Hoover planning commission denies U.S. Steel plan for 820 apartments a second time

by

The Hoover Planning and Zoning Commission tonight for the second time denied a request by U.S. Steel to subdivide 139 acres off Interstate 459 to make way for 820 apartments.

Planning commissioners and city engineers once again said U.S. Steel has not submitted plans that are complete enough to meet the city’s standards, despite assertions by U.S. Steel to the contrary.

U.S. Steel first submitted plans to subdivide the land — located on the south side of Interstate 459 between Preserve Parkway and the Patton Creek shopping center — in August. 

The planning commission heard the request in October and denied it, saying U.S. Steel was not providing enough information for the development, now being called Hidden Valley Apartments.

Brent Hitson, an attorney representing U.S. Steel, tonight told the planning commission that U.S. Steel could go ahead and develop the property as a single lot with 894 apartments but is willing to work with the city and reduce the number of allowed apartments to 820.

U.S. Steel also could develop the land with a private road but instead is willing to work with the city and develop it as a public road that eventually could connect with Chapel Lane, as desired by the city, Hitson said.

After the first denial in October, U.S. Steel tried to get on the commission’s November agenda for reconsideration. However, that application was denied because not enough copies were provided to the city and the application had been given to the city engineer’s office instead of the city clerk’s office, so it didn’t make the deadline for the November meeting, Hitson said.

U.S. Steel then got on the December agenda and asked the city to provide a list of the information the city needs to approve the plans. The city did not provide that until this past Thursday afternoon, Hitson said.

Representatives for U.S. Steel met with the city engineer’s office Friday afternoon and thought they had resolved the vast majority of the problems the city engineer’s office had raised, said Melinda Sellers, another attorney for U.S. Steel.

Hitson identified two issues on which the parties disagree.

First, the city has requested that U.S. Steel provide written documentation from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that U.S. Steel has received a permit to make adjustments to a stream bed that runs through the property in the way that U.S. Steel plans to do it.

The entire property is in a highly sensitive environmental area that includes tributaries that feed into Patton Creek and the Cahaba River, both of which are impaired streams, city officials said.

Any permit from the Army Corps of Engineers must include information about how these lots, when fully developed, would impact those waterways, city officials said.

An engineer for U.S. Steel has said the company already has a permit to alter the flow of water there but has changed its plans to be more friendly to the environment and was waiting to get the land subdivided before it applied for a new permit with the Corps of Engineers.

Hitson tonight said U.S. Steel contends that the city’s subdivision regulations do not require approval from the Army Corps of Engineers in advance.

Second, city engineers say U.S. Steel has provided only conceptual designs for site development and not plans that have been stamped and signed by a professional engineer licensed to do business in Alabama. The city wants more detailed plans, but U.S. Steel contends that such detailed plans are not required just to subdivide the land into three lots and build an access road.

U.S. Steel is not ready to build the apartments yet and is not asking for a building permit yet, Hitson said.

Assistant City Engineer Chris Reeves tonight said U.S. Steel has added some right turn lanes into its plans for the access road, as requested by the city two months ago, and shown proposed access points for the apartment buildings as requested. However, there are several issues that U.S. Steel has not addressed as requested, Reeves said.

Planning Commission Chairman Mike Wood offered to continue the case tonight to give U.S. Steel more time to work out issues with city staff, but U.S. Steel opted to go ahead and seek approval again tonight.

The planning commission voted 6-0-1 to deny the request. Commissioner Scott Underwood abstained, saying he was too close to the case but declining to give specifics when asked.

After the vote, Hitson said he was not sure what U.S. Steel will do next, now that its request has been denied twice. Attorneys for U.S. Steel had a court reporter present tonight to document the proceedings.

Billy Silver, an executive for U.S. Steel, declined to comment, referring all questions to the company’s public relations office in Pittsburgh.