[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6264439,"mediaKeyId","3096431-857c6a741cf485a02d040c8a03b415d8","parentId",3096431,"title","Votes at a glance: Key Planning and Zoning Commission actions from April 21, 2025","audioSeconds",6742,"startMs",193000,"endMs",6935000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3096431-857c6a741cf485a02d040c8a03b415d8&start=193&end=6935","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3096431-857c6a741cf485a02d040c8a03b415d8/thumbnail_193000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6264439/Tuscaloosa-City/Tuscaloosa-County/Alabama/Votes-at-a-glance-Key-Planning-and-Zoning-Commission-actions-from-April-21-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6264439-219b62554f43d5f9ecad33e70ba85356/orig.mp4?Expires=1771182253&Signature=es1aE-o~F0c0atGQA-4hecBq86dUrKpKcZNmWL2lQfbdiZaAumuH0t~Q9cRRUZpNaNIO-8KYk5YYRosVBKe9qTBT2iQvVlp86sbsRPQ7jRAp9OcWyX8~xABbf-arMq9psu65WXQrvCtn7ozvkUq~ToZAb-jV0iPKdBSO00WqZoMn8g79-P7C9aGy-nFuQODmnZqDfL1WxHXuE4ryGqZe9P35V4oR6Q09iH4R9Kzw4aRt7ef4KllqVi84Ce477sWkx3DefGJJ-9SdlCt0Hi7Imdc7kLk7MlYyTfayC8HWUbN8jqTV7HTLKeG7we4uRsXb8pCQg0VaVOdcWm-CMVVkpw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Tuscaloosa City, AL","date","2025-04-23T17:01:23.32Z","article","Approved items, continuances and procedural outcomes recorded by the Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission at its April 21, 2025 meeting.

Votes at a glance

- Consent agenda (S3625, S3925, SS4225): Approved on consent (no speakers). Outcome: approved.

- Continuance: S3725 (subdivision continuance requested by petitioner): Approved to continue. Outcome: postponed/continued.

- S2825 Wesley Place Condominiums (preliminary plat; 9 condominium units on ~0.65 acres at Wesley Place): Motion to approve passed. Outcome: approved.

- Annexation and rezoning — 605 New Watermelon Road / North River Crossings LLC (annex ~4.99 acres; rezone SFR-1 to GC): Annexation: approved; Rezoning: approved (rezoning passed with one recorded no vote). Next steps: revised traffic study, LDP submissions and fire-turnaround design to be completed during permit review.

- Z0925 (Ricky Sherrod; 2835–2837 Culver Road): Petitioner requested continuance after neighborhood concerns and staff clarification that NC zoning does not permit outdoor storage of monuments/vaults. Outcome: continued for staff coordination.

- Z1025 (Bill Lunsford / 1510 Seventeenth Avenue East): Rezoning from SFR-3 to GC approved. Outcome: approved.

- Brookwood Parkway annexation and rezoning (about 5.83 acres north of I-20 and west of Brookwood Parkway; petitioner Westervelt Realty): Annexation approved. Rezoning from SFR-1 to IH (Heavy Industrial) approved. Outcome: approved.

- S4325 Margin Subdivision (lot consolidation around 2712 Southside Drive; small annexation component): Annexation of sliver (0.15 acres) approved; rezoning of that sliver from SFR-1 to IG approved; subdivision plat approved. Outcome: approved.

- S3525 Snyder Acres No. 2 (resurvey / five lots on ~72.8 acres east of D Cunningham Road): Approved. Outcome: approved.

- S3825 Graco Addition (3-lot subdivision at 9601 Highway 69 South): Approved (minor plan revisions required at LDP/ALDOT submittal). Outcome: approved.

- S4025 Smeltzer Family Subdivision (two lots to place cell tower on separate lot at 6354 Sanders Ferry Road / 6420 First Street): Approved. Outcome: approved.

- S4125 Resurvey (lots 15 & 16 Block 407 TCIL — five-lot subdivision at 1002 Nineteenth Street / 1810–1812 Tenth Avenue): Approved with requirement to install sidewalk along Nineteenth Street at LDP. Outcome: approved.

Notes on procedure and next steps

- Several approved items require follow-up at the land-disturbance permit (LDP) and building-permit stages to resolve technical issues such as drainage, fire-apparatus access, sidewalk installation, ALDOT access and traffic-control measures.

- The Sherrod Culver Road rezoning request was continued to allow the petitioner to work with planning staff to resolve questions related to permitted storage, required buffers and lot access; staff emphasized that outdoor storage of monuments is not permitted in NC zoning.

