AlaFile E-Notice 05-CV-2014-901403.00 Judge: SCOTT P. TAYLOR To: Daniel G Blackburn dblackburn@blackburnpc.com NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA DORIS FAUST CALLIES ET AL V. THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE ET AL 05-CV-2014-901403.00 The following matter was FILED on 1/8/2016 3:11:01 PM C001 CALLIES DORIS FAUST C004 CALLIES WILLIAM J. III C003 HOLLIS LESLIE C. C002 HOLLIS MICHEAL E. RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 56 [Filer: BLACKBURN DANIEL GRANT] Notice Date: 1/8/2016 3:11:01 PM JODY WISE CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT CLERK BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA 312 COURTHOUSE SQUARE SUITE 10 BAY MINETTE, AL 36507 251-937-9561 jody.campbell@alacourt.gov DOCUMENT 94 ELECTRONICALLY FILED 1/8/2016 3:10 PM 05-CV-2014-901403.00 CIRCUIT COURT OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA JODY WISE CAMPBELL, CLERK IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA DORIS FAUST CALLIES, MICHEAL E. HOLLIS, LESLIE C. HOLLIS and WILLIAM J. CALLIES, III, Plaintiffs, vs. THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, an Alabama municipal corporation, THE FAIRHOPE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION and FAIRHOPE SINGLE TAX CORPORATION, Defendants. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Civil Action No.: CV-2014-901403 PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE AND OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DORIS FAUST CALLIES, MICHEAL E. HOLLIS, LESLIE HOLLIS and WILLIAM J. CALLIES, III (“Plaintiffs”) submit the following response and opposition to the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants City of Fairhope (“City”) and the Fairhope Planning & Zoning Commission (“P&Z”). For the reasons set forth below, the record in this action contains numerous issues of material fact which require that the pending motion for summary judgment should be denied as to Plaintiffs’ claims for mandamus and negligence. Factual Background The history of this case presents a hard lesson about the hardships that can be imposed on unsuspecting citizens when the rule of law is ignored. In 1999, William J. (“Bill”) Callies, Jr., the now-deceased husband of Doris Faust Callies and the father of Leslie Hollis and William J. Callies, III, approached the City of Fairhope about completing an eight lot subdivision of his land lying north of and adjacent to Morphy Avenue. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 2 (PX 12, H/C 211). The City advised Bill Callies that his property could be subdivided without Planning Commission approval as an exempt family subdivision. (PX 1, H/C 86-87; PX 2, H/C 101; PX 32). However, Fairhope’s Subdivision Regulations in effect in 1999 did not recognize family subdivisions as being exempt from the formal subdivision process (T. Kant dep. at 14, 30-31, 56-57, 59-60; J. Smith dep. at 16, 45), nor did the state enabling legislation (§ 11-52-30, et seq.) permit municipalities to create an exemption for family subdivisions. Notwithstanding the fact that the City’s regulations did not permit family subdivisions, City officials encouraged Bill Callies to seek a zoning change in order to accommodate his impending subdivision request. (PX 1, H/C 86-87, PX 2, H/C 101; PX 32). Callies complied with this request by submitting an application to rezone his property from the Rural Agricultural (RA) classification to medium-density residential (RS-2) in order to accommodate lots of the size contemplated for the “exempt” family subdivision. On June 7, 1999, Bill Callies appeared before the Fairhope Planning & Commission and received a unanimous favorable recommendation that his rezoning application be approved (PX 1, H/C 86-87). On July 12, 1999, the Fairhope City Council unanimously approved the requested zoning change, and adopted Ordinance No. 1057 to formally enact the amended zoning classification (PX 2, PX 3, H/C 101, 102). At or about this time, Bill Callies informed Leslie Hollis that Callies Court had been approved by the City of Fairhope in 1999. (L. Hollis dep. at 31). After the rezoning became effective, and with the help of his son-in-law Micheal Hollis, Bill Callies personally undertook the task of building the street and installing the utilities DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 3 necessary to make Callies Court a functioning subdivision. Water, sewer and electricity were installed to serve the Callies Court lots (L. Hollis dep. at 46, M. Hollis dep. at 115). Micheal Hollis was physically present at the time and observed the installation of all utilities (M. Hollis dep. at 115). Installation of the utilities was performed by the City of Fairhope (M. Hollis dep. at 115, 116). Stub outs for the utilities were placed on each lot within the subdivision (M. Hollis dep. at 116-117). City employees were routinely on the site to supervise construction of the street and the installation of culverts (M. Hollis dep. at 62-63). The City also brought a truck to the building site which circled “around and around” for the purpose of measuring an adequate diameter for the cul-de-sac (M. Hollis dep. at 62-63; 65-66). In order for the lots within Callies Court to have vehicular access, Beecher Street was extended, terminating at a cul-de-sac adjacent to Lots 3 and 4.1 Micheal Hollis observed a contractor build the street, which was surfaced with asphalt in 2000 (M. Hollis dep. at 87). Records maintained by Leslie Hollis indicate that McKenzie Bulldozing was hired to perform the site work at a cost of $4,042.00 (PX 6, H/C 84). The asphalt for Beecher was supplied by American Asphalt Company (PX 7, H/C 85). A culvert was also installed where Beecher Street crossed a ditch on the Callies property (M. Hollis dep. at 88). Following the completion of the subdivision, a City employee came to the site and instructed Mr. Callies to improve the ditch running beneath Beecher Street (M. Hollis dep. at 59-61). The City of Fairhope performed an electrical inspection on October 6, 1999 (PX 10; 1 Throughout this brief, references to lot numbers will be according to the numbering scheme used in the plat submitted to the Planning & Zoning Commission on November 3, 2014. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 4 H/C 126). Records maintained by the Callies/Hollis families indicate that Bill Callies spent the following amounts for completion of the subdivision: $3,750.00 $1,572.00 $790.00 $728.00 $6,840.00 Asphalt Dirt work Site work and culverts Misc. work (Doris’ lot) (PX 8; H/C 83). This exhibit also indicates that the property owners on North Beecher Street2 contributed to the work for a total cost of $11,209.00 (PX 8). After the street was constructed and the utilities were installed, Micheal and Leslie Hollis constructed a residence on Lot 3 of Callies Court Subdivision adjacent to the southeast corner of the cul-de-sac (M. Hollis dep. at 32, 34). On April 27, 1999, the City of Fairhope issued a building permit to Bill Callies for the construction of a residence to be located at 20308 Beecher Street (PX 35; F 424-426). Micheal and Leslie Hollis borrowed approximately $140,000.00 from Alabama Power Company Credit Union to finance the house (PX 34; H/C 196-210; M. Hollis dep. at 36-38). The E911 Board assigned the residence with the address of 20308 Beecher Street (PX 9; H/C 105-106; M. Hollis dep. at 32). Seth Moore performed a survey of the Hollis residence on October 14, 1999 (PX 11; H/C 166). Micheal and Leslie Hollis occupied the house as their primary residence from the time of its construction in 1999-2000 until approximately 2009, when the property was leased to a third party (L. Hollis dep. at 24-26). 2 There is no technical distinction between North Beecher Street and South Beecher Street. For clarity throughout this brief, the portion of Beecher Street providing access through the Callies’ property will be referred to as “South Beecher”. The remaining portion of Beecher Street between the Callies property and Fairhope Avenue will be referred to as “North Beecher”. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 5 For reasons unknown to Plaintiffs, Bill Callies never recorded the subdivision plat for Callies Court (PX 12; H/C 211; L. Hollis dep. at 34; T. Kant dep. at 57). However, a sketch of Callies Court depicting all eight lots was maintained by the City of Fairhope and has been produced in this litigation as Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 4 (PX 4; F 13). Bill Callies did, however, record a survey showing a two-lot subdivision (the Callies residence as one lot and the remaining property as the other) at Instrument No. 489776 (PX 45, H/C 261-262). In addition, the Baldwin County Revenue Commissioner recognizes Callies Court as consisting of eight separate lots identified as follows: Lot PPIN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 243084 14482 236236 356333 356337 356334 356336 356335 Parcel ID Number 46-05-16-0-000-028.812 46-05-16-0-000-028.515 46-05-16-0-000-028.803 46-05-16-0-000-028.901 46-05-16-0-000-028.905 46-05-16-0-000-028.902 46-05-16-0-000-028.904 46-05-16-0-000-028.903 (PX 36-43; H/C 373-380). A copy of the Revenue Commissioner’s tax map depicting these lots is attached and marked as PX 44. (H/C 381). Various county records show the relationship of the Callies property to the homes constructed along North Beecher. Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 16 (PX 16, F 26) is an aerial photograph showing the cul-de-sac on South Beecher, the Hollis residence and the Callies home adjacent to Morphy Avenue. Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 21 (PX 21, H/C 61) is an aerial photograph showing the entirety of the Callies/Hollis property and all homes constructed adjacent to North Beecher. Plaintiffs’ DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 6 Exhibit 23 (PX 23, H/C 82) is a sketch prepared by Moore Surveying showing the lots on North Beecher. In early 2014, it was discovered that a “problem” existed with the original subdivision of Callies Court. In response, Leslie Hollis arranged to meet with Fairhope Mayor Timothy Kant and Planning Director Jonathan Smith (T. Kant dep. at 21-22). After hearing the history of Callies Court, Mayor Kant instructed Jonathan Smith to research the City’s files to determine if Leslie’s explanation could be substantiated (T. Kant dep. at 22). On May 21, 2014, Jonathan Smith noted on a sketch of Callies Court found in the City’s files that “Staff can find nothing indicating this was ever recorded.” (PX 4, F 13; PX 5, F 12). On June 10, 2014, Jonathan Smith sent a memorandum to Mayor Timothy Kant advising as follows: Per recent conversations with Bill Callies’ daughter Leslie Callies Hollis, and extensive research pertaining to the property, it appears the City endorsed a Family Subdivision inside the City Limits back in 1999. There are utilities already in place with stub outs where the lots were to be platted and the property was rezoned from R-A (Residential Agriculture) to R2 (Medium Density Single Family) to accommodate the subject parcels. The subdivision was never recorded with the County as a whole, due to Mr. Callies being under the impression he could create a lot as necessary over time to avoid having to pay property taxes on eight, rather than two or three parcels. Currently three lots are planted on the subject property; Mr. Callies presented and eight lot Family Subdivision to the City. It is my understanding that at that time, the City honored Family Subdivisions within the Corporate Limits. At this time we do not, but due to the circumstances and evidence available, I will sign off administratively on the Callies Court DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 7 Family Subdivision, with your approval. Please see the attached documents relating to the subject property. (PX 12; H/C 211, T. Kant dep. at 23). At the bottom of the memorandum appears the handwritten notation “OK, Tim Kant 6-13-14” (PX 12; T. Kant dep. at 28). The Mayor’s use of the word “OK” meant that it was acceptable to record a new plat of the subdivision (T. Kant dep. at 28). Leslie Hollis then retained local surveyor Seth Moore to prepare a second plat (“Replat”) of Callies Court depicting all six lots owned by Doris Faust Callies (PX 13; H/C 113). The Replat was executed by representatives of Fairhope Single Tax Corporation on June 12, 2014, and by Jonathan Smith on June 17, 2014 (PX 13; H/C 113). The City did not require an appearance before the Planning & Zoning Commission in order to obtain the Replat (T. Kant dep. at 29). The Replat was recorded in the Baldwin County Probate Records on June 19, 2014 at Slide 2508-C (Instrument No. 1462903)(PX 13). A more legible and enlarged copy of the Replat is attached hereto as PX 14 (H/C 332-336). Fairhope’s copy of the recorded Replat is attached as PX 15 (F5). The Mayor was in agreement with the Replat because it seemed like the “right thing to do” (T. Kant dep. at 31). Thinking that the Replat corrected whatever problems may have existed with the original subdivision, Doris Callies entered into separate contracts on August 6, 2014 to sell Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and a separate lot situated just outside Callies Court to ARK Builders for a total price of $225,000.00 (PX 19; H/C 64-67). Despite having executed the Replat at the Mayor’s direction, Jonathan Smith sent correspondence to Leslie Hollis dated August 22, 2014 stating the following: DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 8 It has recently been brought to the attention of the City that the lots that are the subject of the Callies Court Family Subdivision plat that was recently recorded may not have any dedicated access to a public road. Please be advised that the City cannot and will not consider the issuance of any building permits for those lots or provide any City services to those lots unless and until we receive reasonably acceptable written evidence that dedicated access to a public road exists for the benefit of the Callies Subdivision lots. (PX 29; H/C 63). Realizing that her contract with ARK Builders was in jeopardy, Doris Callies applied to the Fairhope Planning & Zoning Commission for approval of the same eight lot subdivision that the City had previously “endorsed” for her husband back in 1999 (PX 12; PX 28; F143, Subdivision application dated September 30, 2014). At approximately the same time, Micheal and Leslie Hollis entered into a contract to sell their residence located at 20308 Beecher Street to Inez Oberg for the sum $303,721.00 (PX 20; H/C 31-38). Along with her application, Doris Callies submitted to the City a proposed plat depicting the eight lot subdivision (PX 30; H/C 12). The application was considered by the Fairhope Planning & Zoning Commission on November 3, 2014 and was denied by a unanimous vote (PX 31; F 98-99). As a result of the denial of the subdivision plat application by the Planning & Zoning Commission, Doris Callies’ contract with ARK Builders and the Hollis’s contract with Oberg could not be consummated. Plaintiffs’ Petition for Writ of Mandamus and other relief was timely filed in the Circuit Court of Baldwin County, Alabama on November 26, 2014. