DUNNAVANT VALLEY SMALL AREA PLAN
DRAFT 07/2013
[- 2 -]
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Shelby County Commission
Lindsey Allison, Rick Shepherd, Chairperson Vice-Chairman
Daniel M. Acker Tommy Edwards Jon Parker Elwyn Bearden Corley Ellis Mike Vest Robbie Hayes
Shelby County Manager
Alex Dudchock
Shelby County Planning Commission
Bill Kinnebrew, Jr., James R. Land, Chairman Vice-Chairman
James Davis Amy Smith Kenneth F. Wilder Rachel Garrett Robert L. Taylor
Shelby County Development Services
Ray E. Hamilton Chad Scroggins David Hunke, AICP
Eric R. Womack Sharman Brooks Tom Wilkins Kristine Goddard Christie Pannell-Hester Charles Wright
Dunnavant Valley Small Area Plan Steering Committee
David Busby Ben Kirkland Gwynne Sams Bill Dunn George Kontos Ann Tharpe Jeff Flannery Jason McCracken Karen Threlkeld Bill Gunn Jayne Morrow Ward Tishler Patti Hamilton Bill Norton Mark Wesson Millard Harris, Jr. Virginia Randolph Joe Wiedeburg
Mt. Laurel Elementary School (Meetings / Workshops)
Angela Walker, Principal
Mt.Laurel Library (Meetings)
Kate Etheredge, Branch Manager
[- 3 -]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. BACKGROUND ...... 8 Purpose ...... 8 Study Area ...... 8 Public Participation ...... 8
II. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 13 Topography ...... 13 Wetlands & Endangered Species ...... 13 Soils ...... 17
III. SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS ...... 19 Demographic ...... 19 Income ...... 24
IV. LAND USE ...... 26
V. ZONING ...... 28
VI. COMMUNITY FACILITIES ...... 31 Police Protection ...... 31 Fire Protection ...... 33 Water & Sanitary Sewer Services ...... 35 Library ...... 38 Parks and Recreation ...... 38 Public Schools ...... 39
VII. TRANSPORTATION ...... 41 Roadway Functional Classification ...... 41 Traffic Counts ...... 41 Traffic Accidents ...... 43 Planned Transportation Projects ...... 46 Railroad Crossings ...... 47
VIII. NOVEMBER COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS ...... 49
IX. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES ...... 57 Goal 1: Improve the Road Network 57 Goal 2: Improve Public Safety 62 Goal 3: Improve At Grade Railroad Crossings 66 Goal 4: Increase Community Facilities 69 Goal 5: Improve Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety 71 Goal 6: Increase Public Recreational Opportunities 75 Goal 7: Promote Consistent Growth Patterns 77 Goal 8: Preserve the Rural Character 80
[- 4 -]
LIST OF MAPS
Map 1: Dunnavant Valley Study Area ...... 7 Map 2: Dunnavant Valley Steering Committee Distribution ...... 9 Map 3: Dunnavant Valley Topography...... 14 Map 4: Dunnavant Valley Special Flood Hazard Areas ...... 15 Map 5: Dunnavant Valley Wetlands & Endangered Species ...... 16 Map 6: Dunnavant Valley Detailed Soils ...... 18 Map 7: Dunnavant Valley Cities & Census Designated Places (CDPs) ...... 20 Map 8: Dunnavant Valley Incorporated Places ...... 23 Map 9: Dunnavant Valley Existing Land Use ...... 27 Map 10: Dunnavant Valley Zoning ...... 29 Map 11: Dunnavant Valley Police Protection ...... 32 Map 12: Dunnavant Valley Fire Protection Areas ...... 34 Map 13: Dunnavant Valley Community Facilities ...... 36 Map 14: Dunnavant Valley Water Service ...... 37 Map 15: Dunnavant Valley Roadway Functional Classification ...... 42 Map 16: Dunnavant Valley At-Grade Railroad Crossings ...... 48
[- 5 -]
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Community Workshop One -- Issue Generation & Prioritization ...... 11 Table 2: Shelby County Detailed Soil Map Units ...... 17 Table 3: Dunnavant Valley 2010 Population by Place ...... 19 Table 4: Dunnavant Valley 2010 Population by Age Group and Place ...... 21 Table 5: Dunnavant Valley 2010 Population by Race / Ethnicity and Place ..... 22 Table 6: Dunnavant Valley 2010 Households by Type and Place ...... 22 Table 7: Dunnavant Valley Households by Income and Place (2007-2011) .... 24 Table 8: Dunnavant Valley Employment by Status and Place ...... 25 Table 9: Dunnavant Valley Workers by Occupation and Place ...... 25 Table 10: Crime Statistics for Beats 5150 and 5170 by Year ...... 