First reading of 247‑acre Oak Mountain rezoning draws council concern over school impacts and lot sizes

Pelham City Council heard a first reading June 18 of Ordinance 135‑269, a rezoning request for roughly 247 acres near Oak Mountain State Park to change existing A1, R1, R3 and B1 zoning to a planned unit development for an applicant identified in the ordinance as Brooks Harris/Harris Doyle Homes.

Council members and public commenters focused on the development's likely housing mix and the effect on local schools. One council member summarized data from a recent school‑board demographic study and said some of the study's takeaways convinced him the development might not produce as many schoolchildren as previously expected: "When we estimate 0.7 children, that's not what their demographic study is, like, 0.3," he said, noting a smaller student yield per unit reported in the study. The council member also relayed developer phase estimates discussed at a school‑board meeting: about 50 rental units in Phase 1, roughly 100 lots in Phase 2 with houses priced near $350,000, and a later phase with about 175 lots in a $450,000 range.

During council comments, members expressed reservations about lot design and density, discussing the difference between 60‑foot and 70‑foot lot widths and warning against "stacking" hundreds of houses on that parcel. "I just strongly oppose this," said public commenter Marty Gilbert (Emerald Lake Drive), arguing garden‑home style units are not appropriate along Highway 35 and urging the council to consider alternative plans. Gary Williams (Legacy Park), another member of the public, said he found the developers "honorable" but would prefer larger lots and said he would support approval if lot sizes were expanded.

Council members noted the ordinance was only a first reading and that the complete text is available at Pelham City Hall and online at pellumalabama.gov. The city also announced public hearings on July 9 for other rezoning and annexation matters; the council said this Oak Mountain rezoning 'will likely be considered at a future city council meeting.' Council members encouraged continued dialogue with the school system to clarify enrollment expectations before any final votes.

Because the item was a first reading, no final action was taken at the June 18 meeting. The council signaled it expects further work sessions and a vote at a later meeting after staff and developers respond to council questions and after the public‑hearing process.