Fairhope public hearing lays over broad zoning‑ordinance amendments after lengthy presentation and architect concerns

Council opened a public hearing on proposed amendments to the city zoning ordinance (Ordinance No. 12‑53) and heard an extended staff presentation and public comment before deciding to lay the matter over for further consideration.

A planning staff presenter outlined roughly 10 categories of changes that would alter site‑plan review triggers, add impervious surface limits to most residential districts, create two recreational zoning districts (active and passive), set new standards and maximum densities for townhomes and multifamily apartments, establish a mixed‑use building standard with ground‑floor commercial requirements, tighten Planned Unit Development (PUD) rules (including requiring commercial uses and increasing minimum PUD acreage from 3 to 5 acres), and remove rarely used village districts. The presenter said the amendments also include multiple use‑table edits and refinements to definitions, and that the city has budgeted a rewrite of regulations and planned to engage outside counsel for a comprehensive code revision in the near term.

The measurement of building height drew extended debate. Staff described reverting to an earlier method of measuring height from a building’s front elevation to its highest point, saying a 2018 change to measuring from average lot elevation had produced inconsistent results on sloped lots. Council members and staff discussed alternatives — measuring from the finished floor/slab, lowest point of the structure, or clarifying average elevation — and staff cautioned that substantive changes to the proposed ordinance would require re‑advertisement and another public hearing.

Architect Matt Walcott, representing Walcott Adams Renewal Architects, urged the council to slow down. Walcott warned the amendments could reduce property owners’ development rights and questioned what specific problem the changes were intended to solve. “Are buildings too tall in Fairhope?” he asked, and urged the council to consider infrastructure investments (for example, drainage capacity) rather than placing new burdens on lot owners. He asked council to “take your time and look at this before you adopt it.”

After public comment, the council closed the public hearing and laid the matter over for further consideration rather than taking immediate action. Staff said the full redline ordinance (more than 100 pages) is available and that some items — notably building‑height measurement — might be separated into a separate ordinance with a different effective date to avoid disrupting applicants currently working under the existing rules.

What’s next: The city will revisit the proposed ordinance in a future meeting; staff warned that any substantive revision will require re‑advertisement and a new public‑hearing process.