1 of 3
Map courtesy of Shelby County Department of Development Services
Capstone 119 cottages map
Capstone Collegiate Communities is proposing to build 187 cottage rental homes off Alabama 119 across from the Outlook at Greystone apartment complex. The 29.9-acre site is outlined here in red. The cottages would be restricted to the 14.39 acres on the western side of Lee Branch, which flows through the property.
2 of 3
Layout courtesy of Nequette Arch
Capstone 119 cottages concept plan
Capstone Collegiate Communities is proposing to build 187 cottage rental homes off Alabama 119 across from the Outlook at Greystone apartment complex. The entire site is 29.9 acres, but the cottages would be restricted to the 14.39 acres on the western side of Lee Branch, which flows through the property.
3 of 3
Exhibit courtesy of Gonzalez Str
Capstone 119 cottages exhibit 8-5-20
Capstone Collegiate Communities is proposing to build 187 cottage rental homes off Alabama 119 across from the Outlook at Greystone apartment complex. The entire site is 29.9 acres, but the cottages would be restricted to the 14.39 acres on the western side of Lee Branch, which flows through the property.
On Monday night, The Shelby County Planning Commission tabled a vote on whether to rezone about 30 acres for 187 cottage rental homes along Alabama 119 across from The Outlook at Greystone apartment complex.
The proposal was met with significant opposition from residents of the Greystone community.
The wooded property sits about a mile north of U.S. 280, slightly north of the St. Vincent’s One Nineteen Health & Wellness center, to the east of the Greystone Founders community and a little south of the Calumet Meadow community.
A Birmingham-based development company called Capstone Collegiate Communities wants to rezone the 30 acres from a holding zone and general business district to an R-5 multiple-dwelling special district to accommodate 80 townhomes, 82 attached single-family dwellings and 25 detached single-family dwellings.
The development would have seven building types ranging from 676 square feet to 1,346 square feet and have one to three bedrooms, but all would be rental properties.
Jim Beatty, vice president for Capstone Collegiate Communities, said this type of development — new homes built for rent — is designed primarily for young professionals, empty nesters and families that relocate due to job changes.
Louis Nequette of Nequette Architecture said there is growing demand for rental properties other than traditional apartments. Young professionals often desire to live in a single-family residence but may not be able to afford to purchase one yet, he said.
Empty nesters often are ready to move from the large home in which they raised their children to one with less maintenance but may still prefer the look and feel of a single-family home over a traditional apartment, Nequette said.
Families that move due to job changes often need something quickly until they can get established and pick out the area of town in which they wish to purchase a home, but they also prefer the idea of a single-family residence versus an apartment, he said.
This cottage home and townhome development would have a neighborhood feel, and each house would have a private backyard with outdoor living space, Beatty said.
The homes would have 9-foot to 12-foot ceilings and smarthome technology, and the community would have valet trash service, professional on-site management, a clubhouse with a fitness center, a resort-style pool and green space to walk and exercise, Nequette said.
While the entire property is 30 acres, the development would be restricted to the 14.4 acres on the west side of Lee Branch, which flows through the middle of the property, said engineer Mark Gonzalez of Gonzalez Strength & Associates. The other 15.5 acres, most of which is in a floodway or floodplain and closer to the Greystone residential community, would be left natural, except the possibility of walking trails or passive recreational use, Gonzalez said.
That would mean the development would have a gross density of 6.25 homes per acre and a net density of 11.89 homes per acre, said Kristine Goddard, a planner with the Shelby County Department of Development Services.
Goddard said her department received three emails in support of this development but more than 80 comments in opposition from people in neighboring communities, and many of those were jointly signed by husbands and wives. Concerns ranged from the high density of the development to increased traffic, tree clearing, noise, decreased property values, stormwater detention and stream impediments.
Mary Sue Ludwig, a representative for the Greystone Founders community, said Greystone residents five years ago opposed a different plan for this piece of property, and they also don’t like this one for the reasons stated by Goddard.
There already are 1,200 apartments in the immediate vicinity, and traffic has become increasingly clogged along Alabama 119 as more are built, she said.
Troy Wolkow, president of the Greystone Legacy community, echoed those sentiments. While Alabama 119 recently was expanded between Greystone Way and U.S. 280, the portion of it north of that point was not meant to handle the high-density developments that are taking place, Wolkow said.
Also, while rental properties may look good when first built, they typically don’t several years down the road, Wolkow said. The residents of Greystone have been good tax-paying residents of Shelby County and consider Greystone to be a gem in north Shelby County, he said.
“We want to keep it that way,” Wolkow said. This development is “just not a good fit for that location. It might be for somewhere else, but not next to us.”
The Shelby County Highway Department recommended the zoning request be denied due to the high density and associated traffic it would bring. Alabama 119, during peak hours, already functions at an F service level, and this development, if approved as presented, would only exacerbate the problem, said John Slaughter, the highway department’s chief civil engineer.
Goddard said the developer submitted a traffic study and revised designs in recent days, but the planning department had not had time to review it.
Planning commissioners voted unanimously to table the rezoning request to give planning staff and the county highway department more time to review the traffic study and amended plans.
For the matter to come back up, the applicant must request the matter be brought off the table and set for another hearing. Nearby residents would be notified if that were to happen, Goddard said.
