Fairhope, Alabama
Updated: The Times has learned that city council approval is not needed: the updated plan went into affect when adopted by the Planning Commission on this date.
After a two hour presentation by Christopher Baker formerly of Thompson Engineering, the city's Planning and Zoning Commission voted to accept the modified "preferred plan" and recommend its adoption by the city council. (Baker has since taken a job in Phoenix, Arizona)
The new plan is a modification of the original 2001 village concept plan based upon data derived from town hall and other meetings in 2013-14 -- and envisions additional commercial nodes in outlying areas and other changes as well as new implementation strategies.
Baker emphasized frequently that village concepts are common throughout the nation but are much harder to bring about than most others types -- and that in Alabama comprehensive plans themselves are strictly non-binding by state law: must be backed up by appropriate administrative policies and legislation (given teeth) to be effective.
Forming a new city committee ("task force") and hiring more planning staff were among Baker's recommendations for successful implementation.
The un-zoned areas east and south of town also represent a major obstacle to implementation, but could be addressed via more aggressive annexation strategies -- and incentives like tax and fee abatements for compliant village-type design projects: conditions for connecting to city utilities could also be applied as incentives ( a "stick").
The mayor and all council members present (Burrell, Mueller, Boone, Brewer) also indicated preliminary support for the modified plan; all but Mr. Ford agreed it would need "more teeth" to work.
Ford said he supported it as well but thought the opposite, that it should not be made mandatory.
Click here to view the proposed plan.
 |
| Baker standing |
 |
| Planning Commission at left |
Updated: The Times has learned that city council approval is not needed: the updated plan went into affect when adopted by the Planning Commission on this date.
After a two hour presentation by Christopher Baker formerly of Thompson Engineering, the city's Planning and Zoning Commission voted to accept the modified "preferred plan" and recommend its adoption by the city council. (Baker has since taken a job in Phoenix, Arizona)
The new plan is a modification of the original 2001 village concept plan based upon data derived from town hall and other meetings in 2013-14 -- and envisions additional commercial nodes in outlying areas and other changes as well as new implementation strategies.
Baker emphasized frequently that village concepts are common throughout the nation but are much harder to bring about than most others types -- and that in Alabama comprehensive plans themselves are strictly non-binding by state law: must be backed up by appropriate administrative policies and legislation (given teeth) to be effective.
Forming a new city committee ("task force") and hiring more planning staff were among Baker's recommendations for successful implementation.
The un-zoned areas east and south of town also represent a major obstacle to implementation, but could be addressed via more aggressive annexation strategies -- and incentives like tax and fee abatements for compliant village-type design projects: conditions for connecting to city utilities could also be applied as incentives ( a "stick").
The mayor and all council members present (Burrell, Mueller, Boone, Brewer) also indicated preliminary support for the modified plan; all but Mr. Ford agreed it would need "more teeth" to work.
Ford said he supported it as well but thought the opposite, that it should not be made mandatory.
Click here to view the proposed plan.
Comments
One can't even dig in their own yard due to a dirt abatement rule requiring a $25.00 permit were as NO inspection occurs.
We'll see you at the polls on Tue.
We should end the free handouts to those arrogant people outside of city limits who brag they get all services (recreation, police and fire, etc) real Fairhopers do anyway ... so why would they want to annex in (and pay full property taxes and help manage growth)?
Greed is not good.
"Ask not what your city can do for you ... but what you can do for your city!"