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 9 I. The City of Fairhope is barred by the doctrine of equitable estoppel to disavow its acquiescence in the 1999 approval of Callies Court. Therefore, mandamus will lie in favor of Plaintiffs, and summary judgment is not appropriate based on the record. The City, as expected, hides behind the Planning Commission’s denial of the formal subdivision request on November 3, 2014. This shallow defense to Plaintiffs’ petition for writ of mandamus ignores the procedural history of the subdivision dating back to 1999. More importantly, the City has not addressed its own participation in the approval of Callies Court, albeit defective, and its participation in the installation of utilities and street layout while the subdivision was being built. The City also fails to explain why Micheal and Leslie Hollis have been permitted to reside on an improperly subdivided lot since 1999 without complaint, yet when the Hollises attempt to sell their home to a third party, the City insists on strict adherence to its subdivision regulations. Plaintiffs acknowledge that mandamus is an extraordinary remedy. However, mandamus is the appropriate procedural vehicle to be employed following the improper denial of an application for subdivision approval. Smith v. City of Mobile, 374 So. 2d 305 (Ala. 1979); McCary v. City of Fairhope, 599 So. 2d 1214 (Ala. Civ App. 1992). Alabama law states that mandamus is an appropriate remedy when (a) the Plaintiff demonstrates a clear legal right to the relief sought; (b) there is an imperative duty on the defendant to perform, a company by a refusal to do so; (c) there is no other adequate remedy available; and (d) the matter is before a court of competent jurisdiction. Ex Parte Holladay, 466 So. 2d 956 (Ala. 1985). Under the present facts, the City of Fairhope is equitably estopped to deny the validity of Callies Court Subdivision. In the recent case of Dorsett v. Singlia, ___ So.3d ___ WL5918751 DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 10 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015), the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals summarized the law of equitable estoppel in the following way: The purpose of [the doctrine of] equitable estoppel . . . is to promote equity and justice in an individual case by preventing a party from asserting rights under a general technical rule of law when his own conduct renders the assertion of such rights contrary to equity and good conscience. First National Bank of Opp v. Boles, 231 Ala. 473, 479, 165 So. 586, 592 (1936). Equitable estoppel is . . . based upon the ground of public policy and good faith, and is interposed to prevent injustice and to guard against fraud by denying to a person the right to repudiate his acts, admissions, or representations, when they have been relied on by persons to whom they were directed and whose conduct they were intended to and did influence. The doctrine of estoppel is far-reaching in its effect, extending to real as well as personal estate, and embracing almost every enterprise in which men may be engaged. An estoppel . . . has three important elements. The actor, who usually must have knowledge of the true facts, communicates something in a misleading way, either by words, conduct or silence. The other relies upon that communication. And the other would be harmed materially if the actor is later permitted to assert any claim inconsistent with his earlier conduct. A more detailed statement of the elements generally required to support an estoppel is given in 3 Pomeroy, Equity Jurisprudence §805 (5th ed. 1941): 1. There must be conduct – acts, or language, or silence – amounting to a representation or a concealment of material facts. 2. These facts must be known to the party estopped at the time of his said conduct, or at least the circumstances must be such that knowledge DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 11 of them is necessarily imputed to him. 3. The truth concerning these facts must be unknown to the other party claiming the benefit of the estoppel, at the time when such conduct was done, and at times when it was acted upon by him. 4. The conduct must be done with the intention, or at least with the expectation, that it will be acted upon by the other party, or under such circumstances that it is both natural and probable that it will be so acted upon. 5. The conduct must be relied upon by the other party, and, thus relying, he must be led to act upon it. 6. He must in fact act upon it in such a manner as to change his position for the worse; in other words, he must so act that he would suffer a loss if he were compelled to surrender or [forgo] or alter what he has done by reason of the first party being permitted to repudiate his conduct and to assert rights inconsistent with it. Dorsett v. Singlia, ___ So.3d at ___, WL5918751 at 9. Applying the facts of this case to the six factors stated above from Pomeroy demonstrates that the City is equitably estopped to deny the validity of Callies Court. Each of the six Pomeroy factors will be discussed in detail below: A. There must be conduct –acts, or language, or silence –amounting to a representation or a concealment of material facts. In 1999, representatives from the City induced Bill Callies to forgo an appearance before the Planning & Zoning Commission and to pursue his subdivision plans as an “exempt family subdivision”. In the words chosen by Jonathan Smith in his memorandum to Mayor Kant dated June 10, 2014, the City “endorsed” a family subdivision for Bill Callies in 1999. (PX 12, H/C 211). There is no dispute that the Fairhope subdivision regulations in effect in 1999 did not provide an exemption for family subdivisions. This statement amounts to both a misrepresentation and a concealment of the true content of the City’s subdivision regulations. In addition, this statement is DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 12 memorialized in (a) the minutes of the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting held on June 7, 1999 (“. . . Mr. Callies is dividing his land for his children and that proper zoning is required for building permits”) (PX 1; H/C 86-87) and (b) the cover sheet for the June 7, 1999 meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission signed by then-planning director Christopher Baker (“Mr. Callies is in the process of completing a family subdivision under the Attorney General’s Opinion. The property will be divided amongst his children. Proper zoning is required for his children to secure building permits”) (PX 32; H/C 87). More importantly, the enabling legislation providing municipalities with the power to enact subdivision regulations (Ala. Code §11-52-30 et seq.) has no field of operation for a family subdivision exemption. Therefore, the record is clear that Fairhope representatives misled Bill Callies into the belief that he could lawfully subdivide his property without an appearance before the Planning & Zoning Commission and strict adherence to the City’s subdivision regulations. Accordingly, the first Pomeroy factor is satisfied. B. These facts must be known to the party estopped at the time of his said conduct, or at least the circumstances must be such that knowledge of them is necessarily imputed to him. There can be no question that a municipal corporation is charged with knowledge of its own ordinances. Accordingly, the second Pomeroy factor is satisfied. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 13 C. The truth concerning these facts must be unknown to the other party claiming the benefit of the estoppel, at the time when such conduct was done, and at time when it was acted upon by him. Nothing in the record suggests that Bill Callies was in any way attempting to circumvent Fairhope’s subdivision regulations. For all that appears, Fairhope representatives steered him in the direction of the family subdivision “exemption”. (See PX 1; H/C 86-87 and PX 32; H/C 87 discussed in subsection A. above). Accordingly, the third Pomeroy factor is satisfied. D. The conduct must be done with the intention, or at least with the expectation, that it will be acted upon by the other party, or under such circumstances that it is both natural and probable that it will be so acted upon. Four factors are in play here. The first is the City’s suggestion that Bill Callies follow the family subdivision “exemption”. The second is the City’s unanimous decision to rezone the Callies property from RA to RS-2 in order to accommodate Bill Callies’ desire to subdivide his land (See PX 1; H/C 86-87 and PX 32; H/C 87 discussed in subsection A. above). The third is the City’s active participation in the construction of Callies Court and its ongoing supervision of the installation of utilities and extension of Beecher Street (See M. Hollis dep. at 59-61, 62-63, 65-66, 87, 88, 115, 116, 117, PX 8, PX 10, H/C 83, 84-85). The fourth is the City’s issuance of a building permit for the construction of the Hollis residence located at 20308 Beecher Street, the subsequent construction of the home and its habitation by Micheal and Leslie Hollis from 1999 to 2009 as their primary residence (See M. Hollis dep. at 32, 34, 36-38, 54-57; PX 33, F 424-426; PX 34, H/C 196-210). It is safe to say that Fairhope was complicit, not only in the approval, but in the construction and subsequent occupation of Callies Court. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 14 Accordingly, the fourth Pomeroy factor is satisfied. E. The conduct must be relied upon by the other party, and, thus relying, he must be led to act upon it. Bill Callies’ reliance on the City’s representations is self-evident from his construction of the Beecher Street improvements and the installation of utilities to serve the Callies Court lots. Accordingly, the fifth Pomeroy factor is satisfied. F. He must in fact act upon it in such a manner as to change his position for the worse; in other words, he must so act that he would suffer a loss if he were compelled to surrender or [forgo] or alter what he has done by reason of the first party being permitted to repudiate his conduct and to assert rights inconsistent with it. Bill Callies’ financial investment alone is more than sufficient to satisfy this factor. The record indicates that his out-of-pocket expenses in the construction of Callies Court were at least $6,840.00, and that when the North Beecher residents’ contributions are included, the total cost of the work equaled $11,209.00 (PX 8, H/C 83). In addition, Micheal and Leslie Hollis expended in excess of $140,000.00 to construct their residence in 1999 (PX 34, H/C 196-210, M. Hollis dep. at 36-38). Accordingly, the sixth and final Pomeroy factor is satisfied. It should also be noted that equitable estoppel will be enforced against municipalities when equity and justice so require. See City of Guntersville v. Allred, 795 So. 2d 566 (Ala. 1986) (city estopped to deny validity of lease); Talladega City Bd. of Educ. vs. Yancy, 682 So. 2d 33 (Ala. 1996) (municipal school board estopped from asserting failure to nominate teacher for position); City of Foley v. McLeod, 709 So. 2d 471 (Ala. 1998) (city estopped from enforcing zoning ordinance because of misrepresentations made to property owners); Ex parte Mathers, 541 So. 2d 1110 (Ala. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 15 1989) (municipal pension board estopped from denying its prior conduct); City of Wetumpka v. Central Elmore Water Auth., 703 So. 2d 907 (Ala. 1997) (city estopped from denying it was bound by assurances made by its chairman). Summary judgment on the mandamus count is also due to be denied because the existence of behavior leading to an equitable estoppel is a question of fact to be decided by the jury. In Humphrey v. Boschung, 287 Ala. 600, 253 So.2d 769 (1971), the Alabama Supreme Court stated the following: Generally speaking, the existence of an estoppel in pais is a mixed question of law and fact. Where the trial court is one by jury and evidence as to estoppel is susceptible of different reasonable inferences, it is the duty of the court to charge and define the law applicable to estoppel, but it is the province of the jury to say whether the facts of the particular case constitute estoppel as defined by the court. It is a firmly settled principle that the question of the existence of an estoppel is a question to be settled by the triers of the facts-that is, the jury in the event of a jury trial, or the trial court in the event the proceedings involve trial without a jury-where there is a dispute as to the facts involving estoppel. Unless only one reasonable inference can be drawn from the evidence, estoppel is a question for the triers of the facts, the jury or the trial court. On the other hand, if the facts are undisputed and only one reasonable inference in such respect can be drawn from the evidence, the question of whether an estoppel is established is one of law for the court. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 16 Id. at 608. Quoting 28 Am. Jur. 2d, Estoppel and Waiver §149. See also Standard Oil Co. v. Gentry, 241 Ala. 62, 1 So.2d 29 (1941); White v. Hogland, 209 Ala. 537, 96 So. 625 (1923); Lackland v. Turner, 207 Ala. 73, 91 So. 877 (1921). Accordingly, the City’s motion for summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ petition for writ of mandamus is due to be denied. II. Fairhope’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Negligence Claim is due to be Denied. As with the portion of its motion directed to the mandamus claim, the City’s arguments against the negligence claim miss the mark. The Alabama Supreme Court has recently held that a Baldwin County municipality may be held liable for negligently denying an application for subdivision approval. In Lee v. Houser, 148 So.3d 406 (Ala. 2014), the Court found the Town of Magnolia Springs liable for negligently failing to approve an application seeking approval for a 124 lot residential subdivision. The Court noted that the basis of a negligence claim against a municipality is found at Ala. Code §11-47-190 (1975). This section provides as follows: No city or town shall be liable for damages for injury done to or wrongs suffered by any person or corporation, unless such injury or wrong was done or suffered with neglect, carelessness or unskillfulness of some agent, officer or employee of the municipality engaged in the work therefore and while acting in the line of his or her duty. The Court cited with approval a recent commentary to the effect that “this statute [§11-47-190] allows a cause of action for negligence when an agent acts as such during his work for the municipality and causes an injury”. Holtsford and Higgins, Liability of a Municipality Under DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 17 Alabama Law, 56 Ala. Law. 35, 38 (1995). The Fairhope Planning & Zoning Commission was clearly acting within the line and scope of its duties when it voted to deny the subdivision application for Callies Court. At the meeting which took place on November 3, 2014, the Fairhope Planning & Zoning Commission heard the history of Callies Court dating back to 1999, together with the fact that Micheal and Leslie Hollis had resided within the subdivision at all times between 1999 and 2009 (PX 31, F 98-99). Therefore, the issue to be decided at trial is more than simply whether the Planning & Zoning Commission was within its authority to deny the application because it failed to comply with the present version of the Fairhope subdivision regulations. In other words, the Planning Commission was advised that the City had approved the subdivision in 1999 as an “exempt family subdivision”, yet the Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny the application, thus refusing to recognize that liability could attach because of the City’s prior actions. The Lee court noted that in order to prevail on a claim of negligence, “a party must show that another party’s negligence is more than mere ‘wrongful decision-making’”. 148 So.3d at 419, citing Ott v. Everett, 420 So.2d 258, 260 (Ala. 1982). Whether the Planning Commission’s decision was negligence or a case of “wrongful decision-making” is a factual determination which will be left to the jury, thus precluding summary judgment on the negligence issue. Accordingly, Fairhope’s motion for summary judgment on the negligence count is due to be denied. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 18 Conclusion The 17-year history of Callies Court teaches us that municipal ordinances should not be disregarded for the sake of expediency. But when they are disregarded, it should be the municipality, and not the innocent landowner, who should be forced to live with the consequences of its actions. Fairhope should not be allowed to “look the other way” in 1999, yet demand unwavering compliance with the subdivision regulations in 2014, particularly where the City was complicit, not only in the approval of Callies Court, but also in its actual construction. Fairhope’s motion for summary judgment is due to be denied as to the causes of action based on mandamus and negligence.3 s/Daniel G. Blackburn DANIEL G. BLACKBURN / BLA043 Attorney for Plaintiffs Doris Faust Callies, Micheal E. Hollis, Leslie C. Hollis and William J. Callies, III OF COUNSEL: BLACKBURN & CONNER, P.C. Attorneys at Law Post Office Box 458 Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 (251) 937-1750 3 Plaintiffs do not contest Fairhope’s motion for summary judgment on the claims for inverse condemnation and tortious interference. DOCUMENT 94 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 19 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Daniel G. Blackburn, attorney for Plaintiffs in the above-styled action, hereby certify that on the 8th day of January, 2016, I served the attached upon Caine O’Rear, III, Esquire and Christopher S. Williams, Esquire by electronic filing or by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, postpaid, addressed to Hand Arendall, LLC, Post Office Box 123, Mobile, Alabama 36601. s/Daniel G. Blackburn DANIEL G. BLACKBURN DOCUMENT 95 ELECTRONICALLY FILED 1/8/2016 3:10 PM 05-CV-2014-901403.00 CIRCUIT COURT OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA JODY WISE CAMPBELL, CLERK IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA DORIS FAUST CALLIES, MICHEAL E. HOLLIS, LESLIE C. HOLLIS and WILLIAM J. CALLIES, III, Plaintiffs, vs. THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, an Alabama municipal corporation, THE FAIRHOPE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION and FAIRHOPE SINGLE TAX CORPORATION, Defendants. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Civil Action No.: CV-2014-901403 PLAINTIFFS’ EVIDENTIARY SUBMISSION IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED BY DEFENDANTS CITY OF FAIRHOPE AND FAIRHOPE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DORIS FAUST CALLIES, MICHEAL E. HOLLIS, LESLIE C. HOLLIS and WILLIAM J. CALLIES, III (“Plaintiffs”) submit the following evidence in opposition to the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants City of Fairhope (“City” or “Fairhope”) and the Fairhope Planning & Zoning Commission (“P&Z”). All exhibit numbers1 referred to herein shall be consistent with the numbering scheme set forth in Plaintiffs’ brief submitted simultaneously herewith. 1. June 7, 1999 P&Z Minutes concerning rezoning from RA to R-2 (H/C86-87); 2. July 12, 1999 Fairhope City Council Minutes approving rezoning from RA to R-2 (H/C101); 1 Exhibits produced by Plaintiff will be identified as H/CXXXX. Exhibits produced by the City will be identified as FXXXX. DOCUMENT 95 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 2 3. Fairhope Ordinance No. 1057 adopted July 12, 1999 approving rezoning from RA to R-2 (H/C102); 4. Sketch of Callies Court Subdivision consisting of eight (8) lots (F13); 5. Sketch of South Beecher Street showing Callies lot only (F12); 6. Invoices from McKenzie Bulldozing (H/C84); 7. Proposal from American Asphalt Company (H/C85); 8. Beecher Street explanation of costs (H/C83); 9. E911 correspondence (H/C105-106); 10. Electrical inspection dated October 6, 1999 (H/C126); 11. Seth Moore Survey of Hollis residence dated October 14, 1999 (H/C166); 12. Jonathan Smith memorandum to Timothy Kant dated June 10, 2014 (H/C211); 13. Second plat of Callies Court Subdivision dated June 17, 2014 (H/C113); 14. Second plat of Callies Court Subdivision (enlarged copy) (H/C332-336); 15. Fairhope’s copy of recorded second plat of Callies Court Subdivision (F5); 16. Aerial photograph of South Beecher Street showing Hollis and Callies residences (F26); 17. Baldwin County Revenue Commissioner’s map showing eight (8) lots on South Beecher Street (F125); 18. Baldwin County Revenue Commissioner’s map showing Doris Callies’ lots identified as Parcel No. 28.515 (F148); DOCUMENT 95 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 3 19. Doris Callies’ contracts with ARK Builders (H/C64-67); 20. Hollis Purchase Agreement with Inez Oberg (H/C31-38); 21. Aerial photograph of North and South Beecher Street (H/C61); 22. Road Maintenance Agreement dated July 16, 2014 (H/C17-30); 23. Sketch showing owners on North Beecher Street (H/C82); 24. Jonathan Smith note (H/C107); 25. Hollis assessment for 2014 (F138); 26. William J. Callies, III assessment for 2014 (F139); 27. Doris Faust Callies assessment for 2014 (F140); 28. Doris Faust Callies Subdivision Application dated September 30, 2014 29. August 22, 2014 letter from Jonathan Smith regarding lack of dedicated access 30. Proposed plat presented to P&Z on November 3, 2014 (H/C12); 31. Excerpt of P&Z minutes from November 3, 2014 (F98-99); 32. June 7, 1999 P&Z Cover Sheet (H/C87); 33. Building Permit for Hollis residence (F424-426); 34. Hollis loan documents with Alabama Power Company Credit Union (H/C196- 35. Hollis Building Permit (F424-426); (F143); (H/C63); 210); DOCUMENT 95 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 4 36. Kelly Callies assessment Lot 1 (H/C373); 37. Doris Callies assessment Lot 2 (H/C374); 38. Hollis assessment Lot 3 (H/C375); 39. Doris Callies assessment Lot 4 (H/C376); 40. Doris Callies assessment Lot 5 (H/C377); 41. Doris Callies assessment Lot 6 (H/C378); 42. Doris Callies assessment Lot 7 (H/C379); 43. Doris Callies assessment Lot 8 (H/C380); 44. Revenue Commissioner’s tax map (H/C381); 45. Two-lot survey (H/C261-262); 46. Excerpts from deposition of Timothy Kant; 47. Excerpts from deposition of Jonathan Smith; 48. Excerpts from deposition of Leslie Hollis; 49. Excerpts from deposition of Micheal Hollis. s/Daniel G. Blackburn DANIEL G. BLACKBURN / BLA043 Attorney for Plaintiffs Doris Faust Callies, Micheal E. Hollis, Leslie C. Hollis and William J. Callies, III OF COUNSEL: BLACKBURN & CONNER, P.C. Attorneys at Law Post Office Box 458 Bay Minette, Alabama 36507 (251) 937-1750 DOCUMENT 95 Callies, et al. vs. Fairhope, et al. Case No. CV-2014-901403 Page 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Daniel G. Blackburn, attorney for Plaintiffs in the above-styled action, hereby certify that on the 8th day of January, 2016, I served the attached upon Caine O’Rear, III, Esquire and Christopher S. Williams, Esquire by electronic filing or by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, postpaid, addressed to Hand Arendall, LLC, Post Office Box 123, Mobile, Alabama 36601. s/Daniel G. Blackburn DANIEL G. BLACKBURN DOCUMENT 96 ELECTRONICALLY FILED 1/8/2016 3:10 PM 05-CV-2014-901403.00 CIRCUIT COURT OF BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA JODY WISE CAMPBELL, CLERK DOCUMENT 96 ?n ?4 mm ?umm .wm-m-umw-Wu .ww am 6F 7 AND QQVER $2333 ?33% 220 99439 Pubiic Hearing in Ccnsidm the Raquaai 923?? Mr. Biff Baum Residmtia? Ag?cutiure ta mw?esfdentia} an Aims an Beacher street (lasted ?reman Merphy Ave. and Faimapa Am} Mr. Games hag appiied far a Weight 26:25:19 diS?ii?l'Gt change mm RA~Resfdan?az Agricu?ure t0 R2w8?ngiee Famiiy Residan?ai. Mr. Cal?es is Er: the recess mmp?e?ng a famiig subdiviaion ugder the Aitamay Generai?s: Opinim. Th9 praperty wit a divided aman his children {Draper mining 53 required fer his chiiciran secure builciing mamas. gublic: Natisa has been giver: if"! amrdanca-Mth Staia iaw. Tc: data, haw bean racemd by the Planning games. This requast is in wnfomance th? appraved Plan far the City. STAFF Ta approve 2.0 9%9 aa requeastgd. Respeaifu?y Submi?ciac! far Samaidm?m at E. Baker Bimc?ar a? Piamf?g am Buffc??g M. Eoommwn??w? Gummd? XQWPOE ?mmz?xj ?m GISMOAJQR MEL. in? Emma ?ux/OE 073? v: QMUQQOKFKW Emu.?an .mzaz .y?z .320?; .xmz gunman ?03Q$k? mzwa?iau Mr? arm meazm?zn Emmi zackOmd 442E mam ?038 ,5 nuazOomm ,hm0* dz. .wuza?am? m0 zQEQad 442: ?Hi 2mg r?guja Qz?z?ai .320? 924. .Emusa ii dmni .mummiwyd ?50> 9:3ng mg omm?i m1? .9. 205.0: Exuna amazoumm .mwg?m ME, Q, 9M5: mung zgh? wwiomxzm mag 0k xmam? 2W :4 Gk cmmauga m5; wzmumma was 02 .m4g2_m-mm 0L. mma?nuEwd 30mm .mmazuyd maoxm?m 02?, m32m>( yramo? zmw?rmm 3.5003 Emmkm :0 $2004 .Emnomu 53440 Jim mgz?zamo mug .muzdzwama arc. m0 Agoguq 352:0qu axiom m?zz?a my? 2 018m?; 2. amunaom?x x030 .mUzqzamO wzwz?m 0534 or mazdzamo ammDaOm? 4 20 ammimm?m 3 3.3: we?? 93$qu ijsa 4 NM 00 HZMEDUOQ DOCUMENT 96 ORDENANCE NO. 1135? AN ORDENANCE AMENDING URDINANGE Ni). 55? ??xS THE ZONWG QRDWANCE REZGNE PROPERTY 1P4 ACCORDANCE WITH APPUCABLE STATE REQUIREMENTS The eminence known as; the Zoning Ordinance (m3. adopted Ti Augugt 1975, together w?ih ihe 210an Map 0f ihe City of Fairhope, A?abama be 895% the game heraby is cha?gea and aitarad in respect if: {he {36mm property described beiow: WHEREAS, ??he City sf Faimcpe ham received a requaat for a change ii": zani?g district boundaries My: Cail?as; and; Mr. Ca?lies's prager?y is; curren?ily aimed FER-Residential Agricultuge, and WHEREAS, Mr. Ca?ies mats is change the Earning to Famiiy Residentias, anc? WHEREAS, afier appz'apciaia pubiic mating an? ?mar?ngg the Piai?mmg and Zan?ng Cummissian 0f tha City of Aiabama, has fOrwardsd a recommenda?m to the City Council far amandmeni of Ordinance Na; 55?? the Of?ciai Ewing Map by re?zonhg certain properiy as set form harem; NQW THEREFOREFAIRHOPE, ALABAMA: Tha prape?y is inmates! cm Beecher Streak Easi of Greene Ram {Case Mumbar zc gguse). The fsiiowing ascribed pmpariy shali be ra?zaned Regidemiai Agricuit?re is R2~8mgie Famiiy Ra?sident?a? Preoerty Lama! Bescrim?on: me {ha $wuthesat corner a? me Narihwesi Quaz?iar a? iha Sgu?heaa?i Quarter of Bastian '36. Township 6 Sauth, Range 2 East; Eaidwin Camry, siiabama mm Of} dagraegs 3 1 34? East, 225 feet in the OF Thames, centi'nua 05 degrees 31? 34" East, 541 .43 feet t0 a paint; Manse rum Nari}: E39 degrees 53' ?v?ves?zr 288.52 fee: is a palm; Thence, run 3mm?: ?egraesi. 