Neighbors Oppose Proposed Town Home Project

Fairhope, Alabama

 



‘BAYTOWN PUD’

Residents from the adjacent Rolling Oaks neighborhood showed up at the May Planning Commission meeting en masse to oppose a new proposal to constrict 162 townhomes on 16.5 acres at the corner of Bishop and Dyer Roads in east-central Fairhope.

Many worried about increased traffic and storm water runoff since their neighborhood is downstream, in the Fly Creek watershed.

Others thought it did not comply with the city’s current comprehensive growth plan; the city’s planning staff also objected due to parking and other technical issues.

(Only about half of the Rolling Oaks neighborhood is within city limits.)

TABLED UNTIL FUTURE MEETING

Planning commissioners Art Dyas and Lee Turner pointed out to the group that since the project is outside of city limits in the county where there is currently no land use zoning, the commission has very limited control over what gets built there.

In this case however, since the owner, Carolyn Gill Koch (Trustee), is currently asking for a PUD and concurrent annexation into the city, the city council could turn down the request, but it may be resubmitted later as just a MOP (Multiple Occupancy Project) and approval would be likely if all technical requirements are met.

Larry Smith of SE Civil Engineers told the commission the owner would prefer “to be part of the city” and pay the estimated “$500K impact fees” associated with the development (they could not be collected if the property is developed outside). There would be no city property tax on the individual unit owners either if they remain outside. (City impact fees may be used for fire, police and recreation purposes.)

Smith requested the matter be tabled to allow time to work out solutions to the issues raised during the meeting.

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REDO COMING

Referring to the failure of the commission’s effort last year to restrict unwanted growth along nearby US 98, commissioner Dyas invited the group to participate in the upcoming update of the comprehensive growth plan that could result in more influence in areas outside of city limit.

A $600K BP RESTORE grant was secured for the upgrade; it is expected to get started next year.

 

 

Dyer Road Site


Comments

Anonymous said…
Wouldn't matter if it's inside or outside city limits... everything gets approved. Those units are ugly too...packing it in as much as possible. The impact fees and property taxes won't come close to offsetting the negative impacts of developments like these. So sad what is happening to Fairhope thanks, in part, to a rubber-stamp planning commission.
Anonymous said…
There is no zoning outside city limits hence the property owners may build whatever he wants too. There is zoning inside cl's and much more control.
Anonymous said…
When is he city going to get serious about building a second sewer plant .Wake up an smell the growth, it may not smell good .
Anonymous said…
I really think it would not be hugely expensive for the city to buy some properties just outside city limits and resell them with stipulations limiting density. We can at least slow and better control what is just outside our borders. I also do not see why the county cannot place zoning restrictions on properties close to municipalities. It is a matter of will. It seems this outside city limits leverage play has gone on for a long time and no one has even discussed ways the city can partially regain control. The city has good finances presently and a few million bucks might do wonders. The property could well resell at a profit given the forecasts.
Anonymous said…
Lets start a rotating residency. Those that have lived here awhile move away making room for those who are moving here. If we start with all the complainers it won't need to be a long program.
Anonymous said…
Right on ! Outside the box, but the idea could work. The status quo has not worked.
1 good guy said…
Bishop Road needs to be connected up to Highway 104!
Anonymous said…
Lower density is too expensive. need some affordable housing here badly!
Anonymous said…
"Lower density is too expensive. need some affordable housing here badly!"

High density is too expensive...for our schools, our police and fire, and our overall quality of life (e.g. commute times).

Moreover, low density and unaffordable are not synonymous, nor are high density and affordable.

Anonymous said…
Blah...blah...blah... Money Talks!
Anonymous said…
I guess there are no easy solutions. One answer struck me. The outside the city limits leverage play. That keeps happening. Isn’t there a way to stop it ? Is there a reason Baldwin County cannot place any zoning around Fairhope ? I honestly do not get it.
Publisher said…
This is within Baldwin County planning district 17. County citizens living there will have to vote to enact zoning in their district. The county cannot impose zoning there without consent of residents.
Anonymous said…
take alook around. any open field you see now will be filled with houses in 50 years.