Ana Good
BZA Mountain Brook
After hearing from more than half-a-dozen Mountain Brook residents who expressed concern and voiced their disapproval of the plans, the board sided with Mountain Brook City Planner Dana Hazen’s initial denial of the request.
The Mountain Brook Board of Zoning Adjustment tonight denied an appeal from Crestline Commercial Partners, LLC that would have allowed for the construction of an urgent care-like facility in Crestline Village.
After hearing from more than half-a-dozen Mountain Brook residents who expressed concern and voiced their disapproval of the plans, the board sided with Mountain Brook City Planner Dana Hazen’s initial denial of the request.
The proposal, submitted by Crestline Commercial Partners, LLC. for the urgent care-type facility and professional offices at 30 Dexter Ave, called for the business to be built close to single-family residences in the area.
In her explanation for the initial denial, Hazen said the proposal did not meet the specifications laid out in the Vine Street Transitional District plan that calls for “soft uses” in the buffer zone between residential properties and high-patronage businesses.
Mountain Brook residents in the audience overwhelmingly agreed with Hazen’s logic, stating concerns over the type of patronage such a business might attract, potential increases in traffic volumes and the risk of declining property values. There were no residents who spoke in favor of the development except for Dr. Lee England, who spoke on behalf of Ivy Creek Healthcare—the owners of the would-be facility. England is employed by Ivy Creek as the chief medical officer, but said that as a resident of Crestline Village for 16 years, he was “keenly aware of the concerns from residents.”
The facility, he said, would not attract unreasonable patronage or traffic volumes, nor would it keep narcotics in stock. The board also heard from Andy Campbell, attorney for Dr. England and the developers, who argued that his client’s proposal “clearly falls under the allowed uses” outlined in the city’s code. Campbell said he and his clients “respectfully” disagreed with City Planner Dana Hazen’s interpretation of the proposal.
Now that the BZA upheld the city planner's ruling, the developers have the right to appeal in Circuit Court.