33 Table 11: Chelsea Attendance Zone Enrollment by Year ...... 40 Table 12: Shelby County Schools Attendance Zone Enrollments by Year ...... 40 Table 13: Annual Average Daily Traffic Counts by Year ...... 43 Table 14: Visionary Roadway Capacity Projects ...... 47 Table 15: November Community Workshops Questions 1 through 9 ...... 49 Table 16: November Community Workshops Questions 10 through 16 ...... 50 Table 17: November Community Workshops Questions 17 through 25 ...... 51 Table 18: November Community Workshops Questions 26 through 33 ...... 52 Table 19: November Community Workshops Questions 34 through 40 ...... 53
[- 6 -]
MAP 1
DUNNAVANT VALLEY STUDY AREA 4567101
N 456741 4567478 4567474 4567470 AB25 456750 4567480 4567487 456743 456741 4567491
AB25 456755 456745 456741 4567462 AB119 4567469 456743
AB25
4567495 ¤£280
456741 456755
AB119 456743
¤£280 456741 4567362 4567280 456751
I. BACKGROUND
PURPOSE
Over the last 10 to 15 years, the Dunnavant Valley has experienced significant residential growth and has been subjected to annexations from municipalities centered on the other sides of both Oak and Double Oak Mountains. With the development of Highland Lakes, Mt. Laurel, Villas Belvedere, Greystone Farms, and the Village at Highland Lakes among others, the Dunnavant Valley has seen a population explosion. While commercial growth has remained relatively near U.S. Highway 280 (US 280), commercial components have blossomed in Mt. Laurel and have been approved for the Village at Highland Lakes and Dunnavant Square. While growth has occurred primarily south of Hugh Daniel Drive, an alternative route to US 280, the additional development has also put increased vehicular burdens on Dunnavant Valley Road (County Road 41) and placed additional burdens on public safety, public facilities, and preservation of the environment which ironically led to the increased residential growth.
After initially being approached by the “Friends of Dunnavant Valley Greenway”, who helped facilitate the Dunnavant Valley Community Greenway project, the Shelby County Planning Commission directed staff to develop the Dunnavant Valley Small Area Plan. The plan focuses on the Dunnavant Valley more narrowly than the Shelby County 2004 Comprehensive Plan -- A Path to the Future. It addresses current and foreseeable issues facing the Dunnavant Valley by formulating a vision and a list of goals, objectives, and implementation strategies. The plan should provide a guide for the future growth and development of the Dunnavant Valley.
STUDY AREA
Generally, the study area for this plan is the Dunnavant Valley or the County Road 41 corridor which extends northeasterly from US 280 through the Dunnavant Community to the county boundary. The other two boundaries are the mountain ridges of Oak Mountain northwest of the valley and Double Oak Mountain southeast of the valley. The majority of the Dunnavant Valley is unincorporated for which the Shelby County Planning Commission has jurisdiction related to subdivision regulations. However, the Shelby County Planning Commission has limited jurisdiction when it comes to zoning regulations here as the Dunnavant Valley falls within two zoning beats – the Chelsea North-Dunnavant Valley South-Westover North Beat, which has zoning, and the Dunnavant Valley North Beat, which does not have zoning. Although any implementation strategies adopted would only fall under the jurisdiction of either the Shelby County Planning Commission or the Shelby County Commission, the adopted implementation strategies would benefit all within the Dunnavant Valley, unincorporated or not.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
During the summer of 2012, initial and secondary lists of Dunnavant Valley residents were generated from prior public participation work in the valley and suggestions in order to create a manageable Dunnavant Valley Small Area Plan Steering Committee. In order to
[- 8 -]
MAP 2
DUNNAVANT VALLEY STEERING COMMITTEE DISTRIBUTION [! 4567101
N 456741 4567478 [! [! 4567474 4567470 [! [! [! 480 456743 AB25 4567 456755 [! 456750 4567487 456741 [! 4567491 [! 456745 [!
