1702-Feb 14
Planning & Development Department
102 West Main Street Prattville, Alabama 36067 334-595-0500 334-361-3677 Facsimile
planning.prattvilleal.gov
CITY OF PRATTVILLE
BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT
A G E N D A
February 14, 2017
4:00pm
Call to Order:
Roll Call:
Chairman Leo Jamieson, Vice-Chairman James Miles, Mr. Jerry Cimis, and Mrs. Jerry Schannep.
Minutes:
January 10, 2017
Old Business:
None
New Business:
1. 170214-01 USE-ON-APPEAL:
To allow an offsite sign on property.
Corner of Howard Murfee Blvd. & Old Farm Lane
B-2 Zoning District (General Business)
William C. Manley, Petitioner
District 5
2. 170214-02 USE-ON-APPEAL:
To allow expansion of existing municipal wastewater treatment plant.
100 Pine Creek Drive
FAR Zoning District (Forest, Agricultural, Recreation)
City of Prattville, Petitioner
District 7
3. 170214-03 VARIANCE:
To reduce the required 30’ frontage landscape setback to 10’.
Boardroom Drive
B-2 Zoning District (General Business)
Trampoline Park LLC, Petitioner
District 3
Miscellaneous:
Adjourn
Prattville Board of Zoning Adjustment
February 14, 2017Minutes
Page 1of 5
City of Prattville Board of Zoning Adjustment
Minutes
February 14, 2017
CALL TO ORDER:
The regular meeting of the Prattville Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA) was called to order by
Chairman Leo Jamieson at 4:05 p.m. on Tuesday,February 14, 2017.
ROLL CALL:
Present Chairman Leo Jamieson,Vice-Chairman James Miles,Mr. Gerald Cimis,Chief Michael
Whaley,and Mr.Jerry Crosby.Absent:Mrs. Jerry Schannep.
Mr. Jamieson offered his sympathy to board member Jerry Schannep in the passing of her husband, Pat
Schannep.
Quorum Present
Staff present:Mr. Joel Duke, City Planner and Ms. Alisa Morgan, Secretary.
Chairman Jamieson stated the governing rules for the Prattville Board of Zoning Adjustment according
to the Code of Alabama, 1975 and the procedure of the meeting.
MINUTES:
Mr. Crosby moved to approve the minutes of the January 10, 2017 meeting.Mr. Cimis seconded the
motion. The motion passed unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS:
There was no old business to discuss.
NEW BUSINESS:
USE-ON-APPEAL
To allow an offsite sign on property
Corner of Howard Murfee Blvd. & Old Farm Lane
B-2 Zoning District (General Business)
William C.Manley, Petitioner
Mr. Duke introduced the request for a use-on-appeal for an offsite sign at Howard Murfee Blvd. and
Old Farm Lane. He stated that the sign is advertising a use that is not on the lot. A sign permit was
applied for and the signed was placed without BZA’s approval.
Mr. Cimis asked if the sign was an issue with traffic safety. Mr. Duke replied that the sign was not an
obstruction to traffic.
William Manley,petitioner,stated that he placed the sign on a vacant lot that he owns to advertise
another business he is co-ownership. He stated that he was not aware he needed to get approval for
property he owns.
Mr. Miles asked what the name of the existing business was. Mr. Manley stated that the name of the
existing business is Alabama Better Built Homes, Inc.
Chairman Jamieson opened the public hearing.
Jeffrey Lee, business partner with William Manley,spoke in favor of the request. He stated that there
Prattville Board of Zoning Adjustment
February 14, 2017Minutes
Page 2of 5
was a misunderstanding about the permitting. He stated that he has a home occupation and the sign
advertises that the business exists.
Jon Lee Finnegan, 211 Deer Trace, spoke in opposition to the request. She asked that the Board would
consider holding the request until the codes could change to improve sign regulations and maintain the
aesthetics of Old Farm Lane.
Chairman Jamieson addressed Ms. Finnegan’s concern stating that the BZA has to deal with the
existing ordinance. The BZA couldn’t vote on a request based on hypothetical regulations.