- Annexations approved by the commission will proceed to the City Council as required by code for final municipal action when applicable (staff noted some items are final authority for the commission and some are recommendations to City Council depending on the case).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting - Apr 21, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission approved multiple annexations, rezonings and subdivisions, continued one rezoning request, and approved several subdivisions. This roundup lists each item, the outcome and next steps.","taxTitle","Tuscaloosa City, Tuscaloosa County, Alabama","taxId",4830,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6264444,"Petitioner withdraws rezoning request for Culver Road property after neighborhood objections over outdoor monument storage",1444,3446000,4890000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3096431-857c6a741cf485a02d040c8a03b415d8&start=3446&end=4890","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3096431-857c6a741cf485a02d040c8a03b415d8/thumbnail_3446000.jpg","/articles/6264444/Tuscaloosa-City/Tuscaloosa-County/Alabama/Petitioner-withdraws-rezoning-request-for-Culver-Road-property-after-neighborhood-objections-over-outdoor-monument-storage","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6264444-032a67dd18dcf768fc721b9ce7e30ab0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771182253&Signature=IFnd~i1F4n4kBcTDtsTc91FyA05vXdJjQVthfnbS5AGlWyPi48RxFOz9~Vtqu3YU-AelF~7szPypSDDdw78ttYY-JbXkXfsAI233FCDAdMAGtms-Cbrk6qlspisYffaJ9Z4ubQQ~oT6TAmmcmrEDHHioL1ubRCjYeFnXw3iJWXZAV~XBsptrV4rz9jjqZHfDQHqLt0BL3Sv5g8vIopf~O2qlL2nJLm0vbRqlF3aoVFUsVQNLwNNOG3GYczHGY8Ss7IXWFsEGD9I3sCIM3c3yivg9Me8oFPRU3UYZo0c2SraqGFlQYosZWHriKaRQaeUWNDCrJem4Ip06eIZr9oNWjA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Ricky Sherrod asked the Planning and Zoning Commission to continue his rezoning petition for two Culver Road parcels after residents objected to alleged outdoor storage of monuments and vaults and staff outlined regulatory constraints.

Sherrod — who identified himself at the hearing with his Northport address and said he operates a vault and monument business — explained he needed more storage and that one parcel is a \"deadlock property\" without direct access to Culver Road. Zach (staff) and other city staff clarified that neighborhood commercial (NC) zoning does not allow outside storage of monuments; any inventory would need to be kept inside a structure or in an accessory building that complied with code and buffering requirements.

Several neighbors spoke in opposition. Chandra Kirkman, who said she owns 2831 Culver Road, described repeated problems when vaults and monuments were left unsecured: \"My kids' bedrooms are on that side by that fence. They're terrified. They have nightmares. They have not slept in their rooms for almost a year.\" John Martin and Paul Rollins Jr., whose properties are adjacent, said they intended to keep the area residential and asked that the commission preserve setbacks and buffers.

Staff noted that NC zoning would require either a 40-foot landscape buffer or a 20-foot buffer paired with a masonry wall at least six feet tall where commercial uses abut residential property. Staff also said the petitioner could pursue accessory structures or expand the existing enclosed building to create indoor storage, but persistent outdoor display or storage of vaults on the parcel would remain a code-enforcement issue.

Commissioners recommended the petitioner work directly with staff to clarify the desired use and to confirm whether the lot immediately east of the existing commercial parcel might meet the petitioner’s needs without converting the residential lot on Culver Road. Petitioner and staff discussed options including lot consolidation, interior storage and the technical requirements for driveway access off U.S. Highway 11 (Culver Road), which would require Alabama Department of Transportation approval for new access if used.

Given the outstanding questions about permitted uses, buffers and the appeals of nearby residents, the petitioner asked to withdraw/continue the item to work with staff. The commission granted the continuance so Sherrod can meet with planning staff and resolve code and access questions before returning with a clarified plan.

The petitioner did not present a definitive plan to leave monuments outdoors; staff’s repeated statements that outdoor storage is not permitted in NC shaped the meeting’s outcome. The petitioner agreed to coordinate with staff on whether expansion of existing structures or use of the adjacent lot could satisfy his storage needs while preserving neighborhood protections.

The commission closed public comment on the item and approved the petitioner’s request to continue the rezoning to a later meeting after outside coordination with staff.","Ricky Sherrod requested a continuance of his rezoning petition for 2835–2837 Culver Road from SFR-2 to Neighborhood Commercial after residents raised safety, property-value and outdoor-storage concerns and staff clarified that outside storage of monuments and vaults is not permitted in NC zoning.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6264449,"Planning commission approves annexation and rezoning for New Watermelon site after extensive public comment",2791,628000,3419000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3096431-857c6a741cf485a02d040c8a03b415d8&start=628&end=3419","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3096431-857c6a741cf485a02d040c8a03b415d8/thumbnail_628000.jpg","/articles/6264449/Tuscaloosa-City/Tuscaloosa-County/Alabama/Planning-commission-approves-annexation-and-rezoning-for-New-Watermelon-site-after-extensive-public-comment","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6264449-9ea9963f55f63322d50643eb0842fb30/orig.mp4?Expires=1771182253&Signature=YQvZYspYfs5L4MbdfFolqkd7zzB1hMXldB9wjDerx90lYidBw6TF5kcSoq3kwB-ZOSSESOipG9PUohPl5p0RBwo2N2rtcNDHbnTTkwEBdZl4OOG1O855kmObD8yVePIPqIYKLlOUXL7uDKBGIvTjSUBgqBbB3G9u2Ar-w~J4Ns8FSoUOcRD51XmsI6FNZ4E3-tOP1TjxZwB0PaQBRqKN7yWE283NQRlmZjegTv-ON02WyQLaiucU3o-zldIdBdYOy1vwehLYh2RcPtjRiNcs4QlDhT6Qwm4X0MXPB2RUCn6eRBhj7wSijMBGrA7qddz0Vv96aHNT0ctVDpk32O5FVg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission on April 21 approved annexation of about 4.99 acres at 605 New Watermelon Road and rezoned the parcel from SFR-1 to GC (General Commercial) following staff presentations and extended public comment.

