Hoover zoning board recommends new subdivision next to Greystone

The Hoover Planning and Zoning Commission on Monday night recommended the City Council pre-zone 36 acres next to Greystone for a new housing development, despite opposition from some Greystone residents.

That decision came after the developer, Alan Howard, made changes in his designs that would decrease the number of homes from 97 to 81. Howard also increased the minimum width of the lots from 65 feet to 75 feet and added more buffer between his proposed subdivision and existing homes in the Greystone Founders community.

The property is not yet in the city of Hoover, but Howard has asked the City Council to annex it.

Howard’s annexation request failed to gain approval from the council’s Annexation Committee on Feb. 3 because no one would make a motion one way or the other. But April Danielson, an attorney for the city, said the annexation request is still pending.

Danielson noted that the request was heard only by the annexation committee and not the full council.

Charlie Beavers, an attorney who represented Howard, said the revised subdivision design would provide 2.2 lots per acre on average. That’s less dense than some other parts of the Greystone community, he said, noting that the Legacy Place subdivision is 2.7 homes per acre, while The Haven is 2.57 homes per acre and Linkside is 3.63 homes per acre.

Howard plans to make the lots that back up to the Greystone Founders community larger than other lots in his community. One of them is 36,000 square feet, he said.

He moved his planned cul-de-sacs an additional 60 feet away from existing homes to accomplish that, and he plans to leave 50 feet of undisturbed buffer between his development and lots with existing homes, he said.

Beavers said one-story houses would be at least 2,500 square feet, while 1.5-story and 2-story houses would be at least 2,800 square feet. The average house price would be about $600,000, he said.

Per an agreement with the existing landowner, the road leading to all the homes would be behind the gate for the Greystone Legacy community. Also, Howard has agreed to abide by covenants and architectural standards set for the Greystone Legacy community and pay dues to that homeowners association.

GREYSTONE COMMUNITY SPLIT

Residents of the Greystone community were split in their opinions of the proposed development.

Numerous residents, including officers of the Greystone Legacy homeowners association, voiced support for Howard’s plan.

Troy Wolkow, president of that association, said he thinks Howard’s subdivision will be a great addition to the neighborhood.

He particularly likes that the new homes would be required to meet the same covenants and architectural standards of the rest of the Greystone Legacy community, he said. That will provide some protection as to both how the homes are built and how they are maintained in the future, he said.

Alicia Huey, a former president of the Greystone Legacy association, said her association also needs the additional dues that will come from the new community, Without that, the association will have to increase the amount of its dues, she said.

Ray Fitzpatrick, an attorney representing the Greystone Residential Association (the homeowners association for the Greystone Founders community), said his association opposes the new development.

He argued that the density proposed for Howard’s community is too dense when compared with surrounding property. There are five estate lots right next to Howard’s property that are 1 to 2 acres each, and additional nearby residential properties average 3 or 5 acres per lot, Fitzpatrick said. An E-1 estate zoning would be more consistent with surrounding land, he said.

Fitzpatrick also argued that Howard had not submitted enough information to meet the requirements for the Planned Residential Development district zoning that he has requested. Such zoning requests require more detailed information about surrounding property, as well as proposed covenants and deed restrictions, Fitzpatrick said.

Fitzpatrick also argued that Howard’s pre-zoning request was invalid because his annexation request failed with the council’s Annexation Committee.

Hoover City Administrator Allan Rice, who sits on the Hoover Planning and Zoning Commission, asked Howard if he plans to submit this same plan to the Shelby County Planning Commission if his efforts to get annexed into Hoover fail. Howard said that would be an option for him.

Frank Paduch, a Greystone Founders resident whose property borders Howard’s proposed development, said there’s no way Shelby County would support this dense of a neighborhood. If Howard leaves the property in the unincorporated part of the county, he could only be allowed to build 40 homes or less, Paduch said.

Paduch also said Hoover’s new comprehensive plan, just approved by the planning commission last year, identified this particular property as having low value for annexation. Howard’s plan to fill in a flood plain also doesn’t help fulfill another goal of the comprehensive plan — to conserve natural resources, Paduch said. Approving Howard’s request would undermine the goals of the comprehensive plan, he said.

Jeremy Wright, who owns a vacant estate-sized lot next to Howard’s property, said he believes the wider lots and larger lots that Howard is now proposing next to existing homes are more palatable than what he originally proposed.

Also, he agrees with Howard that there isn’t enough demand in the market for larger lots right now.

COMMISSION REACTION

The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-1 in favor of Howard’s request, with Nathan Reed voting in opposition, Chairman Mike Wood abstaining and Councilman Mike Shaw absent.

Jason Lovoy, who made the motion to approve Howard’s zoning request, said he knew some people would be disappointed with that decision, but everyone knew something eventually would happen with that land and he doesn’t think requiring 1-acre lots is feasible in today’s market.

Also, he believes Howard is a reputable developer who lives in the area, has already built in Greystone and will produce a good product, he said.

Reed said he voted against the rezoning request because he thinks the commission should have asked the developer to work more with the community to find a more palatable solution. He believed more discussions were in order, he said.

He particularly was concerned that residents in the Greystone Founders community might be looking down on rooftops due to a difference in elevation, and he wasn’t satisfied with the answers he heard concerning that issue, he said.

The pre-zoning request now moves on the Hoover City Council. A public hearing with the Hoover City Council is scheduled for April 20.