Mr. Manley addressed the sign height to state that it is an unlit 4’x8’ sign.
Mr. Miles stated that the samples on the site is not a good idea to have on the property since they are
not part of the sign.
Mr. Duke stated that the sign, if approved, is self-limiting if the property is developed. Based on
Section 132 of the sign regulations,the lot is too small to accommodate more than one freestanding
sign.
After no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
The vote was called. Mr. Cimis moved to establish the finding of facts:1)The proposed off-site sign
is an allowable use-on-appeal, and is not a prohibited use in a B-2 district, 2) the development of the
off-site sign at vacant lot at the NW corner of Howard Murfee Boulevard and Old Farm Lane is in the
public interest and meets the spirit of the City of Prattville Zoning Ordinance, and 3) the proposed
offsite sign will not cause substantial adverse impact to adjacent or nearby properties or uses.Mr.
Miles seconded the motion.
The motion to approve the finding of facts passed unanimously.
After no further discussion, the vote was called.Mr. Miles moved to approve the request to allow a
use-on-appeal for an offsite sign. Mr. Crosby seconded the motion.
The motion to approve passed unanimously.
The BZA voted to approve the use-on-appeal to allow an offsite sign on property at corner of Howard
Murfee Blvd. & Old Farm Lane.
USE-ON-APPEAL:
To allow expansion of existing municipal wastewater treatment plant.
100 Pine Creek Drive
FAR Zoning District (Forest, Agricultural, Recreation)
City of Prattville, Petitioner
Mr. Duke introduced the use-on-appeal request to allow expansion at 100 Pine Creek Drive. He stated
that the approximately 10 acre property was not in the city limits when initially built. He stated that
the area of the site will not increase, all improvements will remain within the existing site.
Greg Thompson of Engineers of the South, petitioner’s representative,presented the request for the
improvements to be made for expanding the use of the wastewater treatment plant. He indicated that
the structures in blue represents proposed new water structures and the structures in red indicated new
buildings (Staff Report BZA Application 170214-02 Attachment B). He stated that this is a great
landmark for the city.
Chairman Jamieson opened the public hearing.There were none to speak. The public hearing was
Prattville Board of Zoning Adjustment
February 14, 2017Minutes
Page 3of 5
closed.
The vote was called. Mr. Cimis moved to establish the finding of facts:1)The proposed essential
community facility (Pine Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant) is an allowable use-on-appeal, and is not
a prohibited use in an FAR district, 2) expansion of the Pine Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant at 100
Pine Creek Drive is in the public interest and meets the spirit of the City of Prattville Zoning
Ordinance, and 3) the proposed treatment plant expansion will not cause substantial adverse impact to
adjacent or nearby properties or uses.Chief Whaley seconded the motion.
The motion to approve the finding of facts passed unanimously.
After no further discussion, Mr. Cimis moved to approve the request to allow expansion of the Pine
Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant based on the approved findings of facts. Chief Whaley seconded
the motion.
The motion to approve passed unanimously.
The BZA voted to approve the use-on-appeal to allow expansion of existing municipal wastewater
treatment plant on property at 100 Pine Creek Drive.
VARIANCE:
To reduce the required 30’ frontage landscape setback to 10’.
Boardroom Drive
B-2 Zoning District (General Business)
Trampoline Park LLC, Petitioner
Mr. Duke introduced the request for a variance to reduce the required 30’ frontage landscape setbackto 10’.He stated that the applicant has submitted preliminary plans for construction of an indoor
entertainment center. The site combines two separately platted lots. The combined lots createapproximately 450’ of road frontage with a usable depth of approximately 200’. Due to space and
parking considerations on the lot, the applicant is requesting relief from the frontage landscaping
setback. He stated that the amount of vegetation required would be maintained.
Mr. Cimis asked if the 117 parking spaces a code requirement or the developer’s request. Mr. Duke
replied that the amount of proposed parking is a little more than the requirement.
