top of page


On October 19, at the culmination of several years of development, the current version of the UDC failed passage at the Council table.

The Ordinance's path forward is now to return to the Planning Commission for amendment before returning to the newly elected Council for further consideration.

At the October 19 meeting, the citizen concerns submitted were:

*that District 2 residents, because of Mr. Manzie's death, had had no voice in the final considerations of the Ordinance

*that a new Council, with new members seated on November 1, would be charged with implementing the new legislation and should therefore be charged with approval of the Ordinance

*that there remains too many appeals that will move to the Board of Adjustment and then to Circuit Court, completely

by-passing Council, and therefore the voice of the people through their elected representatives

*that the occupancy standard for Community Residences (group homes) is set too high at 10 unrelated adults

*that landscape standards east of I65 are set too low

*that additional procedural safeguards for transparency are needed: Staff Approvals should be posted to the public within the appeal period; that Community Meeting minutes, completed by the applicant, should be posted to the public prior to a project proceeding; require Community Meetings for Special Exception cases

*that residents of the Sandtown Community in Springhill object to the Village of Springhill overlay being mandatory

An equal number of speakers spoke in favor of the Ordinance, largely from various commercial entities, including the Port of Mobile, Downtown Alliance, members of the Chamber of Commerce, law firms, realtors, contractors, and nonprofit Mobile Baykeeper. One resident of Sandtown spoke in favor of the Ordinance.


Featured Posts
Search By Tags
No tags yet.
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square
bottom of page