Board of Adjustment delays Arc Montgomery private‑school request, asks for traffic study and neighborhood outreach

The Montgomery City Board of Adjustment on Monday delayed consideration of The Arc Montgomery’s request for a special exception to use a former church at 2130 Bell Road as a private school, and asked the applicant to deliver a traffic study, meet with nearby neighborhood representatives and present a site plan showing vehicular access improvements.

The action came after about 90 minutes of public comment and questioning by board members during which The Arc’s representatives described the program and neighbors and city staff raised concerns about traffic and access. John Stanley, chairman of the Board of Adjustment, opened the item by noting the property previously had approval for a church and asking the applicants to identify themselves.

Stephanie Nunn, HR coordinator for The Arc Montgomery, described the nonprofit’s services and proposed program: “we've been in business for over 50 years, and we have been committed to serving individuals with intellectual development disabilities for the Montgomery and the surrounding communities.” Nunn said the program would be a day program with vocational training, life skills and community engagement, operating weekday hours the applicants listed as 7:30 a.m. to about 2:30 p.m. Nunn said the facility’s current enrollment is 96 and the building was presented with a capacity figure on application of 220.

Jim Parker, chairman of The Arc Montgomery’s board of directors, told the board the organization needs a new facility because its current site on McGinnis Road “is in bad repair” and the insurer has threatened cancellation. Parker said the applicant intends to buy the Bell Road property and has completed inspections by the state, the fire marshal and the city architect.

Residents and an engineering consultant pressed the applicant for traffic planning. Al Garrison, who spoke from the audience as a neighborhood resident, said the meeting notice had been knocked down at the roadway and asked whether the applicant had reached out to neighbors; Garrison also raised questions about a single driveway and potential queuing on Bell Road during drop‑off. Juan Gacha, identified in the record as an engineer working with the applicants, said only a site‑specific traffic report would define the intersection improvements needed and that such a study would usually be done once the buyer is preparing to close. He advised that the traffic engineering recommendation would define whether deceleration or acceleration lanes, a turn lane or a signal were warranted.

Board members pressed for clarity on vehicle counts and bus operations. The Arc’s representatives said about four bus routes would operate in morning and afternoon peak periods, with additional buses stored on site but not in simultaneous operation. Jerry Sailors, representing Providence Presbyterian Church (the nearby property owner where a preschool had previously operated), told the board that a preschool on the site had handled about 70 students for 10 years and had not overwhelmed the area but that conditions on Bell Road have changed since that approval.

After discussion, a board member moved to postpone action until the next meeting and to require the applicant to provide: (1) a traffic study or a consultant preliminary analysis specifying recommended intersection or driveway improvements, (2) outreach to the closest neighborhood associations and documentation of those contacts, (3) a site plan or conceptual overlay showing ingress/egress improvements and any proposed fencing, and (4) any written assurances the city might offer about assisting with required public improvements. The motion was seconded and carried. Diane Burke recorded a recusal earlier in the item because of a stated conflict of interest.

Why it matters: Board members said they were not opposed to Arc Montgomery’s mission but were concerned about transportation safety and the effect of two‑lane approaches and a single curb cut on Bell Road during heavy drop‑off times. The traffic study and neighborhood outreach are meant to show whether the site can safely handle the program in its present configuration or whether street improvements will be necessary before a special exception can be granted.

Votes at a glance

The meeting included votes on multiple zoning and variance requests. Where recorded in the meeting transcript, the board’s motion text and outcomes are below.

- Item 1 — Signage variance for SCD Holdings LLC, 600 Montgomery Street (T4O): motion to approve as requested; motion carried (vote not specified in transcript).

- Item 2 — Signage variance for SCD Holdings LLC, 330 Clayton Street (T4O): motion to approve as requested; motion carried (vote not specified in transcript).

- Item 3 — The Arc Montgomery, 2130 Bell Road, special exception for private school: motion to postpone to next meeting pending a traffic study, neighbor outreach and a site plan; motion carried. Diane Burke recused from this item.

- Item 4 — Tracy Bunnell, 6606 Whitley Road Court: special exception to keep four chickens (no roosters) approved; motion carried.

- Item 5 — Benjamin Phelan and Andreo Patterson, 1430 Mitchell Young Road: request for a mobile home on a 10‑acre parcel opposed by the Red Cedar Farm Homeowners Association; motion to deny approval carried.

- Item 7 — Scott Killman, 50 Watson Circle: coverage variance for accessory structure (detached garage/gym, requested up to ~1,400 sq ft); motion to approve as requested carried.

- Item 8 — John Scott, 3072 Clinton Drive: side‑yard variance for an accessory structure (replacement shed); approval carried with the condition that gutters and downspouts be installed to direct roof runoff to the rear drain and prevent runoff onto adjacent property.

- Item 9 — Dr. Valletta Robinson, 521 Heron Street: exception to SmartCode to allow a small cosmetology school; motion to approve carried.

- Item 10 — Jason Hogg, 2445 LaRuth Avenue: height/front/side‑yard variance for a privacy fence. After extended public comment and neighbor opposition, the board approved a plan requiring the owner to move portions of the 6‑foot fence back (the front yard set back) and to reconfigure the street‑side fencing so that the primary street sides are reduced to 3 feet where they face the street while preserving 6 feet along the private property lines and rear; the board required the work within 30 days and provided a drawing to implement the change. (Motion carried; timeline and relocation requirements are in the motion.)

- Item 12 — Angela Dozier, 3737 Huntington Creek Road: request to retain an accessory shed located close to the property line. The board denied the setback variance and required the petitioner to move the structure to meet the five‑foot setback or demolish it within 60 days.

- Item 13 — Frederick (Rick) Koch, 3625 Jackson Ferry Road: appeal to allow a titled recreational vehicle (RV/tiny house on wheels) for occasional living on a 1.29‑acre lot that already contains a permanent house. The board approved a temporary allowance with a two‑year limit and required the applicant to return if longer occupancy or a permanent dwelling was proposed. (Motion carried; one member opposed.)

What the board asked applicants to provide next

For the Arc Montgomery item (Item 3): a traffic study or engineer’s counts and recommended intersection/driveway improvements; a site plan showing ingress/egress and parking; documentation of outreach to the nearest neighborhood association(s) (identified in the meeting record as Bellwood and adjacent associations); and any written commitments from city traffic engineering about potential public improvements the city might provide should the study indicate a need.

For other items where conditions were placed, the board recorded timelines (30 days for fence reconfiguration; 60 days for removal or relocation of the Huntington Creek accessory structure).