Residents press Prattville officials over Gaddis Pit/Durden Road cul‑de‑sac requirement during public comment

At the Feb. 20 Prattville Planning Commission meeting, multiple residents raised concerns during public comment about a cul‑de‑sac requirement tied to a proposed split of property at Gaddis Pit Road and Durden Road. Lynn Turner Kimbrell, who identified herself as a co-owner of property at 733 Durden Road, said she inherited the property and tried to split roughly two acres into two one-acre lots to settle an estate but learned only after the fact that a cul‑de‑sac condition had been discussed.

Kimbrell said she was not notified of the earlier hearing and described confusion about which entity — city or county — was responsible for maintaining the paved segment and for garbage pickup. Harper Turner, who said they live on the site, echoed concerns about being required to build a cul‑de‑sac when existing neighbors have used the same road for years. Both residents said they are trying to close probate paperwork and do not currently plan to build, and they questioned why they should pay for roadway improvements used by other residents.

Commissioners and staff explained that, by city code, dividing a parcel into multiple lots is treated as creating a subdivision; when a property is subdivided, the subdivision regulations and current street‑access requirements (including turnaround/circle requirements for public safety and sanitation) apply. A planning commissioner said some older drives and paved segments are “grandfathered,” but a new subdivision can trigger requirements that did not exist when the original driveway or road was built.

Planning staff and the city engineer offered to meet the residents on site to explain engineering specifications, the size and construction requirements for an all‑weather access and turnaround, and to review alternatives. Commissioners said the city does have a mechanism to accept private drives for city maintenance, but acceptance is separate from the subdivision review. One commissioner suggested owners could seek legal advice on probate matters and noted estate funds could sometimes be used to meet subdivision requirements.

No formal action was taken at the meeting; staff committed to follow up with the residents to explain technical standards, record‑splitting options and steps required to comply with subdivision rules. Residents said they would meet with planning and engineering staff after the meeting.