Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Developer asks Prattville council to continue Highway 82 PUD rezoning to August

Prattville City Council · July 24, 2026
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

Blake Rice, the petitioner for a planned unit development along Highway 82 Bypass East, asked the council to continue the public hearing to Aug. 18 to allow plan changes including rephasing traffic study, off‑site infrastructure work and removal of proposed multifamily units in favor of detached single‑family homes.

Blake Rice of BSI, the petitioner for a planned unit development (PUD) along Highway 82 Bypass East, asked the council to continue the public hearing so the applicant could revise the master plan and infrastructure phasing. “I would like to respectfully request that this public hearing be continued to the August 2 to give us time to properly make changes to this project,” Rice said, adding the revisions would include changes to the traffic‑study phasing, some off‑site infrastructure work, and removal of a multifamily portion of the project in favor of detached single‑family homes.

City Attorney Andrew told the council the body could continue the hearing and allow public comment when the measure next appears on the agenda, but that any required re‑advertising must comply with legal notice rules. The council discussed which kinds of modifications would require returning to the planning commission; the planning staff advised that substantial changes to the master plan (for example, changes that affect density, unit counts or traffic patterns) would likely necessitate revisiting the planning commission. After discussion, the council voted to hold the ordinance until the Aug. 18 meeting to give the petitioner time to revise materials and to permit additional public review and comment when the matter returns to the agenda.

The hold on the matter does not remove public comment rights: the attorney said members of the public will be able to address the council when the item comes back. The council asked staff to report on the scope of proposed changes and whether any would require formal planning‑commission review before the matter returns for final action.