Rezoning near airport fails after Auburn University expresses FAA‑compatibility concerns

The Planning Commission voted against a request to rezone about 11.29 acres near Big Creek and the airport to Comprehensive Development District (CDD), after Auburn University and the airport raised concerns about residential uses near the airfield.

City staff described the request as an applicant attempt to allow a small residential component—two or three apartment units above commercial or warehouse space—where the existing industrial zoning would not permit residential. Staff said the CDD district is already present along nearby corridors and that the request was driven in part by limitations in the city's zoning ordinance that make a narrower mixed‑use district unavailable.

Richard Geether, director of campus planning and space management at Auburn University, spoke for the university and for airport management. He said the Federal Aviation Administration recommends against residential land uses adjacent to an airfield and that the university opposed rezoning to a district that permits residential by right. Geether said the university had no objection to commercial uses but urged adherence to FAA guidance on compatible land uses around airports.

The project's applicant told the commission the immediate intent was to add two or three apartment units above warehouse space to house transient workers; the applicant said there was no plan for single‑family residential neighborhoods and that the owners would be willing to accept development controls at the conditional‑use stage. Staff confirmed that, even if the rezoning were approved, separate conditional‑use approval would be required for multi‑unit residential construction.

Commissioners expressed concern that granting CDD zoning next to the airport would permit different future owners to pursue residential development that the current owner does not intend. Several commissioners urged a change to the city’s zoning code to create a district that would allow mixed use conditionally instead of granting the broad permissions of CDD adjacent to an airfield.

A motion to approve the rezoning (recorded in the packet as RZ2025003) was moved and seconded. The commission conducted a roll‑call vote; the transcript records commissioners Narnette Reese, Dana Kemp, Veil Chancellor, David Wisdom, Joseph Aistrup and Oscar Mosley voting “No.” The motion did not carry.

Staff and commissioners discussed potential next steps, including drafting a zoning text amendment that would create a gateway or mixed‑use district with residential allowed only by conditional use where airport compatibility or FAA guidance would apply.