Stonebridge residents speak at hearing

Clarion Top News

Wednesday, 21 August 2024 08:59

The much anticipated public hearing was held last week regarding the rezoning of 50 acres in the Stonebridge Subdivision. Developers have proposed rezoning the property from R-1 to R-3. However, there has been much opposition to the rezoning by residents of Stonebridge. The hearing was packed with residents of Stonebridge and other citizens of Scottsboro.

City Council President Richard Bailey explained that those against the rezoning would be given three minutes to speak. The developer was then given time to address any concerns. Bailey also explained that citizens could email City Clerk Whitney Phillips with any additional concerns for seven days after the hearing.

Austin Weddington was the first to speak during the meeting. Wedding stated that the City of Scottsboro’s slogan is “Someplace Special.” He reiterated that Stonebridge was also someplace special and, “We don’t want it to become was someplace special.”

Weddington proposed that the city council say no to rezoning but negotiate with the property owner in order for him to develop the property as an R-1 subdivision.

Weddington stated that this proposal would be a “win for everyone,” stating that the city can get some much needed housing added while Stonebridge won’t have the issue of overflowing traffic due to less homes being developed through R-1, as well as maintaining the current “feel” of the neighborhood.

“The new section would match the rest, it won’t affect everyone’s property values. If the new section stays R-1, the neighborhood would support it. We support the growth. We support building, not the rezoning. David Patrick would get to finish what he started and sell the property. The city council gets the added housing. Scottsboro gets the taxes. Lastly, we already have R-3 housing going in on Phillips Drive and Gant Hill Road just down the street from us. We need R-1 through R-6 housing. Also, it would be good to have a variety in the city for people to choose from. If you build it, they will come,” Weddington said.

Tony Beal then spoke. Beal explained that the neighborhood had a “hometown” feel and that was why he, his wife and in-laws chose to live in Stonebridge. “Our neighborhood is one in which people can be seen walking the streets with one another, along with their children and pets. Children can be seen playing in the front yards. Neighbors can be seen conversing with one another. It is a neighborhood that will change in the feeling safeness if the zoning is changed through the traffic and the water,” Beal said. Beal stated that he works in Madison and makes the drive there for work every day. He says that others, similar to him, live in Stonebridge yet choose to make the drive out of the area for work. He also says that there are younger adults that work with him who want what they have in Stonebridge. “They want a yard. They want a house where the kids can play,” Beal said.

Mike Kirkland stated that the change from R-1 to R-3 could affect the amount of rainwater the lower areas would have to deal with. Kirkland then cited Alabama state law, saying that “the upper land owner may alter the flow of surface water to improve its property so long as it does not unduly burden and damage the property of the lower owner by increasing volume and velocity of the surface order dispersed,” with the only exception being in “exceptional circumstances” after a jury considers the issue. Kirkland also reported that Jackson County receives an average of 50 inches of rain annually, equating to over 68 million gallons of water on 50 acres. Kirkland requests no change to the current zoning ordinance in addition to an environmental impact study being done for any future developments.

Ron Bryant then spoke, echoing Kirkland’s concern of how this development and rezoning will negatively impact the water, also speaking about how the developers seemingly have not laid out any definitive plans and that they seemingly “change each week.”

Gary Maddux spoke to the council, saying that while he does not live in Stonebridge, he is adjacent to it and therefore interested in what is being proposed. Maddux also believes the situation to have crossed a line. “It has gone way too far. It has gotten personal and people have gotten their feelings hurt. We’ve got neighbors against neighbors, citizens against citizens. That is not what was intended. For my part, if I have said anything that has offended you or posted anything that offended you or anyone in the audience, I apologize,” Maddux said. “Sometimes the redneck just creeps right out.” Maddux referred to a 1700 square foot home that would fit the R-3 zoning, stating that it would cost $357,000. He said that if you were to put $20,000 on a down payment and finance it for 30 years, the payment would be about $2,851. Compared to an R-1 house, which would cost $2,837. “Less than $260 per month to get an R-1 house with a normal yard,” Maddux said. “I’ve not heard one person say we’re against R-1 housing. We respect Mr. Patrick’s right to develop that, it’s just we don’t respect changing the rules in the middle of the game,” Maddux said.