456741 [! 4567462 456755 [! AB119 4567469
AB25
4567495 [! [! 456743 [! [! ¤£280 456741[!
AB119 [!
456755 456741 4567362 4567280 456751
get a fair representation of members from throughout the valley, individuals were selected by area to be contacted. If a person from say Highland Lakes agreed to be on the committee, then no other individuals from Highland Lakes were contacted. Once the initial list was depleted, names from subsequent secondary lists were selected the same way.
On the evening of August 7, 2012, the kick off meeting of the steering committee occurred at the Mt. Laurel Elementary School. Fifteen of the nineteen individuals who were contacted were in attendance. There were eight members who resided in the Chelsea North-Dunnavant Valley South-Westover North Beat representing such areas as Highland Lakes, Hollybrook Lake, Lake Wehapa, Mt. Laurel, Shoal Creek, and The Village at Highland Lakes. The remaining seven members in attendance resided in the Dunnavant Valley North Beat representing subdivisions such as Lake Providence and Shoal Ridge as well as areas surrounding the Dunnavant Community.
During this initial meeting of the steering committee, a presentation was made which included Census 2010 demographics, community facilities, transportation, and land use of the Dunnavant Valley. A small area plan was described, and roles for the steering committee members was explained, which included the promotion of the plan to fellow residents and refining goals and strategies developed at the upcoming community workshops. As a precursor to the first community workshop, steering committee members were asked to provide two issues a piece, which they felt were important to the valley.
On the evening of September 13, 2012, the first Community Workshop was held at the Mt. Laurel Elementary School. The workshop was well publicized – in print and/or online -- in the Birmingham News, Shelby County Reporter, and 280 Living as well as postings at the Mt. Laurel Library, the Dunnavant Community Center, and on the Shelby County Government website. Email notification blasts went out within a few of the larger neighborhoods in the Dunnavant Valley. The workshop was attended by sixty-four individuals with nearly a third coming from Mt. Laurel. A brief presentation was made, and the attendees were asked to tell County staff stationed at six large sheets of paper labeled with the topics of Land Use & Community Design, Transportation, Community Facilities & Public Services, Economic Development, Natural & Cultural Resources, and Housing any issues they have related to these topics. Some of the sheets were previously filled with issues generated by the steering committee. Following this exercise, a strip of four adhesive dots were handed out to the attendees, and they were told to place a dot or dots next to any of the issues listed beneath the topics in order to prioritize the issues.
As shown in Table 1, fifty-three issues were generated. During prioritization, eight issues received double dots, but twelve issues collected none. The top issue with 28 dots related to the need for bike lanes on CR 41. With 21 dots, the issue of no apartments or multifamily dwellings placed second. In third with 19 dots was the issue related to the preservation the undisturbed Oak and Double Oak Mountain ridges. Next with 16 dots was the issue of no annexation, while the issues of enhancing police presence and limiting large commercial developments tied with 15 dots. Other double dot issues included not wanting another grocery store with a pharmacy and no more zoning with 13 and 11 dots, respectively. This workshop exercise uncovered pressing valley issues as well as other issues, which might not have received double dots but warranted a further examination.
