp 2022 Klumpp* Eastlake Single-Family Residential (Units) 67 - - 68 Single-Family Residential (Acres) 14.11 - - 12.32 Mult-Family/Apartment (Units) 232 292 292 226 Mult-Family/Apartment (Acres) 23.2 51.66 49.97 8.59 Commercial (Acres) 28.79 19.06 19.06 11.12 Total Residential Units 299 292* 292* 294 Green Space/Amenities (Acres) Inconclusive Inconclusive Inconclusive 28.72 2021 Plan Proposed Plan Page 106 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 5 of 19 Master Development Plan Review A Master Development Plan (MDP) is required of any PUD application. A copy of the draft MDP is included along with the staff report packet. For reference, the Table of Contents within the MDP is beneficial to navigate the information provided. A Master Site Plan is one component of the MDP and is shown below, along with the site data tables. Generally, the Applicant is proposing an integrated project with three types of housing, a hotel, mixed-use buildings, commercial/retail, along with preserved wetlands/streams, programed green space interconnected with sidewalks, trails, greenways, and a perimeter multi-modal path large enough for pedestrians, cyclists, and low-speed vehicles. Page 107 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 6 of 19 Proposed Land Use and Density As the comparison table above illustrates, the overall density and proposed land uses proposed within the Eastlake Village PUD are consistent with the current Klumpp PUD. Eastlake Village differs in that it is more predictable, with a more efficient use of land to preserve open space, including the large central park that is available to all members and guests of the Fairhope Community, as stated in the Applicant’s Develo pment Objective. Development Schedule Phases A, B, and C will be the first phase of construction, which will include installation of the main roads, utilities mains, central greenspace of Phase B, Single-Family Lots, and stormwater ponds. The perimeter path is not listed on the phasing plan. Because it is such an important component that connects the multiple phases, staff recommend a condition of approval that the perimeter path, western greenway, and perimeter landscape be installed in the first phase of construction. In addition, Phase H includes a singular commercial building, the phasing lines also include portions of “The Preserve” as described on the Greenspace Network Plan. Staff recommends the complete trail system within “The Preserve” also be installed as part of the first phase of construction. After the first phase of construction, there is not really a defined phasing plan, as the development schedule states, “development is anticipated to take 5-7 years, with residential and commercial components being Page 108 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 7 of 19 constructed concurrently.” The Applicant proposes “at a minimum 15,000 GSF of commercial will be constructed prior to, or simultaneously to, the multifamily residential component of the development.” If Planning Commission, and/or City Council, have any concerns about the future development plans, Staff recommends addressing those as conditions that can be memorialized in the Master Development Plan so that expectations are clear for future owners/partners/developers. Greenspace The Greenspace Plan below illustrates the acreage of proposed greenspace within the Master Development Plan with slight deviations from standard requirements that staff supports. The Greenspace Network plan within the Master Development Plan includes named areas for parks and amenities that are further illustrated and shown in the graphics below: Page 109 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 8 of 19 Page 110 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 9 of 19 Pedestrian and Bike Circulation, Trails and Multi-Use Paths The below plans illustrate an extensive sidewalk and trail system throughout the proposed development with broad (12-foot wide) sidewalks in the commercial area with integrated tree wells that transition to smaller sidewalks in the residential areas; perimeter multi-use paths; bike racks; parking for low-speed vehicles; boardwalks; as well as gravel trails and paths connecting the parks and amenities. The pedestrian circulation plan meets, or exceeds, the minimum requirements of the City’s regulations with one minor deviation, and perhaps that is due to miscommunication. The streets within the single -family residential phase are relatively small. Staff suggested a sidewalk on only one side of each street may be sufficient, but the plans omit sidewalks on one street altogether. To clarify, staff supports the proposed circulation plan, but each street segment within the single-family residential shall, at minimum, have a sidewalk on one side of the street. Staff welcome s any feedback from Planning Commission and/or City Council. Page 111 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 10 of 19 Proposed Base Zoning Districts and Proposed Deviations Identification of the base zoning district and deviations, along with the reasons for the deviations, are required as part of a PUD application. Below are the proposed base zoning districts, along with the proposed deviations within the Master Development Plan. The base zoning districts are akin to those in the currently approved Klumpp PUD. The stated reasons for the deviations within the Master Development Plan are: “to create a vibrant community. To accomplish this, the project utilizes narrower lots and reduced setbacks to bring homes closer together for human-scaled and pedestrian-friendly streetscapes. This also allows for more consolidated open space.” Staff agrees that most of these deviations are reasonable requests, and as evidenced by the provided master plan, results in more consolidated open space. However, there is one deviation that staff does not support, a maximum building height of 60 feet and four (4) stories