2?31 West @632 fast is a mini; Tia-3mm run Sauth 0L3 dega?eaa 323?, 45" West 233% fee: 19 a point an the Nenh rigi1f-e??wayiine mi Marphy Magma; ?Mensa, run Na?h 89 degzees, 57? East a?ang said Ns?h right-af?way ?ne 27382 far-:1 :0 the PGWT 0F -. asid parcei of 33nd coniains 4.1 acres, mart: or Eeas. 2v SEVERABILETY CLAUSE. Ef any sectian, subsac?an? Sentence, ciause, or phrase Bf ims ard?name is for any racism?: haid be uncengtitu?ana? gr cinemas: invaiid by a court 9f campetentjurisdiciian, such Secisian shafi moi affect the vaiidiify ofthe mmaining per?ans of this?; grammes?3. it. .J shed in y?ke?? EFFECTIVE This or?inanca Shaii bi} Era fuif fame and ??ect??om and We; is passage 33 max/Med far 35 Staie Law, 25* 3 3 AQOPTED THZS THEWJELWDAY OF Jui?g i??9 . 1, x" I x33: 2* gm 2?53 x/ J?mes F3. Nix; Mayer 93%st (x .g . My . ??izamr {x p??xg?wxmv Gamma W. JG??tn??ni fifty Cfas?k DOCUMENT 96 I as? 53? 280.52' any STATION 111?51?,? '7 i. msj7+3] 5 2 LUKE) I I 4 J) 5 00/175} 21?; s?mc,? - 5313mm?" '1 1 i '1 543.45' no :1 1?me \\ngw Lu85' 57? Matt- .c(a.th madam ::wnn' any: ?7 amaze: "mam: AVENUE - WED gm: CAL-LIES CO UN 5 (A '9ka13 23? Fa?hop8000013 CaElies vs. City of Fairhope CaHEes vs. City of Fairhope 1? f5?; 00/119? 271' '1 {405.32 "Em 2? "hm 'gamcr OFNWZ A: - TngCorricr #4 12+. of SE Si?ui 5'6 rm: 5. ?f'HSmS?l?i?? .ES {30? 31' 34" ?34.6? sinu-?ar 34? 1:25.23' ma ??45'1n3 STATION My 2? 3354? 250.5? DOCUMENT 96 DOCUMENT 96 133156 Charies Mckenz?a Lama FAWHOFEE, ALABAMA 38532 {334) 928w?giiAn? mun-w a i 5 :mm? WM mm. 5 i ?Tmww? m?f-IW m? .. a I Int-v: wv Wm. 3 LEQQZW 123155} Shams Malaen?e Lame 38532 928%94? WW5 wi? Er} if L- 9:3, m7 ?Mg ?gwxm?f'f My WW ??55 53 fir5ng'?mm ?22; . . ?Wis Wm if? I ?2 g??x?77? MW a I 39:3?22? 2?1. 39T??ka 177 fafa 42mm? mama? ?ngm ., 'hwma E5 DOCUMENT 96 a Sm: was .- gamma, ?ak 914.0% mm cam 928?5386 ?may; J08: NAME s?m ma?a-3W mmsm?tgzw mamaw AL. 36532 m?a We harem mama: mm?h maie?aig ami him: iha :2me a? mm a EWRE AREA ?i 9? i4; $93 95 a LAWQWN 0% my GNE 2mm? matma??t?fa gm amm? a Egg?msa Wi?m m? ?g?aam 2M3 Fmsa Emma; Asmm I Egg I) Wa Wang arm 'famiah mais?a?ss and me? it} mmg?eia if: EWW with 3% far 3:3 mm {16238253 ?i i; i are 3; ?39 Was MEW: 3 mm a 1m 1.2mm GQWM I Maria: 5% guamnm be a3 spaci??d, m: mg: is: b? wmp??ka? a summa? 5%me W?i?a mm: 932$sz ?15 awi?mima mmi?edy par ?madam Srgmium My 3%?ng Gr Wan {m 8mm: awaifmti?ns inm?ving Mia ME exmuie? am my mm orgy ugsan Wen wdsmi 8% me an maxim mama; mm anti awa ashmte. mm?! agagmemenis mmingar? again mama, aW?s at ways hayzm? am? cmm?. a (saw - . W: {a 33% am, {$3366 ammega am?maaimg mi ewama mam Yam are Wamaamvmawwfm 39;; um ma?a a3 wi?ne? 2531mm ?igaa?ma A HOMESEALMES DOCUMENT 96 ?We :2 6x mwwz? Pif?a?m? k??'ekam?a Bai?zim?m 3? 3 w. any. .. ?3 ?k . mmg?mm aim: wad-<7 m; 11;};an m; 1:39:93: {guafatzam :0 magsQty-2mm ?7333" abmgaa Tammy E?gmgt? a B??y'?mm was?. It a n, at; 53-313 mg 6% 1*e?ar?ii $438.39 {:23th 3533:? 333313}: 1792:3824: 7 (Him; {?53 a {?223 ?2 3i Mgfig; 553%? "a {if} gig if?? keg-Q g? ?i - 51:; 4? m. A ?ag; DOCUMENT 96 April :27, 1999 Bath. Wimin 91 E. Addressing Of?ce am faxing yam two drawings far a division prarcei 5. The ?rst shaws :21 "mm parcel riivisiau, resul?tmg in a. new 333mm fronting in: Beecher. This (iivisian wag reccmied 21:th Fairhope Caur?rhause yes?ierday. Property owner is submitting a plat (.incluciesd) far a {wither division of this parcel to the Planning Cmmnissian iieday. Howev?fzr, it wili 110th heard untii the meeting in June. We need an addreas for this parcel {mating m1 Bewher. The Secand drawing shows intended diviaien pmgozmd f01??une meeting. Adi??essing it aging division Wm give as {has certain: address: 1.15ng yam grid system the ?rst tima, ingtead of having 10 change, it law? this Summer. 13 it gaming ?00 02123;? W312, sit here in my chain my friend. To make it Ema. sweat, the owrier ?eedg a builc'iing permit me mad 3, need an address far it. you. Mapping Shaw's 28636373? i 11 Qf?f?Faifh?p? Avenua a famfxiiy divisian of Fans: property. This new p?ropased division will {36 a cm?inua?aim 9f Beam-1r aiming in, 21 C111 de 3216;. The new resicieme wili be. lacaied an the 30?: 2111116 SE and {3f 131:3 C131 d6 SEN: marked wi?'j an 02:: yam" copy?. 14101133 wiil sit 35? back. the prepariy lime and driveway will {38 weaned 125? {Eff {he Natth and 0f the garagm'ty 86:3 Ci:??1Wil?1g) Have 1 fm?gottE-m anything? Oh, yeah, ewner Wm ha ham might aariy {his momingi 23 Thanks, Emma Thanks. for year hi?p.? GS ??agx#3900106 if35? mamg {3 r4 2 a Funny ?aP?I?lv- . DOCUMENT 96 DOCUMENT 96 . .- {Cm gaopagi II I . - - Busgmma ?wear I . I . - mm DOCUMENT 96 a 2 3:?89? {55' 5 \97, an If.? S?m?h" \uk? [317' ?rz'va FigUa' mm}? a} 3 ?4 {3 xfy?; gig-5! WM {13 m; ?35at) J?moa? m: ?1';ng . 1 . . t-a?mi?hit?f? i 5 saw 55? 57" 14021? ?i Fens: Can-w is Feat: Cara-gr is . 29' Mail!) g- as? wry: :15" 53:22! 5k . . Si" Ecmar a! ?148mg ?ung-z x? 21?3?8 BiuL-Ll?sdl LANEL (Si DESCRIPTION AND FOR LE 3 $683 1, Seth W, Moom ii registet'ed land gurwym, marshy Smite that was a? this same; and Lii?awing have been cample?zd in accoxinnce with the. requirmnemg Minimum "3i?eahnicai for the Practice {31" Land Surveying in the State of Alabama and ihat ?sh; 5S :1 mac: and cmract map 0i." the?: fallowing {icgcriptziom me {he Bentham? cam?r Nu?x'tluwsst Quartcir OHM Somhc?msi Quari'tr of Simian i5, (1 South, Range 2 Eur, Baidwin County, Aiahama, run Na?h 00." 31? 34? 195,9 feet :0 the OF {fiance rm South 89" 55? f3?? Waat, 34021 ?rm :13 3 point; {henna rm: Norm 23? :37" East, feet t9 3 point; thence run Nari}: 3 5? 10-984 feet in) a point an the right?oiiway line DfB?i?Ch?l? 3mm; thence mm along a cum: to the: Mt macaw having; a radius; of 50 feet, an arc distance at" ?05.03" faei ?9 a paint; thence run 8mm 39?) East, 93714 [em a. point; {helm run, Scum 31? 34?? 299.43 fee: the POZNT Further 3mm that. the: imp?w?menig prescnt'iy aii?uazad on said prawn}! are ii?emeii within ma bimndariizs ihermi?; that there are no 11pm: said by [mailings fences; sii?uatitd m3 aszljoiniug property; and [hat there are nojwint (?r?vaways, easements, mar r?ighaswafwway visible on the except as mated heracm AH according my survey made thix {he Ia?? day E9951 3. 3333 am: that i have examined {ha cun?cm PM (li?Ecia?i l?fiom?? Hamr? Map, Cm?mmnii?y Nm?n?mr 6150063, i"anei Number 0420 and (hand rc??cr?nced lat abiwa lies in 100d Kane (3. I Maxi state that 1.2m; drawing and a? certi?cation does not re?ect my this: or ?35211:th aressarch, Other than whaijs vigibie 13mm: ground GT provided in}; the: ciiams at mm; of?sus?vw. 86th Mama EFLS Aha. Reg, N0 MOORE SUE VEYZNG, xvi 50:? mm mtg; N013 1/11? we manger; @4411 w- by- a; if 111318501315, .4 1mm 35:23.2 sum NO, :3 3? I (334} EATEEVISWQY x3: {33/ ?ew H31 i5 Tim-3th} Ram. 31 iffy?! ??znf? ,ih?mflm irons {Siam g. 13mm Iaci; Misha} A Pam; A h! 0, ?Erhazz? Amelia; 5L 3. Mum WAC Fm" (Fm? Nmry it ?125m. {233. fan'an :23} Karat: Eeczz?an Sum F53 ?ramr 43"? mm?: mam REESE 353 13283356 2?1v?38v? ia?; mm {damage cm: ?34. ms 4:2 mg; DOCUMENT 96 June 10v 2014 1?6: Mayer Time-thy Km: FROM: 38112111321}: 1 Sm?ih: Planning Direcmr RE: Callies Cam; Family Subdivisicm Per ream: with daughter L?glie {Tallies HOME: mid extensiva resaamh {jamming the pmpe?y, ii appearg the City endersed a Famin Subdivisim in?sida the City Limiis back: in 1999, Than: are utilities already in placg with stub Guts where the lots were to be pia?ed and the property was rezoned from (Residential Agricutmre) to R-2 {Medium Dans?y Singis Family) to accenmwdate [ha subject pamels. Tha subdivisian wag never rammed with the: (Emmy as a whom, due is Mr, Cailiag being un?ar Gm impress?an- he muld cream a 101: as zzemssary {war time, :0 amid having t0 pay pmpe?y taxes an eight: rather than has or threa parceia. Curreniiy three 101:3 are platted an the. subjact preperty; Mr. Caik?s prsaented an eight 101 Family Subdivision :0 the City 11 i3 my undarsiam?ng that at that {timea the City honored Famin Subdivigions Within the (Sammie Limits At this time we dc; mm; but dua :0 the circumgtm?scas and evidenm availabla, 1 win Sig?: eff adminis?ativaiy 0n the Cailies C?Qurt Famiiy Subc?ivisian, with your appm?val. P132156 Sea: the mammal dewmenta rewiring {0 {he subjaai: prape?y. 3. E. DOCUMENT Hawsamt?;- run?wee. . MMWM :3 HOELE 1% ESGOQ 1 I 3 i r? -.. . an?. Scam *3 '5 SSEGG we 3mg :1 .4 133; . .1 ,w I is (In, (Q?Ej?ij. i \r LST 3 'gagd 1,qu pun .3 1 Building fic?mck E5 an: Asian .4137} mm: sesn - I A 3393mm {3th 3,9115; pawns?33.qgvzaq gaming;prer 1011?} Agnew 0? I. 503.12% :85 my :35 3C3 (W?vevw 30 AG $5.533 SE :3 355' Ez??ds?g Satibcck w; 6 9/ 5241mm?; ??gumg ugmggogg F) *7 2.012%! . mg? was. umaw, .3233 mm. ?9333 I L: I w- I 33155;,? pm) pump: rim; 31 gums any; panama am pawn; . auger; mm A 962340; ecu; '2-1 Xv?. 3's) 11053,! . :31} 33332::sz ?Hum 0? L/f a? Noiivagda :j 3? rurpen,ch i? DUB 2 pg?? a, i 1' EC AL 11.. .1 WE 300033. '2 DOCUMENT 96 DOCUMENT 96 Eff?tr cam: 32% \m magma ma??wn rocn?? m?amwm?m .. 73333333 m?wammu mu. .. \?mv . yummy? Q3 v? Murxvuw?m wharf/F? gm HPCI 43m 3 gm ?rm 3.,er Sign: . in 00:33 ?303? Ea ob,wa MHUWEINLEA.rC 9:5. Kg?. x31. nv . momgonm 303% UM:mean . Kama? :Aw Win \Qw. 1 FE: 3,3 in?: Cagi'i?fi? GUEC Praragfjerty vile; 2 mm? if! :31: Esualliillx?aluz: vi ?5.00. 3 mm?. 6G: ?335.23 DOCUMENT 96 Tutk REL T??Cfx, mEmEuhm? $5.0 .a "angioifuwm .m?w?mmag 8.0503ch .6 muwuhmu? mg mar: mumw? ?me NE 3:2:th me .3 E3) mummw?amm mam?? Ema mmD>wx Pa ?amuon mm 5% 384 3:53 ma?a?? 3.6% mo 3E ME . ?Em; mm Emm mm ?myom? mm. 35 mxoa?mm in .nm.w&c mmz?mwmo mg was Balm; 5% 333?: min 3.33 on .q w. aim wumcmm 35% geam?mMZAq no a; man m?mCi .m mam mac Emim snowman? gmgaa L3 mnax?gmu 3w; 6:0 awn; 3 muozuuw?EEom 3 33me EU 33 w: 58. 303m 3% "v1 . mrmno 440;? En Ummhuq mmam mam ?um?ai :m 33.4 V3, EQESZ .m??wm me?m?mnw m0 Sagan wag; {3am}: xi?; Jezjm?; 38 J0 mud? n. ?usuuf .vv 2m?. um US i awn 2134:4235 52$ ?7 A: .q ?2 334 309;! ?94ng g? A If 393:5 943mb . . r? 1 Run Ezc?uc? Eva?- af?empt may-:39, to Eazzute Ssaea such as but net m; we: u. fer ta. mmrd?d Bean?s. P'Eaia, Resfrici?ve Covenmts This or Map $5 the of Niagara Surveying Em: 5 and Sew Mamba It is Qaieiy far ?he use 0f the CEEM a Named hereon. is any ether Part" and may far any eiher purpnse i with-taut {mic-r written or? from x? where Surveying Inc; Gr Mcaz'NEE: ?$54.3 Law: slum-(war, karat}; stai?e that :35: manta by time Siam-3mg: of Pm: ?ns 3 2r}..er carrent map cf the fa. part2 of th- A survey and drawing have been campieteaf in the Rate cf Ascbamc tca "she has? of my escr?ipiion. a; Snuihea ship Sauth, ?Earth diam-:75; a eg?mmgg QC: degreas MA mac-Ma East :22 mar: North 89 degr? a - UO West, a diam: 2843.52 feet rjmtes 23 traces?de WEE (?36.32 feet to cm an mm 530;: c?iatcnce .7 ESSEE feet ?0 Wing on said North thence run aid North Richt~of~wav a distance {em to an km East, 0 dsaiance :sf 2 iran thence run Narih QC degr?ea Aet, {a an ?rm ?sh; left, having a radius 0' 50 feei an are meme :1 Smih R0 East, C2 dimer: 3 a? 9?.14 faei to ME: 31 {535%. distance of pm; theme 3 dagreaa z??ss?th E9 683; mm Narih GB 3:4 saconds ?2 1: r; (a furthe mates mat the mismvements mat there?: are m: when ?ed prezggserty by bu prcperfy are: [casted within 9 boundmr?ea thereof; :15; c2? fences Situated o5"; adgmi mg gamma and i?h?rc- no. jofr?? veswafa azusamenta rear my visibie fine surface, except as ?oiecs Shannon. mxvay this the: my: m? SE Comm U4 of SE: of Sec. 16? RWZWEJ ?30?de Candy A?aboma. a and OF Cf?f?: . er fo??d?d the research, ?ber men 'vhqzi an {302%. mf?eci 53:7?: ,Jts's at txme of - HGLE 38K 1 m? w! SEED SE INC. Aim rim):an 1 V1 Hm T. a gh??u??v?vmv?. as F982 Canie??me ?0 E: A 11: i. DORIS F. WE - :2 FangsArc Lenq??x mm? mm? SWM 95:4: we: PLANMNG cowsm 8 Hanan u. 13 4 a Swim 1? r: ELEV - ,1 gm if! uh, A EUR. mac mm a ct? 363*141f?xiW (CE 1 Fmg??ellwuthnet Wr?eerggia?mm tr - 2 ?Wu-?3 9? ?53 1? 1" 0* 3m?? Obi? if i ?(ran mu, 3? '1 mama ., ?Rewmr R. 133; W1. 2 DOCUMENT 96 an a! 19:: rag MAN: 3?34? 3555353 ?33% 3i; ?0 (EN 5; ?amm- ?m 3w}; [12:3qu :?Qwadogd DOCUMENT 96 QUEER 2.8M 9m??be 30293 awe pama wing; perm? {Quadmd Buguug?agj wgod 5035393 2 5?3 53150? 5mg} 2332.30; E) 12 1005332 C) x/ 553R $373 mmzas; Eu??sz .3) ?mm-m wan.. . . A. . wag; wmus am53? {30" 523991?? gnu}; 33mm A'padcud {Ce-$3 ?1 8:3ng 3quan ,Gr? 1mm: Lina: dirt I i 99M mna?mm 35 game $888056?. .225: .3 3 (a Hi1u? .Z?a?g pg?: 1 mmxa 999m 5 ?agu 993.54%. anha?a?. va Kn $3.58. a. ?ltw WK 3?;va in thin wiw? ?Kim? $335.8.. uxgafm .mipwxu ?new 5.35.: d. and: that.? #325 2.2qu .3. oz. mmoog ..awar?Saga 3.. .325: Bah .2. a. .7va 4.27.. MMJ?e?mm u. 5.: art .853? j; .5. .9. :8 3 an5.95.3% S. L753 .923. .2 ?2.26? E. .. .a .2. .29 .533. .5 3.5.. 22: 6 33. 3 .2353 $2 2:533?? ta i: 1? a it}. y. 3.32 .5 hi: .5. 8 "$955; an. act: . . N. 4.39.. 3.. It: . 2.. 8 .383 ?5.25 ?5 a In: 1.. first an? a. ?was! 3:55. .56 3 u. .V?savm 3 Eva 1.8.: an an ?wbw .E vi .b 3 .3. 3.3.. .a 3:33. .3 a aim. :2 f. at an n" ?manum: mum?. x; Cm v. It?; ?ma. new.Euw . Y: .8 7: 3 Ema: a m. 3: .1: $13.42 ?2 mm. an at?: 2 . n. 1. 2.9. .o :5 Agiupii .32:35. 5.5 ?.32 .51. grum?u Handr Janathan, The attach?a? armaments gnaw a quit ciaim dead that give a Sega? description of each $01; a?sc We have a S?te plan that was provided ta Citizens Bank as part of the ?oan processx It 5% ?ms the in?ividua? {01:5, Thank you, Lesiia News quitclaimdeedda?ni?ng individuai lotspcif 2 MB :33? site plan gravided to ?Citizens Bank in appraisal paperapdf 882 KB i 7 PM DOCUMENT 96 Deita Computer Systems 7. Page 1 0f 2 Pmperty Appraisal Link BALDWIN COUNTY, AL Tax Year 2014 cum? we 9/20? I Date October I, 2023 OWNER INFORMATION PARCEL PPIN 236236 TAX DIST 06 NAME PST HOLLIS, MICHAEL ETAL HOLLIS, LESLI ADDRESS 20303 131313031130 ST FAZRHOPE AL 36532 DEED TYPE 1N BOOK 0000 PAGE 0752696 PREVIOUS OWNER FST CALLIES, WILLEAM ETUX DORIS LAST DEED DATE 5/2 8/2003 DESCRIPTION 1402* 200.RUN 195? FOR THE POE, TH CONT 200.4?, TH 97.1?, TH ALG CURVE 105.1', TH 125.8?, TH 1402' TO THE FOB IN THE CITY OF FAIREHOPE CORP LIMITS SEC WARR BOS) IN752697 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS 20308 BEECHER ST NEIGHBORHOOD FHOPBEA ST EAST FAIRHOPE PROPERTY CLASS SUB CLASS LOT BLOCK 00-00 00 LOT DIMENSION 280K64153 0-2 FROPERTY VALUES LAND: 37500 CLASS I: TQTAL ACRES: .65 BUILDING: 162500 CLASS 2: TIMBER ACRES: mm:sz CLASS 3: 200000 TOTAL PARCEL VALUE: 200000 ESTIMATED TAX: DETAIL . I I I MARKETUSE CODETYPE DESCRIFIEON LAND USE mg; I ST AC8 .65 acres 3 37500 1 SINGLE FAMILY 3 159900 BLDG- 2 UTILITY, WOOD OR 0.13. - 3 2600 . .. 