Sammy Razick, petitioner, presented the variance request to reduce the frontage landscape setback to
10’. He stated that the proposed building size has been reduced and configured to be located on the
site but need the landscape buffer reduction to incorporate it all in. He stated that the use will be for an
indoor trampoline park.
Mr. Cimis asked what is the size of the building and how did they calculate to obtain 117 parking
spaces. Mr. Razick stated that the proposed building is approximately 33’ in height and the architect
firm used (D K Mullins) calculated parking spaces based on capacity load.Mr. Cimis also suggested
that the unused portion of the triangular shaped lot be used for parking. Mr. Razick stated that that
portion of property has been dedicated for retention pond for drainage and can’t allow parking in the
same area.
Chairman Jamieson opened the public hearing.
Horace Powell, spoke in favor of the request. He stated that this would be a major improvement to the
city. They have been trying to develop this area for a long time. He stated that the city agreed to make
road improvements (pavement) if the lots are developed.
Prattville Board of Zoning Adjustment
February 14, 2017Minutes
Page 4of 5
Amy Brabham,Economic Developer with the Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of the request.
She stated they have worked diligently with Mr. Razick to bring the entertainment venue to Prattville.
She stated that he is meticulous about buffers being in place for the adjacent residential subdivision.
Jon Lee Finnegan, 211 Deer Trace,spoke in opposition to the location of the business, height of the
building and traffic increase.
Marcia Spatz, 1934 Calumet Parkway, spoke in opposition to the request.Her concerns were potential
noise increase, lights on the buildings, reduced property value this business may cause and safety
concerns.
Jay Spatz, 1934 Calumet Parkway, spoke in opposition to the request.
Mary Lee Jones, 1932 Calumet, spoke in opposition to the request. She wanted to know how much
buffer to the rear would be maintained.
After no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Razick addressed the public’s comments. He stated that he wants to be a good business neighbor.
He proposed that there would be low lighting along the back of the property. The parking lot will have
lights which he can place with shields. He stated that he wanted to install privacy fences for adjacent
properties that do not have them which would address the additional buffer for the residents.
Mr.Duke addressed concerns of the public comments. He stated that the proposed property is zoned
B-2, the residential subdivision on Calumet Parkway was developed after the commercial property.
He stated that the maximum height for a commercial building is 65’ (5 stories). The 30’ rear buffer is
not requested to be varied. The frontage variance is for setback only and not the vegetation. He stated
that there is a noise ordinance in effect and can be handle through the Prattville Police Department. He
stated that the proposed connections would provide options out of the subdivision and eliminate travel
off of Highway 14.
Chairman Jamieson opened discussion between board members. Mr. Cimis stated that he felt that toomuch was being fit on a lot that’s too small and abutting it against a residential neighborhood is not a
good fit. He felt that the business maybe better suited abutting another business zoned property. He
also stated that granting a 10-15’ variance is more reasonable than granting a 30’ variance.He stated
that a similar business in Montgomery has a smaller building and asked the petitioner if he considered
reducing the size of his building and limiting the number of parking spaces to the code maximum. Mr.
Razick stated that although the business in Montgomery is the same type of business, his business
offers more services than the one in comparison. He stated that he was not sure what the code
requirements are for parking but he was trying to provide ample onsite parking to eliminate off street
for safety of consumers.
After no further discussion,Mr. Miles moved to establish the finding of facts. 1)The proposed use is
an allowable use in the B-2 zoning district; 2) the proposed use is in the interest of the public and
meets the spirit of the ordinance; and 3) a variance will not adversely affect the surrounding property.
Mr. Crosby seconded the motion.
The motion passed by 4/0/1 vote as recorded. Favor: Mr. Miles, Mr. Crosby, Chief Whaley and
Chairman Jamieson. Opposed: None. Abstained: Mr. Cimis.
The vote was called. Mr. Miles moved to approve the request to reduce the required 30’ frontage
landscape setback to 10’. Chief Whaley seconded the motion.
The motion passed by 4/0/1 vote as recorded. Favor: Mr. Miles, Mr. Crosby, Chief Whaley and
Chairman Jamieson. Opposed: None. Abstained: Mr. Cimis.
