Councilman Frets About Downtown Losing "Charm"

Fairhope, Alabama 

 


Big buildings under construction.


Proposed 404 Oak Ave. rezoning.
 

REZONING REQUESTED

During a lengthy discussion recently about rezoning a converted house at 404  Oak Avenue from B-4 (office space) to B-2 (general business), council members worried about setting an unwanted precedent for the entire central business district. 

The current owner has indicated intentions for a restaurant there but rezoning would allow a multitude of possible uses for all potential owners of the property in the future.

Councilman Burrell insisted on adding conditions to preserve the character of the existing structure with an emphasis on the view from Oak Avenue, so "the whole roof line is protected" -- and potential additions could not go any higher anywhere on the property. 

(A rezoning request in the CBD gives the opportunity to add such restrictions; the planning commission already added several, according to planning director Simmons. )

Councilman Martin also wanted to focus on planning long-range; raised the possibility of just "leaving it B-4" to avoid potential noise and traffic increases -- as well as parking issues in the neighborhood.

Councilman Conyers said he was not enthusiastic about such "up zoning" but did not want to be too restrictive either: "enhancing downtown" should be the goal he added.

CITY LOSING CHARM?

Councilman Robinson worried about the future of the whole central business district: " ... not just this project ... but every project that comes in front of us like this ...  (my) goal being to enhance the downtown business district ... one of the hallmarks that makes Fairhope different ... from everywhere else ... maintain the charm, character, integrity of what is already down there ... maybe in a new and innovative way .... ."

FIRST DOMINO?

Robinson called this case potentially the first domino: "There are a lot of old buildings in bad shape  ... that we may see requests to do things with ... looking at a coming change ... what downtown looks like ...  (I) see these big buildings going up ... they look really ... big!"

Robinson conceded he had voted to approve the site plans for the new buildings; but added they looked a lot different "on paper."

MORE USE RESTRICTIONS TO BE ADDED

The council decided to add more restrictions for future use of the Oak Avenue property (maintain current roof line, no shopping centers); the rezoning ordinance will have to be advertised again in local newspapers before coming to the council again for a final vote.

MAYOR WEIGHS IN

When asked about Robinson's "charm" concerns later, mayor Sullivan said no changes are being contemplated to allowable building height -- but switching to form based zoning codes is being discussed to help maintain the character of downtown.

Sullivan: "We are not looking at lowering the height limit, just looking at form-based codes that ensure that we are keeping the character of downtown."

Such codes rely more on building appearances than just uses, as is the case with conventional zoning.








Comments

Gadsden said…
So, will the taxpayers pay for the many, ongoing costs of ad hoc restrictions placed upon private property downtown so that Montrose nabobs can drive by--at 15 mph--and smile through Bayerische Motoren Werke safety glass with self-satisfaction?

If we're going to legislate for the community's benefit, then the community should bear the cost--not the individual who is investing in Fairhope, creating jobs in Fairhope, providing goods and services to Fairhope, etc. Otherwise, we begin to approach a taking that implicates the 5th Amendment. Pace local communists.
Anonymous said…
A restaurant is a great choice for this location. Fairhope lacks places to eat but has plenty of banks, hair salons, etc. If the city is concerned about "charm' then they should address non-occupied commercial buildings like the former Sister Julies and the Mattress Shop on Section Street next to H&M. Also, ask P&C Bank to donate their antiquated 3 stall drive thru teller piece of property to the City so that something useful can be built there. That banks takes up 2 city blocks when most people do on-line banking these days. Don't discourage the addition of restaurants when downtown property is limited and highly priced!
Anonymous said…
A little late to close the barn door .
Anonymous said…
So the Council & Mayor are just now figuring this out??
Anonymous said…
Bettter late than never they say! :)
Anonymous said…
I’m sure most would agree that most “old town” downtowns do not have the charm of our Fairhope. There are many danger signs- overcrowded parking, ugly remodels, pedestrian safety, that threaten its’ future. The runaway development outside of downtown also poses a threat with more crowds.
Glad to see these discussions are happening.
Anonymous said…
WOW! About time someone listened to everyone complaining about "losing the charm" in Fairhope. Beside the existing Historic Preservation Committee, there should be an architectural committee that honestly wants to keep and perpetuates Fairhope's charm. There should be architectural standards appropriate to Fairhope unique atmosphere.

I don't believe anyone wants to see monstrous monolithic buildings downtown. Instead, Fairhope should continue to have trendy boutiques, and restaurants downtown.

Anonymous said…
The mayor and council must have been walking around with their eye$ clo$ed.
The citizen$ have been trying to warn them for year$.
Too little too late.


Anonymous said…
So naive.
Anonymous said…
I find it ironic that the councilmen who are complaining about Fairhope losing its charm are the ones who permitted these buildings to be constructed.
Anonymous said…
When did the city council become "Charm" experts? Is there a degree required for that? I'm sure everyones definition of "charm" varies, so what I suggest to the council is set standards, requirements and policy for building in downtown Fairhope and then get out of the way. Everyones opinion in regards to what is aesthetically pleasing is different. The policy says you can't build more than 3 stories, you have to have a mix of residential/commercial, etc. Other than that, don't dictate what you think is aesthetically pleasing as long as everything else meets requirements. If the council wants to dictate what future commercial buildings look like then create an architectural review process that's sets standards for developers to follow from the beginning. Conyers was the only one who made logical statements at this meeting.
Anonymous said…
If there is intrest in charm. Think small do small. Block off 2 blocks expand french Qtr to a euro style outdoor family friendly market. I have never met anyone dislikes old world style dinning -entertainment. The extra walk would be worth it.
Anonymous said…
The French Quarter us privately owned.
Anonymous said…
One can build off the French Qtr theme. Public - private no matter. All can enjoy what many for hundreds of years have in the old world.