Planning commission continues rezoning case for potential shooting training facility

The Shelby County Planning Commission saw a packed house at its first meeting of the month. A crowd of more than 60 gathered at the commission’s June 4 meeting, both in support and against of cases on the agenda.

A majority of the crowd was present to hear the third and final case of the night, regarding a rezoning request for a property off of Roper Cemetery Road. The property is located in unincorporated Shelby County southeast of the Chelsea Ridge subdivision, less than a mile from the neighborhood’s entrance.

The request was submitted by former Navy SEAL Jared Hudson, the owner of the 40-acre property and CEO of The Shooting Institute, a firearms training organization that offers training throughout the U.S., according to its website. Hudson requested rezoning the property from A-1 to A-1 SD in order to accommodate a private shooting/military/law enforcement training facility, a use which is not permitted under the A-1 zoning. While a private property owner can legally fire legally owned firearms on their own property, according to planning commission staff, A-1 zoning does not allow for a business operation on the property. The special district would allow for the training facility to exist and operate as a business.

Principal Planner Kristine Goddard said the planning commission had received letters in support of and in opposition to the rezoning prior to the meeting, and that the case was in front of the commission due to the property not being in compliance with zoning.

Development Services first heard of the training facility in February 2018, after receiving calls from people with concerns about shooting activity and an advertised training class on the property. The business has ceased operation since receiving notice that they were out of compliance, Hudson said.

If the special district was approved, Hudson said the “general characteristics” of the property would remain the same. It would be mainly undeveloped, according to the application, but would have the potential for future permanent structures. 

“We’re trying to zone my business to be able to operate and collect money for our services on the property,” Hudson said.

On the property, which is a former mining facility, Hudson would conduct training operations for military, police and civilians, he said, and shooting and training would take place within the lower area of the property, which has walls of dirt that are 60-100 feet high.

During the staff report, Goddard noted there were concerns about noises coming from the property as well as its proximity to existing and potential residential developments.

“Chelsea is one of our fastest growing cities, so there is concern at the staff level about the expansion of Chelsea and development within Chelsea. Chelsea Ridge itself has additional phases that will be constructed over time,” Goddard said.

The closest residence is 1,848 feet away, and the next two closest properties are 2,106 and 4,022 feet away, Goddard said.

Following Goddard’s presentation, Hudson addressed some of those concerns and others he said he had heard from the community.

Regarding safety, Hudson said the facility would be a professional space and would require that individuals wait 12 hours between consuming an alcoholic beverage and shooting. 

The fact that the space is an old mining facility, within deep holes, adds to safety, Hudson said, because all shooting would take place within those holes. While “you hate to say something’s impossible,” Hudson said, it would be extremely difficult for a shot to be fired in a manner that it would leave the range rather than go into one of the berms.

Regarding noise concerns, Hudson said he took a decibel meter into the Chelsea Ridge neighborhood to see if shots at the range would register. While you could hear the firearms, he said, the noise did not register any higher than other ambient noises in the neighborhood, such as A/C units turning on or individuals completing housework.

There were also several individuals who spoke in favor of granting the rezoning, including a member of Brock’s Gap in Hoover who said he believes The Shooting Institute’s training facility would bring in less people than a membership-based shooting range such as Brock’s Gap and would retain a safe environment, all the while being farther away from residential areas. 

Others, including former Vestavia Hills Police Department Capt. Kevin York, spoke in favor of the high-quality training offered by Hudson and his company.

“They’ve covered every aspect of running a school of this type, from noise abatement to safety to professionalism,” said York, who retired from VHPD in 2017. “… We sent several officers to it [the training], and I’d send more if I was still working.”

Those who spoke against the rezoning noted the impact the facility could have on development in the area, the potential danger it poses to children and others in the area and the noise. Attorney Jesse Evans, representing Chelsea Ridge Estates, said there was an individual who was under contract to buy a home in Chelsea Ridge but would leave that contract if the rezoning passed. That individual also spoke to the planning commission and asked about securing the property. While those participating in training would be professionals, he asked what would be done to prevent teenagers or irresponsible individuals from getting onto the property.

Another resident, who lives off County Road 49, said the shooting will wake his daughter up at night and that the facility has limited access to Roper Cemetery. Others noted concerns about decreasing property values or decreasing the ability to sell their home. One Chelsea Ridge resident, who said she “lost someone very close to me from an accidental shooting,” said she was terrified of the noise of gunfire.

“I am asking and begging you to please not let this happen,” she said.