Prattville Board of Zoning Adjustment
February 14, 2017Minutes
Page 5of 5
The BZA voted to approve the variance request to reduce the required 30’ frontage landscape setback
to 10’on property at Boardroom Drive.
MISCELLANEOUS:
None
ADJOURN:
After no further comments, questions or discussion the meeting was adjourned at 5:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Alisa Morgan,Secretary
Board of Zoning Adjustment
CITY OF PRATTVILLE
Board of Zoning Adjustment
Planning Department Staff Report
USE-ON-APPEAL Off-Site Sign
Vacant lot – corner of Old Farm Lane and
Howard Murfee Boulevard
BZA Application – 170209-01
DATE February 12, 2017
PROPOSED DEVLOPMENT
Petitioners: William C. Manley
Property Owners: William C. Manley
Agent: N/A
Location: Northwest corner of Old Farm Lane and Howard Murfee
Boulevard – vacant lot
Development Status and History
Submission Status: Vacant lot. Off-site sign installed without permit. Violation
notice issued by city in December 2016. Application for
sign permit submitted in December 2016 and denied by
Planning Department.
No other requests on file for variances or uses-on-appeal
at this address
Previous Approvals: None
Conditions of Previous
Approvals:
N/A
Property Configuration
Acreage: Approximately 0.31 acres
Existing Structures Vacant lot.
Page 2 of 3
Proposed Use: Single sign facing Old Farm Lane. Two 4’ x 8’ metal signs
installed in a V configuration on three 4 x 4 posts. Sign is
less than 25’ in height and greater than 15’ from edge of
pavement.
Sign advertises use/service located at a site other than the
vacant lot at the corner of Howard Murfee Boulevard and
Old Farm Lane.
Sign installed prior to application for permit.
December 8, 2016 application for sign permit denied by
Planning Department.
Current Zoning:
B-2 (General Business)
Required Zoning:
Off-site signs are permitted in B-2 zones as a use-on-
appeal. See Prattville Zoning Ordinance, Section 134. -
District regulations. (c) Business districts
Surrounding
Developments and Uses:
The property north, south east, and west of the site is
zoned B-2, General Business.
Street Extensions or New
Streets:
N/A
Water and Sewer: N/A
PLANNING STAFF EVALUATION
Reviewed by: Joel T. Duke, AICP
Site Visits Conducted: December 2016
Page 3 of 3
Recommendation: Approval based on the following:
1. Site zoned for business.
2. Unit is temporary in construction and installation – no
permanent foundation installed – wood construction.
3. Small site will not accommodate proposed sign and
on-site signage once the lot is developed. Per
requirements of Zoning Ordinance Article 12, this
small site cannot accommodate more than one
freestanding sign (see Section 132. - General sign
regulations, subsection (f)).
4. Request that product samples displayed with sign be
removed from site.
Planning Staff Comments:
Below is the staff opinion of questions generally applied to uses-on-appeal:
1. The proposed off-site sign is an allowable use-on-appeal, and is not a prohibited
use in a B-2 district.
2. Development of the off-site sign at vacant lot – NW corner of Howard Murfee
Boulevard and Old Farm Lane is in the public interest and meets the spirit of the
City of Prattville Zoning Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS - Application and additional documents related to the case distributed
earlier.
A. Permit Application S16-000070 – December 8, 2016
B. Staff photograph – December 2016
3. The proposed off-site sign will not cause substantial adverse impact to
adjacent or nearby properties or uses.
CITY OF PRATTVILLE
Board of Zoning Adjustment
Planning Department Staff Report
USE-ON-APPEAL Essential Community Facility - Expansion
100 Pine Creek Drive – Pine Creek
Wastewater Treatment Plant
BZA Application – 170214-02
DATE February 12, 2017
PROPOSED DEVLOPMENT
Petitioners: City of Prattville
Property Owners: City of Prattville
Agent: Engineers of the South
Location: 100 Pine Creek Drive – North side of Cooters Pond Road
at Pine Creek Drive.