The vote follows a staff briefing that said the site is currently identified in the city’s framework plan as \"Traditional Neighborhood Edge (TN2)\" and that the requested commercial zoning does not conform to the plan. Staff reported 46 public comments received the previous month and 32 additional comments since then. City engineering and the petitioner discussed updates to a traffic study intended to address neighbors’ concerns.

Michael Garner, the city engineer, told the commission the revised traffic plan envisions \"1 full access intersection of the southernmost access and then the northern will be a directional access only,\" clarifying the northern access would be right-in/right-out. Chris Sentell of Sentell Engineering, representing the applicant North River Crossings LLC, said the developer agreed to install a center turn lane and to limit the northern access to right-in/right-out, and that an earlier architectural redesign added about $150,000 in aesthetic improvements to the proposed convenience store and related buildings.

The petition submitted revised site plans and elevations showing a C-store and small restaurant uses; the materials presented included brick walls, metal roofing and gooseneck lighting. Staff and the petitioner said the traffic study also included a potential future phase for boat storage behind the primary buildings; Sentell said that boat-storage counts were included in the study and that the impact was “minimal.”

Neighbors pressed several concerns in public comment. Joanne Cook of Lexington Downs said residents had accepted one previously approved service station but opposed a second, saying, \"We need space for residential homes, not more convenience stores and service stations.\" Brian Fuller of Saddle Ridge said the development risked changing the character of the area, calling the plan “the second step in the domino falls of that whole area turning into what we've got on Rice Mine now.” Gloria Oglesby, also of Lexington Downs, raised safety concerns for students who travel along New Watermelon Road and warned that motorists frequently exceed the posted 45 mph limit.

Developer Mark Hearing, who identified himself as a local developer, told the commission he preferred the project be annexed into the city to ensure it meets city design and building standards, and argued the project would be built in the county if necessary. \"I don't think you're gonna see a better rendering come through here on a service station than what we just provided,\" Hearing said, describing the revisions made after earlier feedback.

Commissioners questioned the rezoning’s divergence from the framework plan. Commissioner Dina Prince, who introduced several procedural points earlier in the meeting, participated in the council discussion; other commissioners expressed divided views about applying framework recommendations versus the benefits of bringing the property under city land-use and building controls. City staff reminded the commission that annexation would subject the site to city zoning, building codes, and design review, which they said would allow the city to regulate buffers, lighting and building materials.

Before voting, staff and the petitioner confirmed additional conditions would be resolved through the Land Disturbance Permit (LDP) and development plan review processes. The petitioner was told to coordinate with the fire marshal about a fire-apparatus turnaround and to finalize the updated traffic study. The commission approved the annexation motion and the companion rezoning motion (rezoning passed with one dissenting vote recorded).

The decisions mean the site can proceed under city permitting processes; traffic and safety mitigations identified during the meeting — including a center turn lane, a northern right-in/right-out access, and a required fire turnaround — will be addressed in later permitting steps. The developer said a second, rear parcel now in the county remains a possible future phase and that any additional annexation would be presented to the commission separately.

Votes on the companion items were recorded at the meeting. Staff noted the property touches existing GC and multifamily zoning to the south and that the proposal would allow Sunday beer sales that are barred in the county. The commission emphasized that the LDP and construction permitting must demonstrate compliance with fire, drainage and access requirements before building permits are issued.

The item was continued from last month for further refinement of plans; the April 21 meeting concluded with formal approval of the annexation and rezoning motions subject to the technical LDP and permit conditions discussed at the meeting.","The Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission voted to annex 4.99 acres at 605 New Watermelon Road into the city and rezoned the parcel to General Commercial after staff presentations, traffic-study revisions and extensive public opposition focused on traffic, safety and future boat-storage plans.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Key Planning and Zoning Commission actions from April 21, 2025

Petitioner withdraws rezoning request for Culver Road property after neighborhood objections over outdoor monument storage

Planning commission approves annexation and rezoning for New Watermelon site after extensive public comment