In response to the concerns brought up at the meeting, Hudson noted that while people brought up concerns about the shooting and noise, some of that has taken place when TSI was not under operation. He also presented the planning commission with a document from an appraiser that said the proximity of a shooting range, giving the example of Brock’s Gap, does not have an affect on property values.

Hudson also highlighted that many people opposed to the facility said they “appreciate what we’re doing,” noting that he believed the training could help keep individuals safe in the case of an active shooter situation.

“We’re conducting this training so that … we at least have a place that better prepares our first responders, not only our first responders, but also our civilians. … If everybody thinks its a good idea but we’re in the wrong place, where should it be?” he said.

Hudson also said that if the rezoning was approved, there were plans to secure the facility with fencing and potentially other barriers, as well as locked gates and no trespassing signs.

Following more than two hours of conversation, Hudson asked individuals in favor of the rezoning and training facility to stand up. While around 16 individuals stood, compared to just over a dozen who remained seated, several individuals had left the meeting at that time. 

By the end of the meeting, there was no formal up or down vote. Following a motion by Commissioner Bill Kinnebrew, the planning commission voted to continue the case to its Aug. 6 meeting. The reason for the motion, Kinnebrew said, was because there were not enough guidelines for commissioners to understand exactly what they were approving with their support. Commissioner Bob Land also brought up this concern. 

Special districts, Land said, are supposed to include conditions under which the property can operate, and he believed what was included in the request was insufficient. 

After unanimously voting in favor of the continuance, Commission Chair Jim Davis told Hudson that they would present him with the commission’s concerns so that those questions could be addressed. He also asked to set up a time to view the facility in person.

The first case of the night, regarding a rezoning on Cahaba Valley Road, also drew a lot of discussion, as well as more than a dozen individuals in opposition. 

Moiz Fouladbakhsh of Parade Home Builders Inc. requested that 12 acres be rezoned from A-1 to E-2 in order to eventually allow the development of 15 lots ranging in size from 20,000 square feet — the smallest allowed lot size in E-2 zoning — to 41,743 square feet. 

Of the 12 acres, more than 4 acres are within flood plain or flood way, leaving about 8.27 acres to be developed. In her report, Goddard noted that these plans were revised from an initial request by the property owner, which had been continued from the commission’s April 2 meeting. The new plans included fewer lots and left all development outside of the flood plain.

The proposed 15 lots would start smaller on the roadway and then grow larger as they approached the back of the subdivision, according to the maps provided. The zoning and proposed layout, Goddard said, was consistent with surrounding uses including several R-1 subdivisions (which require lots of at least 15,000 square feet in size) and larger lots in neighboring Indian Springs.

Fouladbakhsh said they plan to construct custom homes in the subdivision, which would fit in with the landscape rather than require grading. While one individual whose home was just completed by Fouladbakhsh said he wanted to speak in favor of his work, there were also several individuals who spoke against.

Wade Richardson, an attorney representing several property owners along Cahaba Valley Road, all of which had multi-acre lots, said his clients were concerned about traffic, the potential increase in traffic accidents and speculation on property values. He asked for a moratorium on developments with “small lots” along Cahaba Valley Road, at least until the road was widened.

Other concerns included flooding in the area and the new development’s proximity to Heardmont Park. 

After more than an hour of discussion, the commission voted 4-2 to rezone the property from A-1 to E-1. Commissioners Samuetta Nesbitt and Amy Smith voted in opposition. 

While the initial request was to rezone to E-2, which allows smaller lots compared to E-1’s requirement of 1 acre lots or larger, Land motioned for an E-1 rezoning. Previously in the discussion, Fouladbakhsh said he was asking for E-2 zoning to allow more flexibility in the development. Once the motion was made by Land and seconded by Davis, the applicant was not asked about the change to E-1.

Based on the E-1 zoning, a maximum of 12 lots, rather than the proposed 15, could be placed on the property, but the existence of the flood plain on the property could potentially limit the developable area.

The property owner will now be able to come before the planning commission with plans for the property, including a preliminary plat, which accommodates the new zoning. Or, if not satisfied with the planning commission’s decision, the applicant can appeal.

Also at the meeting, the planning commission also voted to unanimously approve a variance for a property in Shoal Creek. The property owners requested to reduce the front yard and golf course setbacks from 100 and 75 to 70 and 64 feet, respectively. The change in setbacks was supported by the Shoal Creek Architecture Review Committee and Board of Directors, according to letters provided to the commission.