1. 0/ 9/20 1 4 Fairhopeo?m 38 Caliies vs. City of Fairhope DOCUMENT 96 Delta Computer Systems . Page I of 2 2; Pmperty Appraisal Link BALDWEN COUNTY, AL Tax Year 261.4 cum?: Date 10/9/2014 Valuation Date October 1,2033 OWNER INFORMATION PARCEL PPIN 243084 TAX DIST 06 NAME FST WILLEAM 1 11:1 ADDRESS 8725 MORPHY AVE FAIRHOPE AL 36532 DEED TYPE IN BOOK 0000 PAGE 0589726 PREVIOUS OWNER FST CALLIES, WM .5 DORIS LAST DEED DATE 4/ 3/2001 DESCRIPTION 139.8? 1758131MORPHY AVE FOR THE POB, TH 139.8', TH 175*, TH 1402?, TH 175? TO THE POB IN THE CETY OF FAIR HOPE SEC (PST LEASE) PROPERTY INFORMATEON PROPERTY ADDRESS 8725 AVE NEIGHBORHOOD FHOPEEAST EAST FAIRHOPE PROPERTY CLASS SUB CLASS LOT BLOCK 00-00 -00 LOT DIMENSION ZONING PROPERTY VALUES LANI): 43 200 CLASS 1: TOTAL ACRES: .00 BUILDING: CLASS 2: TIMBER ACRES: CLASS 3: 43200 TOTAL PARCEL VALUE: 43200 ESTIMATED TAX: DETAIL INFORMATION MARKET USE CODE 111:2 MMETHOD DESCRIPTION LAND USE :11; 130130 VWALUE mm LAND 1 AC8 .60 acres LAND 3 43200 View Tax Record I 10/ 9/20 14 Callies vs. City of Fairhope DOCUMENT 96 Delta Computer Systems . Page Ii of f2 I Revenue Pmperty Appraisal Link BALDWIN AL Tax Year 2014 cummt Data 10/ 9/20? Vaiuation Date October I, 2013 OWNER INFORMATION PARCEL PPIN 014482 TAX 3181? 06 NAME FST CALLIES, WILLIAM ETUX DORIS ADDRESS 8725 MORPHY AVE FAIRHOPE AL 36532 DEED TYPE UN BOOK REC LEASE PREVIOUS OWNER LAST DEED DATE 2/ 3/1960 DESCRIPTION 140' 641.5' IRRSEIM SEC 16 RUN 20' TO OF MURPHY AVE TH 139.8? FOR THE POE, CONT 340(3), TH 6415?, TH 280', TH 276(8), TH 97.131? WM ALG CURVE 105.1', TH 8 301(3) TO THE POE IN THE CETY OF FAIRI-IOPE SEC 16-T68-R213 (FST UNREC LEASE) PRQPERTY INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS 3725 MORPHY AVE NEIGHBORHGOD EAST FAIRHOPE PROPERTY CLASS SUB CLASS LOT BLOCK 0000 430 LOT DIMENSION 280K641.53 ZONING 31-2 PROPERTY VALUES LAND: 94500 CLASS 1: TOTAL ACRES: 3.00 BUILDING: 89000 CLASS 2: TIMBER ACRES: CLASS 32 183500 TOTAL PARCEL VALUE: 183500 ESTIMATED TAX: DETAIL INFORMATION MARKET USE 4 Wm CODE TYPE REF METHOD DESCRH TION LAND USE VALUE VALUE LAND 1 ST AC8 3.00 acres 3 94500 . SINGLE FAMILY SLEKJ i Ii 1 RESIDENCE 3 85600 BLDG 2 - 3 3300 . .. 10/9/2014 Fakhope000140 Caliies vs. City of Fairhepe DOCUMENT 96 Page: 5 of It) FOR SUBDIVISIGE Application Type: ViIiage Subdivision Minor Subdivision Informal (No Fee} Preliminary Plot {3 Final Plot Mui?ple Occupancy Proiect Attachments: [3 Articles of Incorporation or List all investors Date of Application: Property Owner Lease-holder Information Name of Property Owner: DORIS CALLIES Phone Number: 253622?4320 Address of Property Owner: 8725 MURPHY AVE City: FAIRHOPE State: ALABAMA Zip: 36532 Proposed Subdivision Name: CALLIES COURT No. Acres in Flat: 4.14 ACRES No. Lots/Units: 8 m, Parcel No: Current Zoning: Ra Authorized Agent Information Plat must be signed by the property owner before acceptance by the City of Fairhope Name of Authorized Agent: SETH MOORE Phone Number: 928-6777 Address: 555 N. SECTION ST City: FAIRHOPE State: Zip: 36532 Contact Person: Surveyor/Engineer information Name of Firm: MOORE SURVEYING INC Phone Address: 555 N. SECTION ST City: FAIRHOPE State: ALABAMA Zip: 36532 Contact Person: SETH MOORE Plat Fee Calculation: Reference: Ordinanee 1259 Signatures: I certify that I am ?le property owner/leasehoicier of the above described property and hereby submit this plat to the City for review. *Zf property is 0 ed by Fairhope Singie Tax Corp. an authorized Single Tax representative shall Sign this app ?cation. Fairhope Single?l?ax Corp. fDoris Caliies Property Owner/ Leaseholder Printed Name Signature Seth oore Auth. Agent 9 9/357?? Dare I Feirhope Single T239: Corp. (If App?oable) Fakhope000143 Games vs. City of Fairhope DOCUMENT 96 Auguss?; 22, 23014 Mm Laslia Ca??m Hg?l?g 20308 gagging? Stra?zt Fairimpa AL 36532 Ra: 1733:3212" Ha?ig: Shana? mama. ii; E3233 mawily bii?ii?i bmugh?; that gs: Sigma-1y, g3? .4 it} {n fiknm?ma 53mm; Piam?xmg Dimsijw {3 $3;ng at? $23 fiaispss: Maya: "fiimmhy Kant Efik {Imam}; {Sf {:33 gamma 5:12:93: ?aw: @255? am ?336 33213322133: 0f {1?38 Canines; CQBITEL Family Subdivigim?; {313% that mm raceizt?y ?(my :th haw an}; dedim?md amt-335313 a pubm mad. Pizza-:36: ha azivigaci that the: City Tammi; and. mm: mmider {ha of any building germi?s; f0? ?23033 his; a? gara'viaiics: any S?ty sawicag {?3935 101:3 mums; and mm} we: mmiw magambiy asmptabie Wx??ima :i'vidamzz: ??51221: ?adigamd a?cmgg tax a public ma? migig far ma b?i?l?i?i {ii'f?ih? {ilai'iiesa Subdivision. 10m 63.111365; af?ui?d?ng Pamu?ig ??lii?mi?fl Mimi City {has $113 3ng that Ifyau ham 21:33,! qwsi?mg, p'i?aszsz 16:: gm Emmy Oizli?arwis?zg we wii! awaii 1:0 {mews wriitan m??idenm {H?Saci?z 2123:3833 DOCUMENT 96 u: {m m: wt 102' :1 mm amp; . a 5.7. w, I nile UFL f! a. l) 2? Jami aw mun?; n? Huang tars?gum FM w: huh-(m. c? mwa? :51 ?Wm; 3g my im {war wave-u . "a m. .. m3. r2. :wm. .4. .mp- ,3 i hum? mm Law in; M- mm? $334.3. Gf? 1 menu". av ur-ut?h?m a: ?mgr: I cm cr- rum-fie-v .a ?aw; Mir-W7 45.er i 'a . u. me man: :2 mm ?e {rmhas ?sham 9: 8:51 In; xv haw-n w- an?: ?5 why-w Mum fun, We. MM My, Wham (mum: nl 57.53 in NM 131435? 5dr" Ma Fol ?l?~giwuy a Jam?unmum 591??an at umwzv. ca? cam-r; arr Jam: rm mm New?: Ta .21; a5 rm? no?: mom-w i" :m?mn tww?ww 4 J, v- a 3: VileilIT in; 95:: mm rgmum 33" A mm w? 7 m- ?:35 m? - an sh v?mi a zz< mm 25 g? :ri?gnr?fh] wimp ?93334 Two-u In ?mg-i ?d tut-o Stu-?bx 5. - a Amman nova-?mm I was! k? mm: my): ?mm umw?n "mm:xmzz?mx mm c; mum-?L ALIESAI. so may; ant-own was? 3.43a?94nw? . can Mac ?anmgquru rev-WW mwr?wgv Rig,? Ex 3 ?li?Pawn. mam I r, - - ga?: 1 2? i3 q: ?Wm Avg-gr; 3313?th um?:sz ?54! mag/*- yawni?s? imrini er Anyway: away?- ?my? Lu x: ?Lama mu; a i wan[ram :mam mar-am 5 3 y, bi may? no a yummy! hum var pm yawwas'IsGi?Z?ij?ZAC?rI-?h?z. $251.1. HY. ?h?mu?f? $533333"; 3? 3" a Au: u; 93mm mm MEET 05?! Exam} o! . TEE ?121?? Phi?ii?E?E mammuzum 1 mummy . an, may mm; wag: ,1 ma "4 glamEL. gunman mummy mg maxuzsmu Tim Ln? MW ?my: 91311142nun-u." g; .QJIRN: Qamn?xu?. 414$ L. a. FAMILY, ?Rum . W. U: i 5 ?53.55.? ,3 mm. 1?95; 9mg 35ng Raw new}; insgm?amq damssgumm?rmz on 535.3? in? 7 ca i a ("Gunmen ma swam? am mammuam 37me w? 4 mg." 2 3 'u 214.?: am5,23Mr: Jpn-1 ma NW7 my run} ?x a, 5 - meww "1,1 A. #izif?wi 9? we canMums? Ina! M3 - a- mush-r urn-v "mans mewhas in?: 33?23 1 Cam! a it?: v.in: mum: e2! num- 9:552 ky? {mm i 14: wi?ng??gfm i 3 a. 3 Shun} Cman ?zmj mll6'5 r-scwumi h?wmmt 25?. 1' the: ??mwr(Saw?y. swim-we Wain-z Karmic. Law 1 am: 152?: hawgunman Emma! ?ii m: :12 rmz?m?sme fir 1hS?s-?la- ?warm 9' gamma Simai? 2 a 2% WW1 1. ?34513 Ira EXP 3U- a: 29% mm?; ?m 2 "in 3 rm W49..qu arcsmusmam i?1m: :13?aw" 54:2? 3mm?W(itl?? in?rm. I I w, . wan{557 $3 hum hr Mun Sac-r a 'v m- w-vy new, ?m my arm m? um is! as: raw? wild(thatmm}: nan-runner. ?Valiant rmIn!? ill-MI wet my an: at" and 14?" 113mmIBM?21; .2: a. ecu?n mm mm, 2W now-- ?my, again ,3 - . 4 m? a Hymn. u? can: ml fizz-st? sis 1w Spunk-14d iwea. an "apps: on ?aim. gm up.? amt-we! 12mmay? a. ,ng. m- as. my?. run.? mm haw: as rum Imam 17.7%? r: xx. mam mm.? 1-: mm a! 2mm: human satin 3 2m. 3* 31 Em . Amway Tu! - .U 1? VM .: faurmr maxim? was .: m. i. m. jut?. km gym?; m: 6 Exam {wai- my? 1: 1mm. 3: mum Sun 5 mumug inn59-31111 1sun: 5: nu JIM: mm ?mam: n! than >Mw pm u? ur? :1 manmow: w; ?Ag/Au?; q, Mm? hwy-w no u. u? My?: um. i; 43 mymay: 9? mm? rm? "4 mm, Many-AM run? a my wukgn m? wum 1 Lvawa a: 13mm? {5.15, .m has Mummy, a an 29-1- 1: :3an 1m 1. ,3 ,1 ?ndan}: .k "4mm us my zn'l" an m. m. w? mama a claims rigve in am? In)? ?mm m?w?w 0-: Wu: Ewe r. 3 sham Chem Lawn We at u: WM Magma. we lw?r-?i-?Hf ?Ham. win-N ca "eh-8 mm 392:: raw.? A?m L. (?mam ?am-w: wan an ?arm <2 um, mm n. mu 062nm mm. mm i, mi? 5 ?gm? 2 1 . w, an'??g51:35,; Mm s-?qzawm $33 9 Imam Mm ma 9'5 A 4! 5 mam? man: x? w? 13' 7i 3% mum?) 139.)? 3. . - awn? 3-32.my?, wm pm my mm mm tar-w in u- wm: Limit}. 5 5 mm: mmcrave?ww?s-ws ware: 3 3 ea"Wm 2mm: mm I mu my hmi? ?m 3: a 6 a mmram. 51 33 12;. mm? mu m. 5. 4.. my:qu 2mm a ?Myiwlqw{Canaft?M08. - mm?: .1. a. nor-ass r. mum: rzi'?l qr- qn?minim M, mam summ 2hmes Mam 55mm" mum. am} L. 1 3493,.? - new.st ?was: ?3?ng gapv.03. .. mm mm imm g, mam: gm!) an Wit 1? 129? a \n 1" 3235;; Prrp?'r?v 21:5 51? ms' gm 1'5 :33. {35$ 33? Hang. gab; ALMESOQGG E. 2; m3 1? HOLUM on ma?a: 0F ACT: CERTIFIED COPY DOCUMENT 96 mm lad r'o 2358/1. Mam NMerra Idovmnher3,2014 Planning Commission Minutes lack Burrell made amotion that the Conunission enter into Executive Session at 5:02 for not more than 30 minutes. George Roberds the motion and the motion carried. unanimously with the following voice vote: AYE Tim Kant, Jennifer Fidler, Bob Clark. Bernie Fogarty, Lee Turner, Dick Charles. Hollie George Robe-rds, and lack Burrell. NAY: none. . Dick Charles made a motion at 5:26 to exit Executive Session. Bernie Fogarty End the motion and the motion carried unanimously. Bernie Fogarty made a motion to hear case SD 14.18 Collies Court ?rst. Dick Charles tltelmotlon and the motion carried unanimously. 81)} 14.1.8 ?ublic hearing to consider the request of Moore Surveying, Inc. for Preliminary and Final Flat approval of Collies Court, an 8~lot subdivision, Seth Moore. The property is located at the south end ofBeecher Street on the north Side of Morphy Avenue. Mr. Smith gave the staff report saying the property is approximately 4.14 acres and is zoned Medium Density Single Family Residential District. Two of the proposed lots already have existing homes located on them and the applicant is proposing multiple waivers. The weavers are as follows; 1) Waiver from rnirdtnum paved street frontage and access atandards, together with any aasoclated drainage facilities Which ought otherwise be required for the north and south portions of Beecher Street; this requested waiver pertains, Without limitation, to requirements for street width, paving, compaction, curb and gutter, and additi?ona?ldrantage facilities. 2) Waiver from the requirement that preliminary and final plats receive approval at separate intervals. 3) Waiver from the reqm'rement that a ?re hydrant be installed a minimum distance 01345 0? from each lot Within a proposed subdivision. 4) Waiver from the City?s drainage requirements as set forth in Article V, Section (Storm Water Standards). Mr. Smith also Stated the City has received a memorandum dated October 31? 2014 from Volkert Engineering are wetlands crossing the subject property. Mr. Smith stated ifthe Commission approves the plan would be revised to include that all minimum buffers shall be required. Staff recommendation is based on the information in the staffreport and due to the number of Waivers being requested by the applicant, staff reco onn'ends thePlaru?n'g Commission evaluate tlte?facts and merits of the proposed plat and make a decisl?cm based on "thoSe foots and merits. If the Planning Commission approves the aubj ect plat, staff recommends approval contingent upon the following conditions: 1.. Finished Floor Elevationa be placed on Lots 2 and 3; and 2. All minimum buffers shall be required. Ban Blackburn addressed the Commission on behalf of the Doris Faust Calli'es. He stated the sobj cot property has more history than this reqtrest. He errplained there was consideration for the subdivision in 1999 whenthe zoning was changed; however, more is nothing in the Commission minutes regarding the subdivision. He said in June 2014 the City signed a. plat for the subdivision and it is recorded. The subdivision was approved informally and the applicant paid for the improvements of the south end of Fakhope?OODQB Cantos vs. City of Fairhope OF ACTION TAKEN COPY DOCUMENT 96 November 3, 20M Planning Commission Minutes 'Beecher Street and the utilities are installed. He said the applicant is only asking for fonnalapproval now. Mr. Turner opened the public hearing. Peggy Faust Sagin - 203 96 Beecher Street She stated she was opposed to the extension of Beecher Street in the first place but it was for family and that. is all that lives on Beecher Street. She said those who live there now paid for the road and maintain it. She added is not adequate for additional traffic and to make adequate will take the front yards of the existing houses. Bobby Faust w22958 Wolf Bay Drive He said he isn?t against the subdivision, but he doesn?t want it to be accessed by the north end of Beecher Street. He stated. they can out an entrance from Morphy Avenue to get? to these new lots. Tommy Faust, Jr. 203.9? Beecher Street He stated he doesn?t want to prohibit the development but he does not want the additional traf?c to come through their property. He provided a petition signed by every one of the existing property owners along Beecher Street. loe Faustw 20452 Beecher Street- He said this piece ofptoperty has caused controversy since 1960 and he deesn?t want 8 more houses and traf?c on Beecher Street. He said they should put in ?an entrance from Morphy Avenue. Mark Lee 8763 Morphy Ayenue He stated no objections to the subdivision but he has concerns with the water 11moff. He said the drainage is an issue and should be taken care of before additiohal houSes are built. He stated the water tons approximately 40? to 50? wide behind his house and through hisbackyard. Having no. one also present to speak, h/lr.Torner closed the public hearing; Mr. Charles said he has an issue with the amount of water running through neighbor?s yard and it is a maj or concern. Mrs. Fidler asked why the applicant doesn?t just pet in an entrance eff of Morphy Avenue sinCether-e is so much opposition and Mr. Moore exp?lainedthe applicant would like to Utilize the eXiSting road and hot have to build a new access. Mr. Buri?eli said the applicant. is saying the subdivision was approved in 17999, but if there is no proof then it wasn?t approved. lie-aloe with the number ofwaivers the applicant is requesting. ML-Roberdssaid the applicant has not provided all of the required information and therefore the application-shouldbe denied. Dick Charlesmade a motion to deny the request due to the numhe?rrofWaivers and not meeting the minimum requirements of approval. Goorge Robei?ds Q?M'the motimi and the motion caisied unanimously. ZC 14.10 Req?nest to consider the request ofxifijehle-Rish?, LLQ to establish an initial Zoning '0me (Planned Unit: Deveiohment) cdncui?rent was conditional annexation into the City of Fairhoy a, to he?known as Fii?eilyiSteVen ?umnhre3n The property is located. east of Sandy Ford, at theend of South Drive; Mr. Smith gave?the staff report saying on October. 