Opelika staff recommend delaying Springwood Hotel occupancy after hidden fire chases found

Opelika City Council staff told the council on March 18 that they have discovered concealed wall chases in the Springwood Hotel that create a fire risk and recommended postponing final occupancy until repairs and re‑inspection are complete.

The recommendation came after staff, including building and fire inspectors, reviewed the hotel’s 1973 blueprints and opened wall chases in one structure, uncovering a concealed pathway where fire could spread unchecked. Jeff Zimmerman, staff member, said the chase was “completely hidden” behind sheetrock and that inspectors had visited the property multiple times during the hotel’s permitting and repair work. "We're recommending that we're not going to allow them to occupy the building," Zimmerman said.

Why it matters: city staff say the concealed chase can allow fire and smoke to travel from interior walls into attic spaces without triggering early detection, reducing the time for occupants to evacuate and for firefighters to respond. The council agreed to delay placing a licensing resolution on the agenda so work and follow‑up inspections can be completed.

What staff reported Jeff Zimmerman and other inspectors said the city had inspected much of Building 1 — units 101–120 and 201–220 — and that an electrical inspector had checked all 40 units. After reviewing old blueprints dated to 1973, staff found a concealed chase that was not visible during earlier inspections. The Fire Chief (title used in the hearing) explained the hazard: when a chase or unsealed cavity connects interior walls to attic spaces, a fire can "run to the top of the attic" and spread through the building despite working smoke detectors in individual units.

The Fire Chief said the repair should be straightforward and reiterated that the owner, identified in the meeting as Mr. Patel, is cooperating with inspectors and contractors.

Owner response and timeline Mr. Patel, who spoke at the meeting, said he has funded the repairs and worked with contractors and an architect; he said Building 1’s 40 rooms are inspected and “ready to go.” Patel asked the council for time to finish required work and noted financial pressure from carrying costs during the closures. Greg, identified as representing Oyo and present as a partner/consultant on the project, said Oyo had provided guidance but not direct financial support and that scheduling contractors could affect the exact timeline.

Council action and next steps Council members and staff agreed to delay adding the licensing resolution to the next agenda; the council directed that the matter remain off the agenda until April 1 (two weeks) so staff can complete inspections and confirm repairs. The council did not take a final vote to grant occupancy at the meeting; staff said they would inspect the opened chases and sign off before any coverings are replaced and before occupancy is allowed in unrepaired structures.

Discussion vs. decision Discussion: staff described the concealed chase, inspection history (fire department visits and full-unit electrical checks), and the safety rationale for requiring openings and repairs before final approval. Direction/assignment: staff were directed to inspect the opened chases and to verify repairs before the council considers resolution action on April 1. Formal action: the council agreed to delay placing the resolution on the agenda; no occupancy permit was granted at the March 18 meeting.

Ending Staff said the repairs are expected to be completed and re‑inspected within the two‑week window if contractors are available; the council will revisit the licensing/resolution matter at or after the April 1 meeting depending on inspection results and any additional issues found during repairs.