Neighbors urge preservation, cite traffic and stormwater concerns over proposed North McGregor development

Mobile City Council · December 31, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A neighborhood representative told the Mobile City Council that a potential 7.6‑acre development at 348–360 North McGregor Ave. should preserve large live oaks, remain R‑1 where possible, and address traffic and stormwater impacts; the council heard the testimony and acknowledged the neighborhood will monitor future proposals.

Dan Reamer, a retired physician and representative of the Spring Hill Cemetery Neighborhood Association, told the Mobile City Council on Dec. 30 that neighbors are concerned about potential future development of roughly 7.6 acres at 348 and 360 North McGregor Avenue. He said the property is currently vacant, zoned R‑1, and that the neighborhood will oppose any rezoning to higher‑density uses such as apartments, condominiums or zero‑lot‑line subdivisions.

Reamer urged preservation of the property's large live oaks and raised specific safety and infrastructure concerns: he said heavy student traffic passes through nearby Old Shell Road and Spring Hill Avenue, and argued that additional high‑density residential development would worsen traffic and stormwater runoff in a neighborhood he described as lacking storm drainage culverts until Tuthill. Reamer said he expects any future approvals to include requirements for water retention and diversion to prevent increased runoff onto neighborhood streets and properties.

Council members asked clarifying questions and briefed Reamer on the current zoning constraints: the council noted the eastern portion of the parcel that fronts McGregor is zoned R‑1 and that only limited uses qualify under that zoning (Reamer and council members referenced church, cemetery or single‑house uses). Reamer said the neighborhood would continue to monitor developers and planning processes as proposals progress through the planning commission and subsequent public hearings.

No formal action on the site was taken at this meeting. The matter was presented during a public hearing; councilmembers encouraged continued engagement and reminded residents of the city’s public‑hearing process.