for the proposed hotel. The Applicant has chosen B-2, General Business District as the base zoning district for the commercial areas and B-2 districts have a maximum building height of thirty (30) feet per Article III Section C of the Zoning Ordinance. Recognizing that a PUD allows flexibility, and height is something that can be considered, PUD applications also require architectural elevations, exterior materials, signs, floor plans and other items to evaluate whether a deviation is warranted. These items were not provided with this application, and as such, staff cannot support a building height deviation doubling the typical allowed height for a hotel. Instead, the Applicant’s request is to defer those requirements to a future PUD amendment or Site Plan Review. Staff does not support the height deviation for the hotel with the current application, but would consider any future request when plans and elevations can be provided for evaluations. Page 112 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 11 of 19 Architectural Plans and Form-Based Codes Single-Family Residential As proposed, the following form-based codes would dictate the development of single-family homes within Eastlake Village. Option 1 and Option 2 are examples of front-loaded lots, while Option 3 represents the rear-loaded lots. No further limitations are proposed, such as exterior materials, colors, roof materials that would ensure architectural diversity. Commissioners may want to consider if that is a desired addition to the Master Development Plan. Page 113 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 12 of 19 Multi-Family Residential Typical elevations and floor plans were submitted for the multi-family buildings, along with a typical “lot” that is intended to illustrate setbacks and dimensional requirements. *Floor plans are not provided in the Staff Report due to size limitations, but are included in the Master Development Plan. Multi-Family Residential Typical elevations and floor plans were submitted for the multi-family buildings, along with a typical “lot” that is intended to illustrate setbacks and dimensional requirements. *Floor plans are not provided in the Staff Report due to size limitations, but are included in the Master Development Plan. Commercial Elevations and floor plans are not included for each building proposed within the PUD, but the following elevations are listed as “Typical Elevations” for Commercial Buildings and Mixed-Use Buildings. Page 114 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 13 of 19 The Applicant acknowledges that elevations, floor plans, exterior materials, and similar details are not provided with this Application for all commercial, multi-family, hotel, and mixed-use buildings. The Applicant has verbally agreed, in concept, to defer those reviews to a mandatory Site Plan Review and to submit certain items typically reviewed with a PUD (elevations, materials, etc.) as part of the Site Plan Review application. If the Planning Commission is agreeable, staff will coordinate with Legal C ounsel on an agreement acceptable to the City. Streets and Traffic Typical street sections for the internal roads are provided below. A Traffic Impact Analysis, dated July 24, 2026, was submitted with proposed improvements with additional turn lanes. This review does not approve the proposed improvements. Detailed reviews regarding turn lanes, signal warrants, etc. will be completed during Subdivision applications that would follow if this PUD is approved. Public Hearings will be held that discussed such details at a potential future meeting. Page 115 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 14 of 19 Parking Large parking areas are behind buildings and screened from public roads. On street parking is proposed on public roads. The Applicant provided a Shared Parking Analysis by Skipper Consulting, Inc. that includes parking requirements for the proposed uses. Staff agrees that a shared parking model is beneficial, but notes that the City Council must approve any shared parking agreement. No parking spaces on public rights-of-way can be reserved for private parking. Stream/Wetland Protections Stream and wetland delineations were previously defined as part of the Klumpp PUD. The Klumpp PUD proposed filling some wetlands and providing on -site mitigation in the form of created wetlands. Eastlake Village is proposing to preserve all wetlands and providing adequate buffers around the delineated areas. There are proposed trails and boardwalks that interact with the preserved areas to encourage interaction. Stormwater A Generalized Stormwater Plan was provided as part of this application. Generally, two large ponds are proposed to capture stormwater before discharging to existing culverts under US 181. Detailed reviews of the stormwater management will be a component of any future subdivision, and, we assume, also be reviewed with ALDOT permits for US 181. Page 116 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 15 of 19 Maintenance Plan The following is the proposed maintenance plan for Eastlake Village. A master association will be formed to ensure the long-term care and maintenance of common areas, landscape, walkways and sidewalks, recreation facilities, etc. City of Fairhope Public Works has some concerns about the certain improvements that are proposed to be located in the public rights-of-way. To that end, a condition of approval is required that the Developer enters into a cooperative maintenance agreement that is agreeable to the City. Utilities A Generalized Utility Plan is shown within the Master Development Plan. Fairhope Utilities will provide water, sewer, and gas service. Electric service will be provided by Baldwin EMC and Riviera Utilities. Two (2) lots will be created for sewer lift stations: one to serve the development and another intended for a regional lift station. The developer is responsible for the