Development Status and History
Submission Status: Site operated as the city second wastewater treatment
plant since 1980.
No other requests on file for variances or uses-on-appeal
at this location
Previous Approvals: None
Conditions of Previous
Approvals:
N/A
Property Configuration
Acreage: Approximately 9.8 acres
Existing Structures Site contains existing wastewater treatment plant
processing approximately 3.0 million gallons per day of
wastewater. Operating on current site since 1980.
Page 2 of 3
Proposed Use: The City of Prattville proposes to upgrade the existing
facility to accommodate a wastewater flow of
approximately 5.7 million gallons per day. The upgrade will
take place within the existing boundaries of the site, but
includes new access points to Cooters Pond Road.
Expansion requires construction of new headworks,
vertical loop reactor, clarifier, solids handling building, and
new training and education building.
Current Zoning:
FAR
Required Zoning:
FAR – Essential community facilities are permitted as a
use-on-appeal in the district classification.
Surrounding
Developments and Uses:
North – FAR – undeveloped wooded property
East – FAR – Cooters Pond Park (city park)
West – R-3 – single-family residential neighborhood –
Scenic Hills
South – FAR undeveloped wooded property – Alabama
River floodplain
Street Extensions or New
Streets:
N/A
Water and Sewer: N/A
PLANNING STAFF EVALUATION
Reviewed by: Joel T. Duke, AICP
Site Visits Conducted: November 2016
Recommendation: Approval based on the following:
1. Expansion will be contained within existing site.
2. Single-family residential, park and wastewater plant
have co-existed in the present location since 1980.
Page 3 of 3
Use is existing. Expansion will not create a noticeable
impact to adjacent uses.
Planning Staff Comments:
Below is the staff’s opinion of questions generally applied to uses-on-appeal:
1. The proposed essential community facility (Pine Creek Wastewater Treatment
Plant) is an allowable use-on-appeal, and is not a prohibited use in an FAR district.
2. Expansion of the Pine Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant at 100 Pine Creek Drive
is in the public interest and meets the spirit of the City of Prattville Zoning
Ordinance.
3. The proposed treatment plant expansion will not cause substantial adverse impact
to adjacent or nearby properties or uses.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Location Map
B. Proposed Site Layout
A
N
G
E
L
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
yield signO:\Birmingham\142739_logo_final.jpgREVISIONS
NO DATE DESCRIPTION PRELIMINARY,NOT FORCONSTRUCTION,RECORDINGPURPOSES, ORIMPLEMENTATIONJOB NO: PV-1601DATE: FEB 2017DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:DWG: BZA APPSHEETNUMBERBOX IS 2 IN WIDEAT FULL SCALEFOR REVIEW
AND COMMENT
CONSTRUCTION
REVISIONS AS-BUILTAS-BID
CITY OF PRATTVILLE, ALABAMA
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, WASTEWATER DIVISION
PINE CREEK CWF EXPANSION &
AUTAUGA CREEK CWF IMPROVEMENTS NEW HEADWORKSSTRUCTURENEW VERTICALLOOP REACTORNEW SOLIDSHANDLING BUILDINGNEW CLARIFIER #4NEW LEARNING CENTERNEW GENERATORSYSTEMNEW EFFLUENT METERNEW RASPUMP STATIONNEW SPLITTER BOXCOOTER'S POND ROADPINE CREEK ROADEX ADMIN BUILDINGEX UVEX AERATION BASINSEX RAW SEWAGEPUMP STATIONELECTRICAL BUILDINGELECTRICAL BUILDINGGSTGSTPINE CREEK CWFEXPANSION - SITEPLAN FOR BZAAPPLICATIONLEGENDPROPOSEDWASTEWATERSTRUCTURESPROPOSEDWASTEWATERBUILDINGSPINE CREEK CWF EXPANSION - SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'ANGELA STREETROSEMARY LANESECONDARY ACCESS(SECURE GATE)PRIMARY ACCESS(SECURE GATE)
PINE CREEK CWF EXPANSIONPRATTVILLE, ALABAMA12/16/2016
CITY OF PRATTVILLE
Board of Zoning Adjustment
Planning Department Staff Report
VARIANCE Vacant Lot – Boardroom Drive
BZA Application – 170214-03
DATE February 12, 2017
PROPOSED DEVLOPMENT
Petitioner: Trampoline Park, LLC
Property Owners: Horace Powell and P.I.P. Enterprises, LLC.
