✕
☰

Hoover council denies rezoning for 55+ community off Patton Chapel Road

by

Map provided by city of Hoover

The Hoover City Council on Monday night voted 5-1 to deny a request to rezone 12 acres on Patton Chapel Road to accommodate a 40-house subdivision for people ages 55 and older.

The D.R. Horton homebuilding company wanted to get the land zoned for the subdivision prior to the land being annexed into the city, but most council members objected to their plan.

Councilman Mike Shaw said that because the council was also being asked to annex the land, the bar was high in terms of what kind of use is acceptable for that property.

Some council members have been reluctant to annex land for more home development, for fear of causing a negative impact on Hoover schools.

Shaw said that even though the developer was promising to create covenants that would prohibit anyone below the age of 18 from living in the neighborhood permanently, he was concerned about the longevity of such an arrangement.

Once all the lots are sold, it could be hard to control who buys houses on the resale market, Shaw said. There are questions about who would enforce the covenants regarding age restrictions, he said.

Plus, Shaw said he was concerned the development doesn’t have enough amenities that cater to senior adults. The other development in Hoover that is restricted to people ages 55 and older, Danberry at Inverness, has many more amenities particular to older adults, he said.

“This was just a very dense, little neighborhood,” Shaw said.

Since the City Council tabled a decision on this matter at its July 17 meeting, D.R. Horton agreed to eliminate two of the original 42 housing lots and build a community clubhouse instead. The development also would have had sidewalks on both side of the streets to allow neighbors to easily connect with one another, D.R. Horton representative Rhett Loveman said.

But that wasn’t enough for the council.

Councilman John Lyda said he just didn’t think this development was in the best interests of the city. Plans for the development kept changing, and he didn’t believe a development of that nature was appropriate in the heart of the city, he said.

John Greene was the only councilman to vote in favor of the zoning change. Councilman Derrick Murphy was absent.

Now that the zoning request has been denied, the 12 acres will remain zoned for agricultural, single-family and commercial use in unincorporated Jefferson County.

The owner of the property, which had a pending sale with D.R. Horton, is the Chapel Farms Holding Co., which is made up of four sisters in the Douglas family who grew up on the property: Amanda Douglas Daily, Alma Douglas Gaudette, Sarah Elizabeth Douglas Martin and Dorothy Douglas Taft.

The sisters also own five acres of land along Old Columbiana Road that the council had agreed to rezone for commercial use, if the property were later annexed into the city.

However, now that the residential part of the plan has been denied, the sisters withdrew their request for annexation for any of the property.

Flash flooding problems

In other business Monday night, the City Council continued decisions on whether to spend $101,000 to repair drainage problems on four pieces of private property and authorize city workers to remove a tree contributing to a draining problem on a fifth piece of private property.

City Attorney Phillip Corley said cities normally are not allowed to fix drainage problems on private property. However, the Alabama Supreme Court and Alabama attorney general’s office have held that cities may perform drainage repairs on private property if the council declares the work to have a “public purpose,” Corley said.

The council may make such a declaration if the work being done has a direct benefit for a significant amount of people and not just a remote, theoretical benefit, Corley said. The City Council has the authority to determine that, he said.

Lyda said city officials have no clue how many other drainage problems exist on private property in the city that affect a significant amount of people. He’s concerned that $101,000 is just “the tip of the iceberg,” he said.

It’s better not to take a bite out of the apple until city officials know better the extent of the problems that exist, Lyda said.

Several residents spoke to the council during the public participation part of the agenda, saying they have drainage problems in their neighborhoods as well. Some wanted city assistance to fix the issues.

But Pete Mosley, a resident on Heather Lane, said he’s concerned about the council spending public money to fix drainage problems on private property. There are hundreds of people in the city in the same situation, Mosley said. “You’re talking about a bottomless pit moneywise,” he said.

Five council members voted to continue the drainage issues indefinitely until the council president decides to bring it back up, with only Councilman Casey Middlebrooks opposing the delay.

The council also on Monday:

Back to topbutton