system improvements required to support this development ; and a separate development agreement will be required prior to approval of the zoning case. Easements will be required where public infrastructure is located outside of public rights -of-way. Garbage All garbage services within Eastlake Village will be private unless otherwise approved by the City of Fairhope Public Works. Landscape Landscaping shown on the Master Development Plan is schematic. The Applicant has agreed to abide by all requirements of the Tree Ordinance, with one exception: where on -street parallel parking spaces are proposed, the Applicant requests street tree spacing of up to one hundred (100) feet, rather than fifty (50) feet, Page 117 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 16 of 19 to accommodate three parking spaces between trees. Staff supports this request, provided that tree wells and tree locations are designed to ensure the long -term health of the street trees. Because of the unique scope of this project, staff feels certain areas may need more consideration than the Tree Ordinance contemplates, such as the landscape details of the greenway on the western edge of the property and landscape screening along the perimeter roads. To this end, staff proposes that a Master Landscape Plan for the entire project be required with the first Subdivision application to ensure a cohesive project, while acknowledging that installation may occur in phases. PUD Application Review Checklist A compliance checklist is provided on the following two pages. Summaries of the “Non-compliant”, or “More Info Needed” are described elsewhere in this report, or correction are memorialized in conditions of approval. Master Development Plan Compliance Table Compliant? Review Item Yes Provided legal description of the parcel upon which the PUD is to be built. Yes Provided the name of the present owner(s) and, if different, the person(s) who will be the owner(s) of the parcel(s) during the development of PUD. Yes Provided a statement of development objectives, including a description of the character of the proposed development and its relationship to surrounding areas. Yes Provided a statement of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and pertinent regulations. More Info Needed Provided a development schedule indicating the approximate date when construction of the PUD is expected to begin and to be completed, and any applicable phasing of construction. More Info Needed Provided a statement of the applicant’s intentions with regard to future selling or leasing of all or portions of the PUD, including land areas and dwelling units. Yes Provide estimated percentages of the PUD to be devoted to each type of land use, including any subcategories of residential, commercial and institutional uses, open space, and recreational areas. Yes Provided a plan for the intended manner of permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreational areas, common areas, and private streets and drives. Yes Provided the name of the development. Yes Provided legal description of the property on which the PUD is to be developed. Yes Provided a graphic scale and north arrow. Yes Provided a vicinity map showing the parcel in relation to the surrounding property and a general description of the surrounding area, including the current zoning and land uses of the surrounding area. Yes Provided a boundary survey prepared and certified by a surveyor who is licensed as a surveyor by the state. The survey must show all streets which are adjacent to the parcel, all easements and rights-of-way on the parcel and the location of any existing buildings or other structures which shall be a part of the PUD. Yes Provided contours and elevations shown on a separate topographical survey. Yes Provided the density of land use to be allocated to all parts of the PUD, together with tabulations by acreage and percentage of the parcel to be occupied by each proposed use. Yes Provided the proposed lot lines and dimensions. No Provided the location, size, and character of proposed buildings and structures, including the following: More Info Needed Identification of the base zoning district related to the contemplated use(s) of the building. If any proposed building does not meet the standards of the base zoning district associated with it, provide a description of the specific standards which are not met by the proposed building, a description of the deviations from those standards, and the reasons why the deviations are necessary; Page 118 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 17 of 19 Yes Distribution of housing types; More Info Needed Number of units, stories, and maximum heights; More Info Needed Proposed floor areas of all units; More Info Needed Elevations of buildings and structures indicating exterior materials; and More Info Needed Location of accessory structures or accessory dwellings. More Info Needed Provided the location and size of all areas to be conveyed, dedicated or reserved as commonly owned space, public parks, recreational areas and similar public or semi-public uses. Yes Provided the location of utility easements. Yes Provided the existing and proposed circulation system of streets, both public and private, including the following: Yes Location and dimensions of streets, alleys, driveways, and points of access to public rights-of-way; Yes Notation of proposed ownership; Yes Location, dimensions and capacities of parking areas; Yes Service, loading and maneuvering areas; Yes Service yards, including, but not limited to, location of dumpsters; Yes Pedestrian circulation; and Yes Materials with which parking areas, driveways, streets, sidewalks, and trails will be covered. Yes Provided the locations, intensity, and height of exterior lights. More Info Needed Provided the locations of mechanical equipment and proposed screening. Yes Provided the location of outside storage and/or