6, 2014, the Blaming Coinmission tabled the subject application, due to access, connectivity, and traffic concerns. Staff and City foicials met with the appiic?ant to address the Comission?s' concerns. The" meeting tesulted in the proposed PUD Site Plan remaining the same. Connecting to the South \t'ouldhe contrary to the 2006 City Council condition of approval for the sub} ect Fly Creek PUD stub out The 2006 condition of approval for the subject stub out requires that the stub out only be used for emergency and pedestrian access until the Fly Creek PUD development is connected to County R0 ad 13. Staff recommendation is to "approve contingent upon the following conditions: CalEies vs. City of Fairhope DOCUMENT 96 .m ?My ?mumuwum- M. (mm. n- SW PLANNWG ANS GGVER SHEET 2?0 99439 Pubiic: Hearirzg in Cmsidar ma Raquas? a? Mr. 8m Games; Rm Residentiai Agriculture to R2~Rasidan?al an 4.1 Aims cm Seminar Street (imam! b?waen Morphy AW. and Fairhape Am.) Mr. Games has appiied far a straight 26mm district mange from Agricufture t0 ?z?ingie Famify Resi?sniiai. Mr: Cal?as is in the mews 0f wmpieti?g a famiig subdivisian u? tier th? Aiming}: General?g (Minion. The pram-say w? a dfvidaed amongst his children. mariner zaning fa required fer his chirdran to seems building pe?nfts. Public: Name has bean givan if?? amardanw with 8M8 Law. T2: (331%, m2 have. Wan masked by iha Planning affim This request is in mnfarmanca with the appmved Comprahansm Fiat: far City? STAFF To apprave ZC 9M9 as rsquasied, Rasmliy Submi?e? far Gamidem?m, Ch?siczg??ter D. Baker 8mm? Warming 3% gaming DOCUMENT96 adongej go Km) segues mm 28 (131851 an; MD WA 31?} (II-11581 3.133%} Si BEEN NEE E) E?l m1; L71 HXED ME 1 AW :0 $015 WM {ii 3}}3351 SCH km, maim' PM 3m (may as.? (N is 3m as: a! 3-3. :sxnum ans 25 ans am $33 mamas 83?! AW gr EUSAXH 0: ?113 18 SIMS 1m gs 9i" mm 38': ?ms mm A 3mg: m: mm 56am?? 81mg mm 331 mi ms :0 an WHEN Th?c?z YMwa 35?! am :03 Exagumm BEE GE Ei?w??i 349325 Imm 33%.153 V?gm V?m??w VNCMIEIEMEN my: 3mg 3mg? 33:15 tsetse arm 9:30 am 1.92: :59 m2: 1:93:92? Erma;an "1v Yuma"; 6s mam; 202x30 :m i313 3'M1mm? 3w; 3mm 5mm 3mm mam WEN-TM 1mm mm ,2 3mm was 'Ta'z was; i; asan 5060mm) mam: (mm ms $9395 mam ?z?mw WM 55:9 macs (E mame .2353 am: {mm gram 1332113 Harm 29mg gamma-av KN mea?m 3:243: mm "mv mm mm (31331 $19829 mg) :3 9: 90 :0 me}: mam .Lmi? $5503 $1323}; 11%? I {Hi "35% GS {303 55 1312:?; am 65 ?0066 3:13? 1533M 'ma mam w. Hm in 3: 339m. 3&1. MM 2H: wamkm mum magma AUIWH 5221 Am am (M 11% am. my; EWXW .3:er SIN a! Sidk??j?1??i??l? 3% in "Maxim mtmu 31.6. 33am (am cw arm 5; mamav 2m. 5: LI (3) mm minim 95.: ?er EN. 31 m1; musms Mg, mm mi '31: :1 :a 1mm; 52mg. (w {gm {?113er 8m 50 ALE Em a: my mama": m0 mam 3m 5m 51') Ermmw (N21 Sii g3 Emma 1mm. HHS i) Em. m3 swam awamxm 'E?Mfs 52a: {11 am. ?mw 3m 35mm Rumor/31W 5 H1. Hm amusz mam :13 an 152535;?sz X) Em ?sxwa maxzuvaxmw $3412;sz 31min mimtexm: 20 mm; mm Em i1 mam 3mm (11. 34%le {mm a: '35 EM 8313 11m: mm 3m :13: 12mg MW Hm *w mm .Di? '15? mm a) bi) gmumssw ?rmLaw-1:: {mm *6 3185: {$331533 "be? 0 w} 53:11:31; am was Mimi mm?) 5m 53 mid cm mm) @1431: 3w. mm {mm {ms (mi awn; mammary (w 1 NZ) mama 3m WM Kim Emmy an; 5V (Mawwas: an awmm 3% mm as (1:23 WI 93 3311111115 mm mm m. 20:: 31W St ND m0 new {31m ma?er srnusx 1% WHITE N3 9-3 mm :1 1N >3 Kil?k? BALD wuwu?wawumnu? (F FAX 32% 83 H'?kgim?? 13?le (3413 (IN SJ PERRE mm SPECIAL "13:35; 0% XMFM (.81 NE "331) (If? 1MB $38? SEER mag-m Ram; Faimope000425 Caliies vs. City of Fairhope DOCUMENT 96 DOCUMENT96 ;0 ?113 'sn games gzwuaadomw ND HIEIESH {Rd Thigh? ii??s?lkME? I fl gi??z' Ni :0 All) ?9'?26 033?; G?i DOS DI 982 20:5 TMEQL Sr?) 33933 N.) im??l 3?8 ULBAESU 3 mm 41.3.12) Ham 3H Wit-'13 CNXM.) WEE $1 $34.33 BENEDFI $506!. {(9962: EMS. i?i??i 05 BID 03 $93 9 LESS 63186 33MB 68i0066 mam ii??ci HQLUJ 4 I CALUESOUG 96 NOENH j. @330 DOCUMENT 96 DOCUMENT 96 US. 13%an rimcm 3 fuming withered Suigers and Urban Lesiiti Callirts and 3lil$b?mCL Mich-ac} Hails};- I'stz'z?awet: 203.03 Betcha Sir/em 36:339. APCG {Empl?ye?s Cir-9&5: Linimt Lender: E608 7m Avemra NINE: _E3irmingimxm Alahusm 35263 30303 Btertm? 3m? Fairimgm, Bnidwiu Cfmmiy, Ain?me 36332 I Scciimi E6, "Fownghip Rn?gg?i?- Bisidwin Cigsamiy, Mu?mmzs ?el?demcu: I Prefhrreci T5112 Agc?ncy?ncl? I Plaqe nf?St?g?iemg?mz 301:3 U?iga Park Drive; Suds: 230,1i3mnimghaa'rz, Ma?nmm 35233 Jef?srsm} {immly 1mm {1521 837%}! I I I {1133 Numb?! f403b5f3263?pad lu?y I inmmg; Higgins; '73, 2W5 I Sim. itenlggifayable in Cummriimi wi?: Lama: Avv?ii?-?i?i M5 f3 41351.! ?'lfumna'?y" 7 2506!?! mg Feb (6 Un300 Liana Ces?i??c??maa Fm Empi?yt-?s? I I .5 Cf?l?ij?4??9?i?3ri .. . .. . . . ?igms it) be in Adgamezu 99:1, 1.31.3??51. i3; . . (>01 Hazard [mutants Prcm?mn THE Saw: ,def: . 5921 rrm} {.?ra?sng?n?if? :25 [$43 ??l?EUan??ELi fiticAng-y, in; HE) $10 Gazing; Yet: in Mm Us}: [inciu?cg A ?35 Tab: hummus (a 'E?izia: Agent-31. Em: ,2 JV 3.121323?) B?t?sw} {inciudcs I, . .. .4 . 4 {?fg?nmgm a} 1 Charges: 32m. newsaec?miiuprm 2535M ?Secs .Rt-L?uniing Yang :0 Baidmn (Sammy thmz: mm: ?Judi-i? . .. ., t??argm ., ., ?E?1ir?8? Mail, Wins, ,nura?cr Fae Ia 50% 5'5 I Lid-'3 :35; . $53.52 Payafil 15: Mm?; impumimn 1501. is?auih'rmst ibrWiHianuEm 24?.825} 33 C311 mm 0005 1335 4592i? . 2am? .. . . 341329.33 N, NETSETTLEMENT 7 M53 Finlf?f"?itfdwui?fer {mspiT?h?M?erj-?v I I 16:32." m: I 4 W30 have cam?eliy reuicwcd ?lm I A Scitiunmm and u: aha: E3. 1% Mm}- ?uzgv?saigc and hij?ci?, ii ?3 a irm?: mad accan x?zaiumvn! and made at: my accent?! m? by rm in {his Mammalian? i {1313322751. . aim: i 3:321: f" wed :2 361691133813mm;an Iimnm'er -- - - 7 - ikma?mcr {?ake (Salim Mi?ii?gm? Ha?z: The: Suii?tuwm Stzticsmm which have pmmrad is 2: km? and :ar'rrumm {yi?zhig :mngaciims 1&3:ch caused an win cause um funds an En Maia {Ens a?leenmu. A 5.33m: 565Warm: i-if?x?ijeizi .iAE?f?i?} a {Em [Emmi Smivs this: an :mjxaxzi'wr azistz?kif ii;sz 1mm: mimvimim: mm incisz {ism Mm? V, .. . 3i Again Hug?1 A 031': 2092 ?Ema En??l?gi SXCA LU ES 299%528492 Juiv 2'2, 20% 5:!7 AM Page 3 RESPA hzamilmak 43032 DOCUMENT 96 FELE 0%Egg UCC STATEMENT FOLLSW {Irons am: necki- A. mm: a. a? CGNTAGT ?0pliana$ AMAEUA G1950N EEND TD: {Mama M5 ?dc?mss; INS. 2?37 HIGHLAND AVENUE BIRMINGHAM, 35263 a THE mm; swag ms Fara Hum 3mm; usa max 1 5303.13? FULL NAME insan? 2th 52:13 damn! nrzma {m as: 5:21 magma marina 1a. ??sfwams gur?x WM HOLLIS EESLEE Magw mle cm 5mm 995w. Geo: Cmdm??a? 33363 BEECHER STREET FAIRHGEE AL. 1 $32 Ugh Kai TIRE If} ii: 655??: EN 10911:?ch RE 12F JURESGEQTKEH as amm?mm Mam \?iza??w?g gt; 15:43; r1 EETGR 3 3 i yaw; Ii. EXACT LEGRL N?d?fi inm? MW ms; 613::chth $1351? da 31:} nig?ruymtu a: cambire Mfr-ca 2E. NAME 0% ?mfmx EOLLES MICHAEL 3 arare chra;aao; camarny - . . . 3' :i 4" ?15: 28338 BEECHER STREET A ?6332:4 we win Mu as gay. wpaags ammaamm 2i as: smarazamwa :3 a: any masswaancm A DEBTGR I I FEHCNE 3a NAME 0f TGTAL $38 - (mm! mi}: 252 main?! many name (3.: as 325 was} CREDET magma": an HRETNAME MBGLENAME ?5Urrm 5T37E r~ a - r? 1&08 AL 33233 boa 5! T'z?z FNMKIEMG STATEMENT Gamma rm: cm?a?mmi: ALL RED FIXTUREE LOCATEE ON THE PRQPERTY RE QREATES. TEIS 33 A LEASEHGLD OF THE CREATED BY TEAT QUET QLREM QEED MRY 23; 2393 EXECUTEE EY WELLIRM JQHN GALixggf JR. QQRIS SUBJEQT T0 THAT LERSE DATEQ JUNE 30; 29GB BY FAIRHGFE SENGLE TAX WILLIEM 3v AND F, SELLERS RECORDEU IN INST - :3 5 {33 0 3 EN THE 53F BALQWE SEE A FUR LEGML r1coumswagmamspwua Ehk?a?nka? iia?ugamuvaa (jag HEN Eimsmua59amu :SEr'e?'Wi ion 13mm: :5 hm: "5 '1 (y mqu 'Ji??viz??w mm {Isu'w gamma? :j?mml DOCUMENT 96 FILE {Rin?g? ?533 If): ng?ii 3 Stewart Title Guaranty Cmmany ALTA Agcm?s FilaNumbm?: Scheduia A, Leg?i Emeripti?m Ca?ii?uatim E?age A ANK) 031131113. EMPROVEMENTS AND FIXTURES SZTUATED QM TiiE FQLLOWENG DESCRIBED REAL FROM THE SE CGRNER THE NEWA- THE SECTION 16% T63), COLWTYE ALABAMA RUN 195 TO THE CGNTINLEE 30943 TO A THENCE RUN 97.14 33:? A 03?! THE EAST ROW. L935 BEECHER THENCE RUN ALQNG A CURVE TC) THE LT, HAVING A RABIUS :30 FEET, AN ARC OF 105.3?? A TH RUN 0053184?be 1G0..84 Ti?) A 53 25 FEET A RUN 140521 FEET TO THE ES A LEASEHQLQ INTEREST OF ESTATE CREAYEE 33?3"? QUIT CLEHM MAY 23, 2003 EXECUTED BY WILLIAM JOHN CALLIEE, 3R, ?Ni} DORIS CALLIESD TO THAT LEASE QATEK) 36, 1.203% BY FAIRHQPE EINCELE TAX CORPQRATIOM LESSOR, AND WELLEAM J. AND 1308113 CALMES RECQREED INST. IN THE BALDWIN CGUWYR ALABAMA. MFA Cesmxitmem Chaim: E. 99 DOCUMENT 96 Emplayw? {:B'Qdii Unitas} 3608 7th Avenue Nara: Birmingham, Mahatma 35263 REAL NGTE Bm'rmveris): ige?iie {Txiilies Holiis and [\?i?clmel ?33. Simui, Fairhnpe, Alabama 36532 1.. He?nii?ians. E?v?lzcrevar used in this Nam, Elm words; ?me? and ?my? mean each whit: Signs this Nate; the words; ?Cfde and mam ?116 Empioyees (Tram. Unimx; and the word ?1?103d01? manna me: {Lircdii Union Emyalm k3 whmu UNIS Note: it; magigned m? Bm?wwer?ss I?mmise ii) Page. Far vaiua?: r?emcimd? i, the umiersignad. jmin?y and smm?zlily, pmmiss?: ?0 pay {319. {mm the Credii Unimz, Sis; am}! zmsignsg plus inieresi. I agree {hat the Lendar may misign. transfer ibis New Some: other gmzsan {31? entity wiihau? my cement and wi?mui Home: {a me. 3. interest. i will palsy inimcssi on the: primipzal E?rcsm {Em {Line ofihis? Note mini} lim- xmiire amth 0f princig?mi has been paid! win pay inmms? 211 i216 ANNUAL R?'f?i of 5501721) ?Fx?n?ha ?imm'cssi Raw?), '1 win my the intcrest mic requier by {hiss Sett?en but}: before am} after any default described in {his N013 any Mm?ig?ug? which secures}; {Em- p?iymen?a ui??xis New, 4. ?ayments. 3. wili my pyinc?py? and in?rm? in monith paymanis, 1 xvi}? mam maniiziy paymmis beginning Cm Angus: 32s 2893? and on 1.12:: sumac day Circa-?sch manlh {iwma?ext I caniinue 1'0 I?nake mesa mmt??: ur?utii i have: paid 211? prinmpa] and Elam. I owe under {his Vitus} g?us my cum ci?mrgas described in this Mom at {he k?lariguge which secures {he of mix Nata. E:th payan than I make wii? be applieai ?rm in than any Charges 01111:? $11231; principal 0r intm'wig and the mmaindm? in {ha ritduciim chin: principa} ii? {swan in me @Viam 11 511' E3 mm any amounis under {his Note: an Viuiy 2'2, 3833, I Wm pay $130,556: amounts on that date. I w?li mzka my memhiy pnyz'mmg 21': the: main of?ua {if {he Cradit {3'31me as designated ahn?va (33' ssuch mhef piacc as thf: Cmdii Un?mu may $42355;th Tin?: smuum u? my nmmi?y mymm?is is $861.63. 5. {im?z?ower?s Right. if} Repay. I. may the principal] I 02% in wimie in park at {my ?me wiihmzt {11:2 of {my yu?apuy??mni gammy. if 1 I'm-aka a partial prepayment {ha-3i win mi change :1le ?ue dam m: ammun?. ofany monthiy pays-mm, unless the zigmas; in 120 23 change-2. Late Charges. Ei?a?my payment his if} ?ayg mm foiiuwing the: aim?: Lime Qtl?such I will pay an mmnmi uqmi to Ui?the sciwduhzd paymcm in. al?huii as; 11 1am change, wiih a. n??nirmm charga of 34,130 and a max?mum Charge of 100,06, Security. The payment Of {hi5 Narnia 5.11:1? bi: 300mm by mm csiafie in a Murigmge mi? {wen Links 55:35de in ?gwr uf? me Hakim? {the ?Morlgage?y This: Mm?tgngac waives any ?ghts in a;th c-oliai.c3rz1? as Securiiy for {his New. Rafei'ctnce {0 such Murigagc is harsh}? made Far 21 mam pa?icumr dessuription Qf?m harms and czmdiliwns of {Edam}; and armim?atign mania? upon which ihis Nam is issued and secured. 8. Acceiemiizm. in iim event. (if a defzmi?a in the payment uf any mm?hiy paymcm due under {hi8 Nola, in case 91" a faihn'i: any a? the: terms?; Ema? in the, 0r ii?ihere shank}. be such change. in the affairs {financiai 01' Qihcrwise) of may pm?iy iiablc under this N913, as aha apinicn (35" ?312:- weuid macaw: ?it-2. risk 01? debt insecure, 1hr: wimic a?ht: ?cbi cvidmmed by Nata: Of {my balance remaining Humid Umrmn, iogcihcr with any and an accrued imitates? may, at the Uplian 01" {I?m wiilwui noiice m" such in any party {0 this N015DOCUMENT 96 become at (nice due. and payr?bie. and a {mime of {he Eimd?r 530 (Lieciare such indebtedness it: be (hm i101 cansu'tule a waiver of the :?ighl? is later ?cciara this: entire: indebtedness to he 52% once due and payabie? Waivers. I am} any who {123$ minim? {his-g Note waive pmms?g, nmicc nI' pmicsi, notice 01'? dislujrz?im; demand anti all iegai in (infarcng tin: COUCCHOH of this Note and burgh}; agree that the: Hakim" may defer or pemiponc caiicc?iun 0f the Much: Or any par: Q?'mjs' Noic: ciiher principal and/?03" imam?, (31? may m? renew me whom or any part thereof. H). Atiarncy's F993. to pay 2111 5031 if cailcciiun, inciuding a. masonablc augmey?a {3:3 mm". in tame-:35 {:35 ?50694} {ha unpaid debt afier de?mm if {he muslin! I'icmumd?r 0r Grigim? principz? umouni $388.08 mu? thig ram-c is referred, i2}? miieciiom {0 m1 Mame}? Wim is 1301 mar empioym. H. Giving of Nuticcs. 171131353 appiicabie inw requims 21 different $101th any {mice {hm 111118: be given me under this; Nate 3.x: given by dciivm?ing it 01* by Imiling by ?rm {312.135 mail addressed in ma the address 51mm} {thaw melt: Esther addrass as i 111:3}: {icgigxmte by mike: to the: Maiden Any mime: that must be given :0 the Haida-r minim" this Nah: 5113]} be. given by nu?ii?g Such notice: by ?rst @533 mail to Hm address}; (if {he Hokfar as stated uimve 0; Such 0mm" adcircss as may have: been {imignai?ed by noiice 1:3 mm, 12, (Em/arming Mm: This Nam 5313?? 1m gm?rnm?} as; 10 its; mlidiiy, is?crpraiai?xm, con?rmation, affirm am? in 21E ?lm-21? mamas by {he Maw and dcci?iens of Gm Sum: of A iabamu. 13?