By Sarah Stephens
Elmore Autauga News
Top Photo: This is the view of the property that has been rezoned, taken from Shady Drive. The 3.88-acre lot runs along Main Street and Graff Road.
At times, it was confusing to follow, but in the end, the Millbrook Council voted 3-1 to rezone 3.88 acres of land along Main Street and Graff Road Tuesday night. There was one abstention from the vote. The issue came up at the last regular meeting earlier in August but was tabled. The council heard from multiple neighbors in the area at the last regular meeting that had concerns about additional traffic, change in zoning from single family to duplexes and flooding issues from Coosada Creek. They were also concerned with changes that were originally proposed to Graff Road to meet up with Shady Drive. The landowner of the property at Hwy. 14 and Graff Road has intentions to build multiple duplexes on land that was formerly zoned for single family residential. It was decided to table the motion at the earlier meeting in August, to allow time for the residents and the developer to meet and work out any concerns.
At the work session this past Tuesday, the council had discussed the issue prior to the official meeting, explaining it would have to be brought off the table before a vote. Councilman Jimmy Harris updated those present that a meeting between area residents and the developer James Merritt was held last week. He reported that many concerns were resolved, and everyone left happy.
Later in the meeting, President Gay interrupted a conversation between councilperson Jimmy Harris and Jacquelyn Thomas. Harris was asking Thomas if she was OK with the vote and said it could remain tabled. President Gay reminded them they cannot ask how another council person will vote in a work session. Council members are allowed to voice their personal opinion in a work session.
In the official meeting, when it came time to discuss this issue again, Council President Gay asked for a point of privilege to allow anyone to come forward and talk about the project, whether for or against.
First up was the landowner and developer James Merritt.
“We listened to what the neighbor’s complaints were,” he said. “We went back and revised our plans and readjusted. We cut the density of how many units we are going to use. And we are not going to mess with Graff Road.”
Council President Gay asked Merritt to expand his information. Merritt said originally the plan called for 12 individual duplex buildings, but that has dropped to nine. He said there would be no changes to Graff Road.
“Our intersection of where we come out (of the development) is just going to align with Shady Drive,” Merritt said. “We heard what the neighbors’ concerns were on the creek. Our engineers have actually moved up our retention pond to get it off the creek a little bit more.”
Up next was Walker Allen Phillips, who has two houses, one on Graff Road and one on Shady Drive. She said in the meeting last week with the developer, they discussed a revision of the water line near her Graff Road property, and other concerns.
She approves reducing the number of buildings on the 3.88-acre property, and not changing the layout of Graff Road.
Lisa Davis, a Shady Drive resident, spoke next saying her two remaining concerns are traffic, and vehicles turning into the development. She is also concerned about the planned retention pond and said she would like assurances it will be maintained in the future.
At that time, Council President said, “What is the desire of the council on the tabled ordinance?”
There was no response from other council members. President Gay said, “If there is no motion, then it will remain tabled. Is there a motion?”
There was no response from the council.
“Hearing none, it remains tabled,” Gay said. “What that means for the people here is that the council will reconsider this at the next council meeting.”
He then moved on to other business before the council. We will have more articles coming on those agenda items.
During this time, Harris and Thomas seemed to be having a discussion as other resolutions were read. Their conversation could not be heard by the audience.
It appeared the meeting was coming to a close, and the floor was opened up to reports from council members and department heads before a final vote of all agenda items.
Councilman Jimmy Harris said, “I think we want to go back and revote on Ordinance Z 24-01 (The Merrit Property rezoning.)”
President Gay then explained to Councilman Harris the procedure to place the ordinance back on the agenda. Two votes were required. One to take the ordinance off the table and another to place it back on the agenda in order to be voted upon. This action was taken by a motion from Harris and a second from Thomas and then a vote of approval by the council. Then there was a motion passed to place it back on the agenda at the end, when official votes are taken.
Comments were then opened to the floor, and again Lisa Davis approached the podium. “I would like for someone to explain to me what just happened. Why did you untable the ordinance so that you could vote on it?” She said that when Gay had asked for a motion to vote on the issue, no one said anything.
President Gay said that because of the request and motion by Councilman Harris and Councilwoman Thomas for a vote to put the motion back on the table, it would be voted on at the end of the meeting, as it was added again to the agenda.
“Nobody spoke up. Nobody wanted it to be voted on. And then all the sudden after the Mayor leaves you decided that you wanted it to be voted on,” Davis said. “I am just asking, what changed in those 20 minutes? Did our testimony not matter, or our concerns not matter? You are just going to ignore our concerns and go ahead and vote on this?”
Harris addressed her saying, “Your concerns, they matter to us. Unfortunately, in any rezoning or any property that we do here, there is always going to be some pros and some cons. And unfortunately, when you get elected to sit up here you have to make tough decisions. A lot of times they are not going to be popular. And that is what we are going to do tonight.”
Lisa said she was worried about the dangers of the traffic and that area, and said, “I am just wondering how many people are going to be killed trying to turn in that intersection, trying to turn into three different areas.”
Davis said she is not opposed to the duplex development, but the additional traffic it could cause.
The vote on the resolution then resumed with Harris making a motion to approve the rezoning, seconded by Thomas. With a roll call vote, approving was Thomas, Harris and Jones. Opposing was Gay. Abstaining was Councilman Chris Bath.as he had business interest in the project.
When the meeting adjourned, the EAN approached the council and asked the same question Lisa Davis had asked. What changed between the first lack of response which tabled the ordinance, to the request to revote?
Harris said, “No comment,” as others remained silent. President Gay then explained that a request was made by Councilman Harris and seconded by Councilwoman Thomas for a motion to put the ordinance back on the table and place on the agenda to be voted upon. This action placed it in line for consideration.
Following the meeting, in the parking lot, Harris explained what had happened by saying “We dropped the ball.”
We will have more information about the proposed residential development in future articles.
The next Council meeting will be Tuesday, Sept. 10 at 10 a.m. with a work session at 9:30 a.m.