display. Yes Provided the proposed drive-through locations. More Info Needed Provided the landscape plan in accordance with the City’s Tree/Landscape Ordinance, including the following: Yes Location of existing trees, indicating which trees will be preserved/removed; Yes Treatment of materials used for private and common open spaces; and More Info Needed The proposed treatment of the perimeter of the PUD including materials and techniques to be used. Yes Provided the location, size, and character of any common open space, or any commonly owned facilities, and the type of organization which will own and maintain any commonly owned open space or facilities. Yes Provided the location, materials, and elevation of any and all fences and/or walls. More Info Needed Provided the location and size of all signage. Yes Provided the hours of operation of any nonresidential use. Yes Provided information regarding the mitigation of noise, fumes, odors, vibration or airborne particles. Yes Provided drainage plans. Yes Provided location of access and utilities. Yes Provided any additional data, plans, or specifications which the City required. Page 119 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 18 of 19 REZONING CONSIDERATIONS Standards of Review: The Zoning Ordinance and its associated zoning map are derived from long-range comprehensive planning studies intended to promote orderly, desirable development. Casual or unsupported amendments to the Zoning Ordinance can undermine this purpose. Therefore, rezoning requests are evaluated according to the following criteria: 1. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan; 2. Compliance with the standards, goals, and intent of this ordinance; 3. The character of the surrounding property, including any pending development activity; 4. Adequacy of public infrastructure to support the proposed development; 5. Impacts on natural resources, including existing conditions and ongoing post-development conditions; 6. Compliance with other laws and regulations of the City; 7. Compliance with other applicable laws and regulations of other jurisdictions; 8. Impacts on adjacent property including noise, traffic, visible intrusions, potential physical impacts, and property values; and 9. Impacts on the surrounding neighborhood including noise, traffic, visible intrusions, potential physical impacts, and property values. Planning Commission Review and Action: The Planning Commission shall consider the application and take one of the following actions: (a) Recommend approval of the application to the City Council; (b) Recommend approval of the application to the City Council, conditioned on specific revisions; (c) Recommend denial of the application to the City Council; or (d) Continue discussion of the application for further study. An application shall only be continued one time without the applicant’s consent before the Planning Commission shall pass it along to the City Council for action. Any continuance shall be for a time reasonably necessary to completely and adequately address the issue of further study. An applicant may agree to more continuances. Considerations Unique to the Eastlake Village PUD. • Standards to ensure architectural diversity within SFR • More detailed review of sidewalks and crosswalks • A master landscape plan • Deferment of Architectural reviews for Mixed-Use Buildings, Multi-Family, Commercial, Drive-throughs, etc. Page 120 of 124 ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village October 5, 2026 Page 19 of 19 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: Staff recommends that Planning Commission recommend to City Council Approval of ZC 26.10 – Eastlake Village PUD, with the following conditions. 1. Prior to City Council review, Developer shall coordinate with Public Works and Planning to finalize a right-of-way/cooperative maintenance plan. 2. A Shared-Parking Agreement is presented to City Council for review/approval. 3. The perimeter trail, greenway, and perimeter landscaping shall be completed with the first phase of construction. 4. The trail systems within “The Preserve”, as shown on the Greenspace Network Plan and Pedestrian Circulation Plan shall be completed with the first phase of construction. 5. Coordinate final edits to the Master Development Plan prior to submittal to the City Council for review. 6. Draft a Development Agreement that shall be approved by City Council; 7. Utility easements shall be obtained where needed on private property. 8. A mandatory Site Plan Review will be required for all commercial, multi-family, and mixed-use buildings. The Applicant shall provide signed authorization that all architectural reviews available to the City of Fairhope within a Planned Unit Development will be deferred to future Site Plan Review. Authorization will be in a form acceptable to the City of Fairhope. 9. The requested deviation to the Maximum Height Limit for the hotel is denied, along with the associated request for (4) four-stories. 10. Revisions made to select plans within the Master Development Plan derived from the previous month’s review shall be consistent on all related plans and text prior to City Council review; 11. On front-loaded residential lots, no garage shall front the public street. 12. A Master Landscape Plan shall be required with first Subdivision application. Page 121 of 124 Page 4 of 6 APPLICATION FOR ZONING DISTRICT CHANGE Property Owner / Leaseholder Information Name: ____________________________ Phone Number: ________________________ Street Address: _____________________________________________________________ City: __________________________ State: ________ Zip: _____________________ Applicant / Agent Information If different from above. Notarized letter from property owner is required if an agent is used for representation. Name: ____________________________ Phone Number: _______________________ Street Address: ____________________________________________________________ City: ________________________ State: ________ Zip: _____________________ Property Map Attached YES NO Metes and Bounds Description Attached YES NO Names and Address of all Real Property Owners within 300 Feet of Above Described Property Attached. YES NO Zoning Fee Calculation: Reference: Ordinance 1269 I certify that I am the property owner/leaseholder of the above described property and hereby submit this application to the City for review. *If property is owned by Fairhope Single Tax Corp. an authorized Single Tax representative shall sign this application. ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Property Owner/Leaseholder Printed Name Signature ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Date Fairhope Single Tax Corp. (If Applicable) Current Zoning of Property: _______________________________________________ Proposed Zoning/Use of the Property: _____________________________________ Property Address: _________________________________________________________ Parcel Number: ___________________________________________________________ Property Legal Description: ________________________________________________ Reason for Zoning Change: ________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Character of Improvements to the Property and Approximate Construction Date: _____________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 122 of 124 Members of the Fairhope City Council, My husband and I live 20535 Lowry Drive, which backs up to the proposed Eastlake Village development. We have may concerns about this development and how it may affect our lives and the lives of the community. Here are just some of our concerns. Traffic along Gayfer extension and Hwy 181 can be particularly busy, especially in the morning and late afternoon. With the addition of businesses and homes filling the development area. I see it getting much busier, despite additional entrances and exits to the property. How will this be addressed? We are also concerned with the possibility of flooding due to more paved areas and some of the lands nearby being relatively low. There have been heavy rainfalls lately that may make roads even more difficult with more drain-off due to more structures and roads. What are the plans for drainage and run off? What types of businesses will be allowed in this development? We greatly enjoy our backyard (which backs up to said development) with the birds, butterflies and trees. Can we hope not to have the sound of cars and businesses operating into the evening? My husband and I are in our 70's. Because of our age we don't know for sure how long we can continue to live in our beloved home. Not only is it our home, it is a part of our financial way to care for ourselves in the future as change is necessary. Will this development cause our home to loose some value? Will it's appraisal go down? The property owner of this development should be able to get the most value for it but should we loose the value of ours in the process? This is what worries us the most. Please help us lose this fear. We know this is a difficult thing to judge. We are not against growth and we love Fairhope. We just want to keep the good things that make Fairhope so special and protect what joy we have found in our part of this wonderful city. Thank you for listening to our concerns. Sincerely, Ames & Walter Yokel Page 123 of 124 THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 451 Pecan Ave, PO Box 429, Fairhope, AL 36532 251-928-8003 | www.fairhopeal.gov | planning@fairhopeal.gov 1 of 1 Sherry Sullivan Mayor Council Members Andrea F. Booth Jack Burrell, ACMO Jimmy Conyers Joshua N. Gammon Jay Robinson Lisa A. Hanks, MMC City Clerk Kimberly Creech City Treasurer Notification Letter September 18, 2026 RE: ZC 26.10 Public hearing to rezone property PPIN #: 236701, 24160, 316793 Description: Applicant, S.E. Civil, on behalf of the owner, 181 Fairhope Ave 2023 LLC, to rezone property from PUD, Planned Unit Development to Planned Unit Development-Mixed Use for Eastlake Village. The property is located on the west side of State Highway 181, north of Fairhope Avenue. Dear Fairhope Resident, State law requires all property owners within 300’ of property to be considered for a zoning change to be notified by mail. The Baldwin County Revenue Office provided your information as a current property owner within 300’ of the zoning change request detailed above. The City of Fairhope Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at 5:00 PM in the Council Chambers located in the Municipal Complex at 161 N. Section Street on October 5, 2026. All written comments and/or presentation materials MUST be received by the Planning Department by no later than noon on September 28, 2026, to ensure adequate time for review and distribution to the Planning Commission prior to the public hearing. Written comments/materials received after this deadline may not be included in the advance report packet but may be submitted for the record at the public hearing. Staff reports and application materials will be posted online during the week prior to the public hearing at www.fairhopeal.gov under the Agendas and Minutes tab. FRAUDULENT & SUSPICIOUS EMAILS The City of Fairhope Planning Department is aware of fraudulent emails impersonating City Staff and Commission members requesting payment for permits or services via wire transfer. Please note that the City of Fairhope will never request payment of any kind via wire transfer and application fees will always be processed prior to a case going before any Board or Commission. If you receive a suspicious message please notify the Planning Department right away and do not click any links, open attachments, or send any payment or personal information. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact the Planning Department. Cordially, Janine Saykes Janine Saykes Planning Clerk Page 124 of 124