} WITNESS WNERIIEOF, i have hereunto af?xed my hand and Seai on 5133; 23, 2033. Lesiia Calling 'Mic'fmei Haws ES 000120 1 DOCUMENT 96 GET RESET E78 LENZEER: Empioyees {Ia'cdii {Mimi Exi?l?is?lz July 23, 3mm EGRROWERS: 'Egeslie Mains 3111i h?fichaef E. 2(3308 Beecher Sh'eeij Fairhupe, Mabama 36532 my) many; 16? Tsimship (38, Range 21% Baldwin Emmi}: Yum am mum?ng :3 that mil msul! in trua?gagc on yum 13mm) Yam fiave a iegai light um 81' Fedsmi iaw 19 came? {big trzm?rzciicm? wilimzi casts. wizhin THREE BUSINESS DAYS from Mike {wilomng wants; ecsm's km: that: a? {he {masaciirm which is Jtziy 2.3. 21393; or (27) the (i213: yea received jgo?ur {wih in iemziing disda?mmes; or the date: yam received this; uglier: afright h) cancel. ifymz mince! {he Lramactitm, {he mm?tgage is aisu mmzcicid. Within 20 ECALENDAH DAYS after we: Evasive nmim, we mus: take: the ships to me far: that the mortgage: at; your hmz?rc baa; bean macaw; and ws mus: mum In you any n? have given 11:; or to anyone eisc in :cnn?mn?iv? with ih?s transactinn, Yam may ii??ifp any mam-y we have givm you mm} M: have the ?lings. s'a-miziiuned aimxgm in}: 3,131] must i! an offer re?ux-n an: maney ox? if i1 is jmpgam?cai or unfair for Wu mum) she: yuu muss: ufi?cr i239 reasonable vaiue? Yam may ?rst (0 yea-mm like pmpm?ty at war Emma the lawman (sme pr'uparly, Money mm be. {calmed in ?ux address sham: mum, If we do mat 1334:? 13055233911 Qflhe money prispc?y Wiihin ?30 CALENDAR DAYS yam yam may keep it furihcr Ohiigatima. ?aw t0 Came: ii?yn?m deride 10 sauce} {his :z'mmaci?mz, yam may {in so by :miifyiug us in writing; at: APCQ Empkayees Credit Uniim 1698 Avenue New?: Birmingham, Aininum 352% Aituntimn me Cirigimxiicm ?r?mt may 113:: any wrincn sml?mrmm ih?t ig Signed and dutcci by you and amiss; yamr iz'imuiun ?10 02321261, ye?: may 1356 this notice by dai?ng and signing, helaw, Keep mu: {:9ij Oi'mis :miicr: waiter how yam not?i?y us humusw i1 wnmius impetu'mm in?mnation ahmsl your righia ifyou ?411wa by mail. 0r (degrst mu?i amid ?it: notice my Ezitm? [ham 01' .3113}; Iii. 2903 {m of mg DAY {i'?haw?ng the iahzsi. the ?ame uvems Eismd abew}. Kym: 536% or dc}th 3mm,? wriimn amiss It: same! game cihcr way, it mus: be {Eclivcmd the above address; rm Ealcr than that (imam i ?32m: 3 raccipt Csf'iwc; mpina 0F RIGHT TO mu: mpg; ui? ?21: 3:253:31 Wain?15H?nding f?xcimus'c all given by 3n can?aplim'zce with Tmih In Laxaciing Simg?i?ca?ion and Refmm Am a? ?980 (public Law i) {Judie {fumes Hank Em: h?iichzzel E, i?ic?iis Berni-QC? 33m: Ju?y 23: 2MB 1mm: jmy 23? 2903 Likacr? (?twice Eiighi Te {funceEENu Cerii :caliun E, 800021332 DOCUMENT 96 AGRBEM Ira twmaaeic-ti: AQDRESS: BQRROWECR: The scale 1311173038 and responsibii?iy GHQ. ENC: in mm iz?az15aciim is providt: mtarial services. 2. LIVE OAK ham not piqmmd or rcviawe? {my {3f the clasing docmnm?g and has 1:121:12: no umzmming any 3:25:21} nmitar or the appropriaimless Mania ?oeuments {31? Eimit compliance: with any State or 3"?i3eicx?a1 121w pertaining to the mic afrez? esmie 01' m?nmcing {?rm-11 mime Erarzgasi?ana 3. LIVE {3:52.31 LAND nu 11213113563113:inregarding the: mutant and ibmmi Qf?m 9105ng ami caring: give- any advica as in {has cmmeni or mantra 0513113: aiming; 4. LIVES GAR. naiarimiimn afckming an? mimr {Grim is in sumac: in be taken as; a cartif?mmc 02? guaranty oftiile and {ha 303;? $51212sz by mammany $3 in {is notarimi?on Maignatums of dosing by ?Lender? and ??Hilc Company." :3 The tmdez'gigned heyday agrees in rczitmse and 320111 humiiess LIVE OMK and im {Tom any E053, 5:05;:i damage, c?aim, dwnand Emilia? Iaww? related in any way immsactians and {011115; for which Live Oak. Land Thie- provided the nniary Starvims, The parties signing, {be closing havng mad and the ;.u?0vi3ims 35 {his Maid E-{armiess Agrecmem En WITNESS whemm? the um?lmsign?ci has emwmd this agz'cen?mm cm 3152; {he vazmy m" 2603. Swan: is and subgmiim? 15637323: me cm mix; that 9f?) WM 3&3, Natar}: mime. My wmmissim} Expire? DOCUMENT 96 Ti?e Agmcy Em. 273?? Avenue Smxii; i?rmingham, AL 35203 i? hone 295m? 2642 228 Fax 29532263633 July 22, 2(393 9&3va: ENT NUMBER: {$8051 $851 OUR FILE NU: 503m ?ames, in mid Daria Faust {Inilies ADDRESS: 20308 ?eueher Strum, ??hil?hop?, Alabama 36532 Tn whom it may macaw: we are. ixr?msmi?ing mm? dwciifwim in tin:- {313341,82033 which rerprescnis payman in 0f" Q16: almvc mo?gagc. hereby rmguast 1m: yam CEOSQ tin-3 swwum am} satisfy yam? nmz'igage within {him}; days in mealtimes with Ahabamu ??383 35, Seaman [@302 that is in in?rumem $9225 in {he of 501-: 03'? $3311de Pmbam of?ahiwiu {Zionist}: Maximum. Ali paid pawn; sshm?d be: rammed is": {he unaiemignea? burrmmiis}. Recm?dcd {chases shm?ld be sent 19 E?t?ssfarreti Title. Em}. Shouid you have any wi?h this payoff; we ask am yet: centaci mm? Of?ce immediately. Closing Agmt DOCUMENT 96 01*" (30 0 EFFERSG LEASE HQLD THIS made and crirmci?i mm (m Juiy 23., 20(33): 13y and hehwm: Leslie {3313395 and husband, Michue} 33?. HOME (hemim?m re 35:1in in as "?riurigagwr?? ?a?x-?h?hi?f mm GT mom) and {his APCG $73 mpiuyew Crm?t Union {hereinafter referred to as; is: ?$138 7&1? sit-Email Nm?th, Birmii?igii?ml, 35203 :0 sewn: the indubiednesg (Tallies HGIHS am! Minimal {E?screrisz'lcr re?tz'md as; whahm? out: far mare} to: T'vhn?sgagce. WIT 1388 Eff] {g WHEREAS, said is jugtiy {Mahler} in Um amnum uf $151,53i.9? lagethcr wiih amt zuivanccx leex?einiif'im? mm?idcti, in {has lawn} Yummy ofthe [Emmi Statics, which Er'?icbiet?ncxa midwach 2a Pmm?s?mv New car?wa date Emmwim which mtm?cst 239.: pt?uvida? therein ?nd which E3 paya'zale in :immrdancv wiah tmna. with Sim mare Baht, ifnm 59mm paid, due am! payable.- on Juiy 22,. 2033. NGW in mnsid?miism tin: premises; and mm} indebmines? and in wafer :13 mama pmmga? of" the same awarding inc {anus and ?izpuiuthaz?is alumina} 538M Praznismz?y and any am? 13H eansaimw and thereof, in? {if zmy mm i?lmmui, and my mlmr? aznuanis that {his E?e-hgrigzzgeta or i?s succegsm?s an ass?gns may animate. 12:: 1.1m 'LT?wm'x'czwer m? Mamgngar bztforc {he paymcm in? mf mud Mungagc and any Hm: may b?wrmr due. on any such renewals and advances; am! pm {hereof (the aggregaita m? debs. any cxiezxaieng, renc?m?a advances mad inieres: {hm {hereon as 3mrci1mfta3r ??uwmpu?Mutual; {,dllt? 'Ikbl and mumpimzjw mm 1m. sngmis?mm mum wmam: {he dues hereby giant. bargamz and can?vcy 1mm aim l?vmngaga?, the 31-31 csme cia'gcz'aiyuid as: Ebiiuws: A AND (if: A Li. AM.) FIXTURES ON FOLLOWING EAL 1343.03?? ?Hii?l 8E CORNER OF NEWS THE SEEM ?3.57 Z. ON 55.33331 R2173, BALDWIN {If} UNTY, REM IN 0903 1?34?13, ?95 FEET THE 913.13.; T3 EENCTE 200.43 TC) 5% RUN 927.1% FEET TO A THIS. Ex- ST ROW. KANE Oi? RUN ALONG Ex TD 1.17271". HAVENS A 50 195.97 FEET TO A, RUN $60.84 TO A THENCE- RUN 25 TO A TERENCE RUN $413.2; FEET "f0 ?30.13. THIS A INTEREST TEE-ES ?i?i?iArl? QU CIAHW DEEB DATED MAY EX BY 41. AND DQRES CALUES. SUBJECT TE DATED JUNE 30. 20017} BY TAX CORPORATEON, LESSGR, mm 3. CALLEES, JR AND F. CALLEES RECOREBEH IN IN THE RECORZBS BALDWIN A LABAMA. Same: Mir"in Tax {Z?wrpm-ntitm TO HAVE ?1?13 the: was; mime mm the: 11$ and asa?gm fm'qzwr, 1 mm the inzprawgrnems raw; or hereafter erecmd {m the real came: ami all rigging, pa'iviicga?, mus, numeral. mi} {mi} gag rigging, water right?; and water mark and all ?xture; mm hcreaiicr attached is 131:: game 3?an 23mm, an inciudia?1g rcpiaccauems and add?imm; therein sha?i be deemed ?0 {m and rm?zmin a purl of the mm! mm: amazed by 33133 Mnr?igagc; am! all 0? {his are imwina?ar re?ned as "Real 1.5mm" and sham be com-Icyecl 133.: this The I?vlorigagnr with the h?IcTsz?igagae 13131 Huff Murigagm' is in {86 af ifar?: Raai Ema: am} has a good right 10 3e? and mum}; 111:: Esme. as aibmsaid; mm- :Eac Real 133mm i5 (tea: :31" Ml except as mated henna, and the Murigagm win and ibmmr defend tin: 1313': We Rani Esla?e 112320 {3113 Mmigagcs 3352mm {his mum 01mm}; M3123 pcmems?. except as a?harwise herein providm}. Fm 1hr: pm?poae af? Swarm; the mymmit 9f 11w mm, 3.11: Mm'zgagm? egress 1i): (H pay when aim: ail taxcs, assesszm?ms, charge?, ?ne. and miles" Hans which may attain pr?uriiy mar 13::?5 Minigng? (hwcinai?ze:juiniiy uni?ed when impescd lcgnily upon the Rm! 13mm and ifde?mit is ma?a in GR: paynmm vi" the M6125, (31' (my 333:1 ?airmail {Em A?i??n?gagcg, :it its; {)pi?cm, may {my a} same; mm m: R9213 Esme: mn?imzmasly insured. it; SHEER manner and by mach as may be. satisihcimy 11m asgguimt less by ?re, vandalism, mniiciaus; mischief? and 0mm pttriEs usuaily ceawrcd by a wiih mmdard extended mvemga eminrsamcmg, with E035, ifzmy, payah?v the: Murigagcm :15 ha ix?lm?mz may 41pr;?: ?iifh 10 be 2311 gunman guf?c?gm saver 25w Quin. The migmzzi insurance gruf?ry, and 12H repm?mnmis {harming shaii and hem by El '??itti??gzzguc Limii (he Dtbi is paid in full. The: urigimi irmaz?aa?me paiicy and mpmc?mcms $36.1ch mum. provide Elm: may 2133:; ms; 32:: amt-(mm? [he Erasure; giving at 162st ten days prim wrinmx {ma?a-z: mfsuch camcaitalizm. the Evfmigugac. Maz?igugm herchy assigm and pimigc?s. to the Mortgage, farmer steamy {m the payn'mm ofthc Debi, such and every poiic}; Ensurmzm new izcatcai'?cr c??cct wh?ch ?mures said imgx'ovmmn?g, :11? any pm? 1158on in?ame: 2131 the. right, ma: 311d ui? (iv: in mm} 8-3191} and any}: such guilty, includ?ng but mt Eimilcd in all 0? ?rigrtgagm?s right, title and imcmsi in in 3:1 pmmium? am! such hazard insmamxs. mes}:chng 333 right; {if} rcuzrne? ptm?s?mzs. if the i?vimi?gagm fails in ken-3p i3?: R3215 Esiai?z insurerc? 123:: s-pcci?scl aimvc this?. 3% the eiezctim: (:i'iim a?v?lmigagmr and wiihmxi notice {a any um Mortgages: may deciam the cni?rc 0:313: (122:: and ?32syai3ie and miss Martgagr Sisbyici Fm?ascizmm?e, and {his Murigagc 1:135 be :13 hereinafter pmvidcd; and. rtgaui?ws aj?whetisa?r ms: Marigagec?: {he entire Debi Line and payabie. {he may. but sia?if mi be {)bl?gzucd m, insure the Rm}? 13mm: far its wins (or far such Jesse? zzmmim as: U15 Mortgages may wish) against web risks 53%" 105s, far its; awn bme?? Uh": from Silifh (fess ?233! 3f ceilcciiug same}, if {diam-ted, is int: ag?xinsi ihe Debi, or, 22% mt: ESGOOZOS DOCUMENT 96 {fllf?ll?? Marlgagee, such may be mgr-cl in repairing or 1hr: located on the Real lizrfaic. All amounls $3342.31! the Morig?gea for or fair llu: 0f Lima; bammt 2r deb: (lute by this Eurmwer 21ml Mallgaggar the Morlgagee and ill (me/r: payable m- nwtim Borrower or anal ?llall be: secured by {he lien Morigagm and shall bear from {lie {late by Elm i?vluri {agate until [mill at rate: rrl? prrwidcrl fur in {hit Hole. The: Borrowm? Martgagrzir agrcca to pay when due principal and lilit?li?b?El ofilm Deli: and ken}: and pcrf'mm every mvcnant and agreernml cl lira Pmmissury Nam: secured hereby. As l?rrl?llm? swcurily for ?re mymr?ni (31" ?315: Debt. the Murlgagm hereby malgns and plums-3?3 to llrr: llic alrascz?ibcal pwperly clairng, rents, prelim, issues and revenue?: ll) All remix, pro?ng 255$}ng and rcvamaes in? 111:: Rir?l lislatt: lmn': time {0 time rimming, wl?icllm' um:er lizascs 0r lsnarasziw new tri?ing; {Lll? lmrealmr rimmed? rr?szzr'ving in 3r; lang as Elli? hilnrigugor is not in default the right is recall/re and whim smell rants, pmlilrs, 21ml munch 21ml artillemema lwreallcr marli?: resulting {mm wudamualim or llic taking all? [Em Emma, 01' any part llmrersl?, unrler the pmver ml eminem domain, er for any damage (wircilrer mus-ml by such raking m' rsllaerwisri) {he Real Emu; or any part thermal, 03? in any rights appurtenant lli?rrzl?, any award l?trr {zlm?ggc visi?rceis, and all pziyiimils made for 1hr: Silk) Gi?lim Rm! Emma, {yr any pan flicrml?, in lieu Gillie cl?lhc Ufsmincui claimant, shall be pair! in (ht. Murigs . The is hereby an lielaz?ellol?aml in ills: name {u macaw and clcliwr valid for" or appeal lmm, any Sil?ll or awards? The. may apply all 31ml} 351mm m" any part ?ller the. payment Gl'all {lac greet; incurred in crimicctiim will: any 0r lranmciimr in this 25 including, mart tears and Mummy .3 lacs, {1n lire Dell: in such manner as ?lm mi, Ill Marzgagec?s smite or any {32:11 llacrml?m may be released :er may be used is} mpziir 9r restcarg any m? all rafilm Married on {lie Real l?iaraler. 'l'lrs: Marr?gagur hereby irremporaius by refinance $an :his; Mmig?zgc all 03? the of Promi?smy Wale eleven (lulu licrcwilla. Morlgagar agrees ?lm, in ill?i event that any Cl?ll?i? of this Mmtgagc (jar (lac: Pmi?niswry Nair: mul?iims wk}: applir?abla law, and: warllici ram :ll?fr? any Mriir'rgage 01? ll :7 Prrlinismryi Nair: which can he: giver; ll is :rgr'mrl llial Elm iarrwisiram (sf ?lm Murigagrt mid the l?rmni?smry New are. and lhal, if" Gilt? mart: prrwisimis maintained in this Murlgage 31? in l?mmissm?y Nate Exhall far my 18.35021 be lzelrl be gr in may respesz, Such invalidity, illegaliiy, er ?lial] lIDl affect any ollmr pi'ravisriuu iscrui?l?; this; Murigag?e be. as ll? such invalid, illegal 0r prm-?isirlil has naiver brim: wnmiziml lim?rtiri. 1T arr cxpimt?mx rll? applicable lawg has; 1hr. rifles: ill" rendering (my all {lie Prnr?lsgory Null: m" l?vlurlgage lu its wrms?, Mortgages. l?s; may flat: ll??m?ill?l? payment in 01? all sums; Sifi?l?i??i by links marrng :mrl may iramlie any rermdies pcrmitml lmreuzadrr. The. Morigagar agfee? ll} lac-rap llv: Rm! Karma. and all lifBCfiitiill in gi?lriel repair and Km to wama 05? penrril impairment ul? the Rail Bizarre, and all {4.3 maintain mull as goad 33 may airs, wtar and tear warmer}. [full w" {my part ul?llre Real lii?siau: or {my llicreir: Sl?l?l rir lizanaltii?crl by Mmlgagm? l?vlorlgagmas?s prim written emigrant, (In) the: Bl? a er Sulamtl?im?s: {lair Mm'tgrege {l6} {il??iillml (if 2: purchase rnrm?zy gamrrily interest for appliances (it) {his transfer by llamas, clascarrl er lii}; al'law uprm the rival}: ofa jairat imam: in gram Murry leasehold inlerml of or legs ml maiza?n?ng 2m {melon is} raurcliagt. 