Agent: Sammy Razick
Location: Vacant lot – North side of Boardroom Drive.
Development Status and History
Previous Variance
Requests/Approvals:
N/A
Conditions of Previous
Approvals:
N/A
Property Configuration
Acreage: 2.56 acres (two lots 1.47 acres and 0.99 acres)
Zoning Classification:
B-2, General Business
Relevant District
Standards:
Zoning Ordinance, Article 13, Section 145
General Site and Off-Street Parking Area
Landscaping Requirements.
(a) Frontage Landscaping and Foundation Planting
Requirements.
Frontage landscaping shall require a landscaped strip with a
minimum 10-foot depth along all adjacent public rights-of-
way. Frontage landscaping shall include a minimum of one
(1) tree and six (6) shrubs per full forty (40) linear feet of the
frontage strip; shrubs are optional in areas where a berm at
least four (4) feet in height is used, Trees and shrubs shall
be well distributed, though not; necessarily evenly spaced.
Page 2 of 4
A lot with less than one hundred fifty (150) feet frontage and
adjacent to a right-of-way shall have a frontage strip depth of
ten (10) feet; a lot with one hundred fifty (150) feet to two
hundred fifty (250) feet frontage shall have a frontage strip
depth of twenty (20) feet; a lot with over 250 feet frontage
shall have a frontage strip depth of thirty (30) feet…
For developments of two (2) or more acres with frontage
of to two hundred fifty (250) feet or more, the frontage
strip shall be bermed in order to minimize the visual
impact of the off-street parking area, unless the
Administrator determines that the natural topography
does not require site to be bermed. The berm shall not
have a slope of greater than one (1) foot of rise per three (3)
feet of run, and shall not be less than four (4) feet in height
at its apex. Landscaping of bermed perimeter strips shall be
in accordance with all requirements as outlined in this
section
Requested Variance:
Effective variance as re-stated by staff (see application for
applicant statement):
Applicant has submitted preliminary plans for construction
of an indoor entertainment center. Site combines two
separately platted lots. The combined lots create
approximately 450’ of road frontage with a usable depth of
approximately 200’. Due to space and parking
considerations on the lot, the applicant is requesting relief
from the frontage landscaping setback.
1. Reduction of the required frontage landscaping
along Boardroom Drive from the required 30’ to 10.’
2. Elimination of required berm along Boardroom
Drive frontage.
Statement of Hardship:
(taken from application)
None provided.
Page 3 of 4
PLANNING STAFF EVALUATION
Reviewed by: Joel T. Duke, AICP
Site Visits Conducted: Several visits in November and December 2016
Recommendation: Approval – overall spirit of the ordinance is maintained and
amount of landscaping required is provided on site.
While a special privilege is confirmed on the applicant, the
requested variance is similar to those granted other lots with
long frontage, but limited depth and area.
Planning Staff Comments:
State code and best practices require the BZA to measure variance requests against
several basic standards. Below is the staff opinion regarding the standards and this
request.
1. No special conditions and circumstances exist regarding this structure which are
not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same B-2 zoning
district.
2. A literal interpretation of the zoning ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights
commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the
zoning ordinance.
3. The special conditions and circumstances do result from actions of the applicant.
4. The granting of a variance will confer a special privilege on the applicant that is
denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same B-4
district;
5. The granting of a variance is in harmony with the intent and purposes of the
zoning ordinance;
6. A variance will not adversely affect the surrounding property, the general
neighborhood, or the community as a whole;
7. A variance will not allow the establishment of a use prohibited under the terms of
the zoning ordinance in a B-2 district.
Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENTS
A. Location Map
B. Site Layout