Jim Olyniec spoke. During his time, he briefly went through his knowledge of rezoning, with 20 years of experience on the planning commission. “Rezoning requests are the most controversial to come before the planning commission. Rezoning requests from R-1, the most restrictive, to anything else is even more controversial and that’s why we’re here tonight. Do not make zoning within neighborhoods is a lesson I learned from Norm. Great care should be exercised to protect the property and home values of people who have bought homes in the neighborhood. We want to focus on property values since for most of us in this room, our home is our biggest investment,” Olyniec said. Olyniec also said that with a smaller home on a smaller lot being next door to the R-1 homes as requested, the property value of the R-1 homes would fall simply because buyers would seek out the less expensive one.

Freddie Tidmore spoke to the council. Tidmore said that he hopes the city council does not misinterpret their passion over this rezoning issue for disrespect, also saying that the past few weeks have left them confused over what has taken place. “We’ve been confused as to why our beautiful, peaceful neighborhood has been singled out when rezoning by alternate sites were available. We’ve been confused as to why the rezoning issue was carried forward after the Scottsboro Planning Commission denied the request by JN Investments and the same rezoning request on June 4. We’ve been confused with why our city needs 266 new R-3 houses in a two-mile radius. The number of homes that, if occupied by four members in each home, would amount to the population growth of 6.8%, 10 times the city’s growth rate at this time,” Tidmore said. In closing, he stated that again that they are not against building R-1 houses, just opposed to rezoning and building R-3 houses. “In a report published by the Alabama League of Municipalities titled Zoning in Alabama, it states that the goal of municipal zoning ordinances is to lessen the congestion in the streets, to provide safety from fire, to provide adequate light and air, to prevent overcrowding of the land, to facilitate adequate provisions for transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks and other public requirements, as well as to conserve the value of the building. We would ask you, the city council, to understand that we feel that we should have a say, and that say should be no to rezoning our neighborhood,” Tidmore said.

David Patrick, the owner of the property then spoke. Patrick explained that he has tried four separate times over 19 years to add to Stonebridge with the R-1 housing. Each time, the plans were denied by the Planning Commission.

“I have tried four times to get this done as an R-1, just like I said,” Patrick said. “When the potential developers contacted me and suggested to try R-3 zoning and see how it works out and what I have seen online, they offer a great product and one thing that they have brought to it is a solution to the water problem.”

Finally the developers spoke. They went over their general plan for the development, saying that the development would result in around 150 houses being built, with a hard number being unavailable to gage due to the need to deal with the water issue. Developers stated that they plan to build these houses in three different phases, resulting in approximately 50 homes each phase, estimating 10 months per phase and a start date of Fourth Quarter 2024, should the rezoning pass. They believe that their phased development approach will allow for them to identify and correct any issues that come up, whether it be drainage, traffic or another issue.

Developers explained that R-1 housing is simply harder to sell in 2024, noting how 65% of new construction in 2023 was on lots less than 9000 square feet, with 40% even being below 7000 square feet. The lot size of 60’x150’ from R-3 would result in a 9300 square feet lot.

Developers also stated that homeowners are looking for smaller homes as well, with the average size house started in 2023 being the lowest in the last 13 years. Large lot building has gone down to 9% in 2023 according to the National Association of Home Builders.

Developers addressed the drainage issues that have been cited as a concern from Stonebridge homeowners. They first said that this property is lower than the existing properties in the neighborhoods, stating that drainage goes through properties now, believing that one of the things they may be suffering from is an incomplete drainage system. The developers believe that the development can continue the flow of water downstream, towards the river, again bringing up that they will inevitably lose lots to solve this drainage issue.

In closing, they talk about the commonalities many of these projects share by surrounding neighborhoods. Homeowners are constantly concerned about potential traffic, drainage and property values. While they can’t answer every question asked due to engineering work needing to be done before they can be answered, they know that these concerns can be addressed, although water always flows down, their property is below and that they can “somehow” get that water in the river.

Bailey stated that there must be a 15-day wait for a vote due to Alabama state law. With that, Bailey announced that this item will be on the September 9, 2024 City Council meeting agenda.