Larry Smith, a resident who identified himself during the public-comment portion of a Chilton County Commission work session, asked the commission to investigate the status of County Road 387 after seeing timber trucks using the route.
Smith said the timber company had been “clear cutting” and “had a lot of log trucks going up and down” and that a bridge on the road bears a sign reading “bridge out.” He said he had searched commission records and “didn't find anywhere where the commission had voted to close it.”
The chairman of the commission said staff could look into the matter. “We can get our engineer to check into it and see if it was closed properly,” the chairman said, and added the commission would “put a resolution up tomorrow night and ask you to do that.”
Commissioner Headley clarified how the roadway was closed in practice, saying 387 is “not closed all the way through. There's a gate on the left on the north and south end of 387. It's closed to the gate. The county is supposed to keep the road worked and maintained to them gates. So ... that’s where it was closed from gate to gate.” He also noted the closure process historically involved notices and hearings.
Why it matters: If a public road was closed without following the county’s closure procedure, property access and maintenance responsibility can become contested, and commercial traffic on a damaged bridge can raise public-safety concerns.
What will happen next: Commissioners directed staff to have the county engineer review records and the physical condition of the road and said they would present a resolution at the next regular meeting to authorize a formal review.
Ending: The commission did not record a formal vote on reopening or formally rescinding any prior closure during the work session; the item will return as a resolution on the next meeting agenda for potential formal action.