11153:. Murtg?gcc?s mplionr declare all m" gums samurai by llils lvlorigage Ear: rims and payable, shall Elam: wa?vcd Uplirm in mmelcrzirt? il?. prior E0 the": sale or transfer, hilrirlgager: and {lie {lac Real lisiaic is: hr: ?31? reach agwemcm in writing llml. {he credit or? small parser} is; satisfacmry to Mortgagee and {113: ?lm payable: on the sums scarred by rials l?V-lmrgage Shall be a: such mm as Marlggagac shall request The l?vlnrigagm? ll'li-IE m} arr failure ml the: l?vlm?lgagrzc any Cyprian lilac-lair: the: Debi rim: and payable: shall be: deemed a. waiver ttlf' {ire hrliurigz-lgitrt?s rlglir mama's small up?imr, either Er) {my pagl or garcseul rlcl?ault. marl it is agmed ?lial no [?rms m" mndilium?r i1: {his Mung:th Shall be waived; or Changed except ll}; xr?riilem lli?llm?ll?lil Signed. by Mmlgagor and signed an birl?iallkralere by um:- nl" its; {luly After alel?mll gm Elli? par? 01? Elm: Bmwwar mt lvlcarrgziggur, alie Morlgagcrg upon bill filed Ql? Ullm legal praccadiugs bizng for the of {big Mmlgagrz, small be ilm lay any cmnpamm mun, neiicr: l0 any party. (if a reg-river .lhr Elia: {wears jaguars and pn?l?l? Milita- Retail will: prawcr 14:: {7:256 and conlml Elk? Real Esial?, and willr gush miller as may Em dreamt! mammary. Uprm rcqurzsl Gl? 0r if inure {him aura}. Marlgzigee, at upliurr prim {0 release sf lliia Morlgagrg may make lismrc Bun?uwcr {separately llm?m?e Elms"; mm}. Such larlurc ?ilx?ail?i?, wilh inscresr Shara-0:1, shall he: by iliis l?vlurtgage when Wiricnrted by pmmisa'crry 210mg Mailing; 35ml times; are received hereby. UPth HOWEVER, Elm; if the: pays} llac Dem {which includes 1hr: evidenced lay the Nair lmmirrabovc referred to and any all and l'tilftWillS advances; and may interest clue {in such exicnsimis, renewals; and and all mlisr secumtl hereby 21ml mirnluuacs ll?l?? fur any ills hilarlgagct has paid in of Lima 0r insus'anczz :mrl lnlm?esl Elwrean, am! ful?lls; 9512;937:213ng izndar llzis lrlm'tgagc? this mnveyancc shall he mill and mid. ll": ll) any warranty 0r mgn'esxzrizrllioxr is; breaclml 0r waves; False in any material resper?: is maria in ll?u: due: pcz?lhrmamsa {if any caveman! agrmmem :11" UN: lvlorigager under this Marigagc; default is made in lhr; lmy?i?ll?f?l l0 Martgagite Ol'any sum {mid by Elle under {he pwvigiau of ill?; lviririgngca?, (ii) the Debt, any part remains unpaid at malrurilzy; {he rxl'?lar: Marlgzig?c in lli?r Real ESlZillif [moraines mdangercrl by 113350;: oftlirt (21' any prior lien or mmn?ilrirm?wc; any el? lien is; [11er ageing: llu: Real 0r any par: umlcr ml ?labama mlmitig flu: liars rzl" n?lecliaxriCS. and malerialmen {williequ regard the exigtmacr? :mrexialmw Elle rlesbi 9r Elm lien which Such smirnmni is: bases; {7?5 any law is gr auilmi'iz?ng all" any tax ?pm: ?lm's; mmlgage gr ill-r: Eel}: grcm?iirling amhm?lzing the {lemmas}: {If 312:: such Eax :mm llre pr?iimpzil or inlerrsl ul' 1hr: mm, er by Virlue (if which any lax lien 91' upon 1hr: Real Estate shall hi; cllargaal?l? agairisl the uwnsr Mrlrigage; any of Elm slipulaiimig tantalum] in ?liig Merigagc is declared invalid 0r ln?pm?ll?? by any court {31? jui?rsrliclian: l?durlgagm' 01' any ml" ?rm) shall apply for er to ll 2 armrsinurrmr rr receivers masts: 0r liquidate! inf" {he 11mm or all ur a submaritiul purl Lil" Such 0r lv?lurlgagrlr?g 21559.13, {33) be arljurl?calczl z: bankrupt ("if ear :1 girliaimi in Evy, lull, 0r admit in wrillng?; such Mortgager?s inability, gamer-ally to pray such Harmwer?s Cir rltlais as; they come due. {cl} make a gmmral Fm? rim mfcrerliwm, file :1 petition an answer seckirag m? an will! or taking: animal-age Glam}; maelverzcy law, (F) rm arirrailting the malarial allagmimzs all car muscm in, Or delimit. in nnswarmg a parilion ?led against such Burmwc?r 0r in my reergzmizmg; or insrilvency {3f an for relief 0r ur decree shall ?be mlm?ad by {my calm ml mmp?lsnl jurisdictim, agpmving a petition ??il?kli?lg liquidating ur rcoz'gzmixallon at? ?lm Borrower Gr Martgagrir, r3: DOCUMENT 96 FOR {3903331) ENE MONEY LQANS 0F -~Bach (he undarsigmd fm and in cm?sgideru?un Ralpi?y??fi ?311th Unit)? (herein ?Lsmier?? {landing the of the ?03m (3n the was! property Scanned :11 26308 Jivecher Sireei, F?sx?r'l?mpe, Alabama; 3633?. and in f'ua?ihcr cuzmidaaticm :31" Pref?cml "him Agency, int) acting .15 smut:an iagmi and um: insurer (if Um 192m, agrees that: if requested by [he Lander 01' Pruil?z?zmi itlc Agency, Inc. In ?13133? cooperate and :zdjusst Ciericai ttm?m and omisxiuns in any 03' Gfihe aiming {immunization pmsenicci at Settlement. The un?m?fiigmd appuini an agent Preferred This Agency. his. as to any such and pincc {Em imiinls am my ?ccumem wheres dumges am in the cum: this is the partias inmived aim?i be imii?cd and receives: a cam}; of the uizzazzgmi document {mm the agent named aimve. AGRREMENF (FOR Elm Lizadcrg?gnm? burimvcm Imz?t?by Elgn?ii that any amounts:- paid. an a grammar; 11101ng get: 05' mum puyec (?mm Eim of? th?s Emu closing are cseimamgg anti that shouid any mldhimmi Sums; be mammary to {my {ball debt off in 111%}, we {Eu hereby agree to pay 21031 said suma- PAYROLI.. ?lte utidm?gignud imx?mwers. understand {hat if we are arranging fur uur mortgage 133311192113 be made by pnymii deduciiom it is mm 503:: respt?msihility it) sue {lmi our payments 1:213 made 1m time, {f the paymi! pEan i5 mm in 3mm in Him: 20 make me ?rst payment, war win he required in make iiw ?rm {myilwut mu! each subsergmezii paymmi until the (lu?ili?ii?m ?5 ef??uct?ve. the umimsigmd imrruwms: (in i?m'ciiray 31:11:: aim: we (If! {mi want or are in?ligibiu to racism? meals: 3552 Lircdil insus'aram: Waugh the (imam. Unmn. W5: uz?xiummzd {hm Emma the: E'?gh? to ubiuin this: inanimate bu: we me am I'L?quu'cd. obtain such instir?zmcr: as; a (3f receiving Sh?s Man, ihc burmm?sm an: and an: m" 1336 wagmriy {ksa'ib?fd imimw which wc an: nxurzgagfng to the Credit. Lin?c?m, Nun?s: has been :30 3312:)? malm?iais ?zmishcd cm ?ue premims {m (hi? pad 91,) days Hm: CGHM cmuuiimc a hen agnins! {Em pr't?sp?crty. We (gratify 1313i than: are zmdjua?lwzw11lzs, iims, executimg, suii 01' against nr g?mul??g agaiml us. We. {ur'ihur ceriify that ?lm: are: no disi's?ic! ducs, 1'111111icipa! assaucinijcm {en's 0r dues, cuminm?nium {5:65 at dues? library garlmgu fans; or (Mm; dwrges and Hans which wmzici attach ?0 mi: property described twimxg wasp! may such Ezems which are being paid mm: Hie 0! the luau: we dosing, 021 this; dam We 512m: 13m: in ?270 cvcn? delerminct} that erCEi feats; dues, Charges: 0r liens "shank! be dun, we: 2523331 pay the 5am: and 531223? andmmii?y and licsiizf Izmx'micss ?ii panics i'eiyizxg (m ihia af?davii and indemnify. This :zf??dzwii is; given [m the purgm?e mi? imiucmg Sicwm?i, {13110 {1&1 nmuty {7011311111}? {0 imuw the heEuw {immime pi?m'aczriy Wuhan! magnum} as 22:1}; 51:03) fees, times, Ghm?ges m" lims. A LEAF: AND ALL 1M PROV EMENTS ?an 0N THE REAL (FROM. CORNER OF N51 3?4 OF SEAN H37 T68, COUNTY, ALABAMA RUN 90?} i ?34'13, 195 FEET TC) T?i? 200.43 TO A RUN 97? i4 FEET TO A ON TIME EAST RENE OF 3813:3571 ER THENCE KEEN A CURV ?10 11,1353} HA VENG A RA E31053 {33-9 FEET, AN OF H3507 FEET TO A RUN i E91384 A THENCE RUN 25. TO A THENCEZ RUN 3981?? TO THIS ?55 A 13331331314013!) (3F CREATED THAT CLERIM DEED DATED MAY 283 EXECUTED BY CALLIES, JR. AND DORIS CALLHES. SUBEECT TO .E'i?ii?X? 5E. 30, ENG EXECUTED BY SING L12 TAX LESSOK JKND J. CALLEES, JR. AND DORIS 3:11 CALLEES RECQRDED INST. 3533032 ZN THEE PRGBATE REEZCORBS OF EXLABAM A, $35.0 1.1} Mi ES O7 DOCUMENT 96 {my of?ihem, ifnmm than (mm or apgm?ming a rcwiver, answer. or Eiquidnlm Qi?any ur 0r {inhe Rcai I.me or m" 313 car a gubsmmia? part 9f the assets ?a?lurigngm'; {hem ugimn the: happening (Jazzy 021:: ramm- ufsa?d mama, at 1116 optima the fvmrigagee, the unpaid balance (affix? a? mare bifmnm due and gartyable: and um; Mm?igagc sisal} he i0 {bzeclasme and may fag ?chimud as now pmvidcd by km in @2153? nmrigagma; and {he ?riu?gages shall be: authorized mks?: {magmaian efii?c 313315ch and. after giving ?mica of {he {ima ?lms :1an 113nm (if suit: by publicalim} (mac :2 mm}: {01? (hm: CURSECHHVE weeks: in Home :mwsganper gmbiished in the county in which me {=16st E-Esfaic is; inmatzd 1:3 36? tins. Real Ram: in afihe cmrrihmmc Liam mum}: air pubiu: mummy i376: bidder far (2113i) and imply Elm pwcemis ofsaid 5211:: as. ?zEans: {3:51, it.) ?lm expense adwriising. 35!!ng and conveying the: Reid Estate: and I?mccia?ing this imindiag a magamablc ?uor?zmy?g fest; 50:10:26, in {he 0me umuxmts that have bean 53mm, er 131:3! it may {hen be necessary 5336316, in paying insurance. pmmimng: liens ether marten; third, {0 the: pajama?! in ?zfi (if the baiance (if tim Deb: and ?amers: wi swag" same shall 01? $313!! 120? have {wig maim?mi at (Ian: ef?snirj saie. but no ?zazcmsi shall be baymxd {he day {?3316 and my unmanned imerm his (a and (With, ?16 balzancm ?fany, be paid the party or parii?r,? apptaz?mg as; We. owner Mme Rm)? [Mate a! use time. 531:3, a?'izr (handing 1hr: cast of is :42.st1 The :?vim?gagor agrees aim: i119 34014352:th may bid at any $2339 under the caf?ih?s Mngage and may purchassc the: Read Estate. 3.3? the highcs: bidder Ifwmai?. the 521k: fiat: Rm? 13.5131: may be (:{fcrcii {hr 531% and 5.6M as a whole Wilh?ui ?rm af?xing it in any other manner 0? may he ui?a?bmd far sale and 520313 in any mixer manner A?iezn?tgngea 11m}: elect; The am Marlgagor agrmis? E0 pay aif 6:15:19. rmsuuzibic incurred by the Murugagec in animating or Securing 0r satiezmatmg Eu Eiffeltii?t {he 921' any part therm? :I'sz?lbmiing 0r alte?'wmg 2?0 dcihmj Lin," prmriiy 131? {his against an}! Hm e133? (m {be Rea! Emma unwass. this Mmigag? ?8 119mm maria: subjcm any 5m?) Eicn {32? am?m 3E1 cums incurred is $316 [brain-sum (Him; A?iurigugv, e?ii cr under 1116 efsaie (remained imam, or by ?ying? m" {Em gi?crce mun jurigd?uii'm The Full amnum msis incm?mj by the Ewmngagguz 3:251:11} be :2 1mm of?m Dem and Sinai? L19 by ibis The purchasvi? a: any such sad-es be nmiezz: rm mm: 30 the proper amphcai?m: EM pmc?iazsc money In Hm awn! stuff a mix: hmcundm?, like: Mu?gagcs, or {he offing? {Jam and my shad! ersu?cms: 112:: purchaser far and in me hams: ofth Morigagm a dead :9 {he Rea} Estates. Mertgugm? wa?vca ail righisz hunmsimd {Exampiim} in the Rani Estate and relimqumhma nil righis m? waves}; and drawer in the Real 133mg: Piumi singuizt: wards azacai Iaarmiu designatc {Em undersigned 51m}? he maximum! [0 re: :0 the maker 03' i'nu?zers 05? this Mo?gagc, winilimr mm {13' more natural pmsacma AH covenant; and :nzz?ecmcu?s} herein. made by me undursigncd 33ml! bimi the heirs, jitI?SGIml fCQI?SS?iliailiVE?J, and sagsigug cf the Lindm?signmi, and ever}: Opt!sz and privihfgiz herein reserved or smzmed :0 the Mortgagec, $11sz mum 132:: hiilf??i Mme and :ma??gn's. i?v?Emigngm agrees; mm ?fth: g2r20 :5ij IIle And you dog that ditch by hand with a Originally. Okay. Did you ever use any heavy mm Yes. machinery? Yes. What did you use? I didn't use ahythihg. You had a contractor to mm Okay. Yeah, I had a contractor. You?ve this question once. This was before the culvert was put in, though? A, At the same time the culvert was put in. The ditch was deepened? A No, it was sloped better. Using a backhoe? A No. What did they use? A A front~ehd load mm a mm a Ford tractor or something like that with a Me with a frontwehd HENDERSON ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS, INC. PO. BOX 2263, MOBILE, AL 36652 (251) 694?0950 (888) 557-2969 DOCUMENT96 MICHEAL ERVIN HOLLIS 115 MR. BLACKBURN: If he wants to break it up into two parts, that?s okay with me. BY MR. WILLIAMS: What utilities are you aware of south of the columns on Beecher Street? All of themm Okay. What do they consist of? Water, electricity, and sewer. And how are you aware of that? I watched them he put down. When was that? 1999. Who put them in? City of Fairhope. Water, sewer, and electricityWater and sewer. At that point in time I am almost positive that the other electrical company that Fairhope bought the electrical from me oh, wait a minute. No, no, no. No, I I'm almost positive, yeah, all of it. Water and sewer goes all the way down Beecher Street to your residence the culmdemsac? HENDERSON ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS, INC. P.O. BOX 2263, MOBILE, AL 36652 (251) 694-0950 (888) 557-2969 DOCUMENT 96 MICHEAL ERVIN HOLLIS A. No, no, no, no, no. They put them ee they started up here at Tommy's house, Little Tommy?s houee. Thie is North Beecher Street now? A North Beecher Street. No, it?s all one Beecher. Yen We you can't find North Beecher Street or South Beecher Street. It?s one Beecher Street. I'm just trying to explain for the of the record, because you?re referring to Defendents' 7. A It Starts We it Starts at Tommy?e heuee and it came all the way down to w? we put a stub here. We put You say "we" now. A Oh, oh. Excuse me. You're going to Me A The city. We make me be preciee. I need you to be precise as well. A The city pet a stub here. You can go out there and look at them. They?re there. A stub here. A stub for me. A stub here. A stub here. A stub here. A stub here. And a stub there. And you're pointing to various locations en Defendents? HENDERSON ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS, INC. P.0. BOX 2263, MOBILE9 AL 36652 (251) 694-0950 (888) 557-2969 DOCUMENT96 MICHEAL ERVIN HOLLIS ll7 A Yes. They put them on lots m~ here, I can give you the lot numbers. Ihey put them on Tommy Faust WW well, Tommy Faust, Jr.'s was already there. They tied into his. They put them on Lot 8, 5, 3. I think that's a 6. 7. Boris Callies' lot on North Beecher, as you call it. Paula Jo B?Olive's lot on Beecher Street, and Peggy Sagah?s lot, which is now owned by Bobby Faust. And oh the lot that's owned by the brothers Faust on, next to the south of Joe Faust. What is a stub or stubeout? A, That's where you tie in for a house to be built. Okay. So what all is entailed with a stubeout? What?s it look like? A Well, there?s a place for water meters. There's a place for the electricity to come up out of the groehd, and there's a place to tie into the sewer. And all those locations you just listed as stubwouts me A thhuh. mm you're saying that water, sewer, and electricity are on all of those locations oh the stubwouts w~ HENDERSON ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS, INC. RO. BOX 2263, MOBILE, AL 36652 (251) 694-0950 (888) 557-2969