Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ross Bridge Easement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ross Bridge resurvey continued after resident objections about storm-sewer easement and encroachment
Summary
A resurvey request in Ross Bridge (S062512) to revise two storm-sewer easements was continued after staff and residents identified a concrete wall encroaching on the easement, a storm pipe installed outside the platted easement, and concerns about proximity to a swimming pool and manhole. Staff will work with the surveyor and applicant to correct easement boundaries.
The Hoover Planning and Zoning Commission voted to continue a resurvey application for a Ross Bridge lot after staff and residents identified problems with proposed storm-sewer easement revisions.
Staff told the commission that the proposed revision would reduce the width of a storm-sewer easement where a concrete retaining wall now sits, leaving insufficient room to maintain the pipe. Staff also reported an existing storm pipe installed outside the platted easement and an as-built that does not align with the physical pipe; one easement segment as shown would go beneath a swimming pool. Based on those discrepancies, staff recommended a continuance to allow the applicant and surveyor to correct the as-built survey and easement instrument.
During the public hearing, resident Susie Sturdivvent and her attorney Joan Singleton described ongoing problems with the contractor on a neighboring lot (identified in the transcript as Alex Smith), asserting the builder had strayed from the subdivision design and previously caused cleanup fees and property concerns. Commissioners and staff responded that property-line or contractor-license disputes may be outside the commission's direct jurisdiction and should be pursued with building inspections or courts, but they reiterated that the commission must ensure the easement as recorded allows adequate space to maintain the storm pipe.
The commission voted to continue the case to the July meeting to allow for revised surveys and further coordination. Staff said they will verify the pipe material and confirm whether Jefferson County previously approved the crossing referenced in the as-built communications. The continuation preserves the record while staff and the applicant resolve survey and easement alignment issues.
