The Square 1907 project in Covington has been sent back to the planning commission for more work after the City Council could not agree on whether or not to approve proposed changes to the development.

The original project was proposed to be three story buildings with commercial establishments on the first floor and residential units on the second and third floors.

The commercial proposed is not true commercial but rather coffee shops and delis and office buildings. Fighting to keep it alive in a struggling economy, developers scaled back the project already once in April of this year, garnering permission to reduce the buildings to two stories if necessary.

The developer, Small Town Developers, LLC. is now requesting permission to scale it down again; this time to allow one-story buildings. Attorney Paul Mayronne said his client also wants to be able to change the residential-commercial arrangement to allow for the mix to be horizontal rather than vertical.

However, the developer is still unable to present the City Council with a definite plan for the development.

Mayronne offered up a lot of possibilities Tuesday night but offered very little promises, frustrating council members.

He said his client would consider give back a variance to building in the five-foot setback they were previously granted as well as reduce parking and square footage.

However, he would not promise any of those things and could not provide a plan, which should them doing any of those things.

“The truth of matter is as we sit here and they sit there is they do not have a final concept,” Councilman Lee Alexius said. “Until they get some finality in their design they cannot commit to that (giving back the 5 feet).”

The developers conditional use permit on the property, which is located at the corner of Tyler Street and 19th Avenue, expires in April, giving developers a very small window to get these items ironed out.

“This is supposed to be a planned combined unit development,” Mayor Candace Watkins said. “That means there is a plan drawn on a piece of paper. What they are asking for is there is no new plan here. There is not a plan here for the council or p and z to consider amending. Until a plan comes back to planning and zoning this is a waste of time.”

Watkins said she is growing even more frustrated with the developer who seems to be moving in that direction of developing the land in a way that would have been allowed under the former zoning, making all of the work the city has done on this project a waste of time.

“I suppose I sound frustrated because I spent a little political capital on this because people were against this and I supported it,” she said.

The vote to allow the proposed changes failed with Trey Blackall, Matt Faust and Alexius voting in favor and Marty Benoit, Clarence Romage and Mark Sacco voting against.

This did not make Blackall happy.

“I guess we passed up an opportunity to have one story buildings and now we are stuck with two and three story buildings,” he said. “That would have reduced density, which is what we thought was the goal three years ago when we started on this project.”

The council voted to rescind the vote twice and both times it failed to pass. The council ultimately decided to send the issue back to the planning commission and requested they review it again and send it back when the developer has presented an actual plan on paper.

In a separate issue, the council was unable to come to a consensus on an amendment that would allow commercial developers to begin construction on their first commercial building prior to finishing work on the development’s infrastructure.

This amendment is closely related to an ordinance that allows up to three model homes to be built in a subdivision prior to the subdivisions roads and infrastructure being installed.

It came about after Franco’s, who is developing a piece of land near Airport Road requested permission to begin construction on its health club, the largest of the commercial buildings to be included in the development, prior to the completion of the development’s infrastructure.

This would allow the two items to be completed simultaneously.

However, some council members had concerns that constructing a building before the area has water service and proper roads would be a fire concern, and construction a large building before drainage is complete would cause issues for surrounding neighbors.

The item was tabled. It will come back before committee, where the wording will be worked on before it appears back before the full council.