Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Baldwin County Commission deadlocks on Kimbrough rezoning amid drainage and wetlands concerns
Summary
The commission failed to approve a rezoning request for the Kimbrough property after residents raised flooding and infrastructure concerns and the vote split 2-2. Planning staff and the developer presented differing acreage figures and a wetland study was highlighted.
The Baldwin County Commission did not approve a rezoning request for the Kimbrough property (case Z24-50) after a 2-2 tie at the meeting. The split vote left the property’s zoning unchanged.
The item before the commission was a request to change the parcel’s zoning to permit residential development. Planning staff presented location and land-use context for the parcel, and the county’s planning commission had recommended approval by an 8-1 vote. Several nearby property owners opposed the rezoning at the public hearing, citing chronic flooding and limited road and drainage infrastructure.
Neighbors described repeated flooding near Norris Lane and said parts of the adjacent road are privately maintained. "There was a group of us ... all the adjoining property owners to the west and to the south of this property" who objected, said Sheena McCluskey, who identified herself as living at 8741 Norris Lane. Sonya Styron McCleskey, who said her family lives west of the property, told commissioners she had been in "water waist deep" on the backside of her property during recent heavy rains and raised concerns about wildlife and school capacity.
The developer’s engineering representative, Jeremy Taylor of MTTR Engineers, said a wetland study identified "about 10 acres that is currently wetlands." Taylor added, "So realistically, development wise, you got about a hundred acres that you can develop, and then you got roads" while noting the need to meet updated subdivision drainage requirements.
Commissioners and staff repeatedly distinguished rezoning from the later subdivision process: rezoning changes permitted land uses, while any specific site layout, road access, drainage plans and required road paving would be addressed during subdivision review. Planning staff noted subdivision regulations and buffers for wetlands would affect how much land could be developed.
After public comment and staff discussion, a motion to approve the rezoning was made and seconded. The roll call produced two votes in favor and two opposed, leaving the motion without the majority required to pass. "So it's 2 2 ... It fails," the chair announced.
What happens next: the rezoning request was not approved; any future application or revised request would need to be filed anew. Several speakers asked the commission to consider lower-density zoning given drainage and infrastructure constraints.