[- 10 -]
Table 1 COMMUNITY WORKSHOP ONE ISSUE GENERATION & PRIORITIZATION ISSUES DOTS Need bike lanes on CR 41 to move cyclists from the travel lanes 28 No apartments or multifamily dwellings 21 Preserve the undisturbed Oak and Double Oak Mountain ridges 19 No annexation 16 Enhance police presence by adding Sheriff's Office substation 15 Limit large commercial development (no "big boxes") 15 Do not want another grocery store with a pharmacy 13 No more zoning -- it encourages mass development 11 Need to enforce / reduce the speed limit on CR 41 9 Add pedestrian pathways along CR 41 7 Need to install pedestrian connections between neighborhoods 7 Preservation of viewscapes -- reduction in sign advertisements 7 Middle school for Valley 6 Build public park in Dunnavant with paved walking trail, basketball court, 5 children's playground, and picnic pavilions County library 4 Limitation of highway commercial uses -- chain gas stations & grocery 4 Need roundabouts at appropriate locations on CR 41 4 Pave established dirt roads 4 Construct safe children crossing zones on CR 41 near school 3 Design standards for community 3 Extend natural gas pipeline to Hwy 25 and down CR 41 north & south 3 Improve Hugh Daniel / CR 41 Intersection 3 No roundabouts and no conversion to boulevard 3 No storage facilities 3 Address train blockages of both ends of Mimosa Road (CR 41 & CR 101) 2 Control growth with respect to the needs of public safety entities 2 Develop more recreational walking trails 2 Develop public recreation areas / community parks 2 Install street lights at intersections / too dark at night 2 Maintain the green infrastructure / agricultural lands & facilities 2 Need lights / gates at railroad crossings on Mimosa Road (CR 41 & CR 101) 2 Regulate attractiveness / designs of commercial development 2 UVERSE access 2 Add additional traffic lanes on CR 41 in certain areas 1 Bring in a gas station 1 Consider zoning for unzoned areas from Wehapa to Hwy 25 & beyond 1 Do not install traffic lights on CR 41 1 Make CR 41 a boulevard with landscaped median 1 Restripe CR 41 to allow passing zones where it previously existed 1 Wildflower management and preservation 1 Attract a grocery store with a pharmacy 0 Increase availability of diverse small commercial shops 0 Increase county involvement in the valley 0 Increase water supply 0 Larger dog park 0 More tornado sirens / warning devices 0 Need a consistent speed limit for CR 41 0 Need a continuous "no passing" zone on CR 41 from US 280 to SR 25 0 Need safe pedestrian crossings to get from one side of CR 41 to the other side in Mt. Laurel area 0 Need to increase speed limit on CR 41 in certain places 0 No walking track past Mt. Laurel 0 Preserve and expand wetlands / wetland mitigation 0
[- 11 -]
Steering Committee meetings were held on September 27 and October 11, 2012 to discuss the workshop findings, commence the generation of goals, and develop initial objectives and strategies to address these goals. Eight goals were generated. The first goal was to improve and adequately maintain transportation routes and access throughout the valley. The second goal focused on improving public safety in the valley. Improving at grade railroad crossings was the third goal, while increasing community facilities and educational opportunities was the fourth goal. Goal five was to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety along Dunnavant Valley Road, and goal six was to increase public recreational opportunities. Discouraging growth patterns inconsistent with current development was the seventh goal, and preserving the rural character of the valley was the last goal.
Shelby County Development Services acquired an audience participation system in October 2012 to provide an automated real time question and answer program for the next community workshop. This audience participation system used keypads roughly the size of a credit card to register participant responses anonymously. Using the goals, objectives, and strategies from the last two Steering Committee meetings, as well as, the identified issues from the first community workshop, a forty question multiple choice answer program was developed. The next community workshop was set for the evening of November 1, 2012 at the Mt. Laurel Elementary School. Press releases went out to the Birmingham News and the Shelby County Reporter, and postings were placed throughout the community. Signs were placed along Dunnavant Valley Road, and email notification blasts were sent. The Community Workshop had forty-four participants. Of the participants who listed their zip codes, thirty-seven came from the 35242 zip code, while five stated that they resided in the 35094 zip code.
Following this workshop, a participant felt that her large neighborhood was not represented well and suggested that we hold another community workshop. An announcement was made that another Community Workshop would be held on November 27, 2012 at the Mt. Laurel Elementary School. The program with the same questions and answers presented on November 1 was exhibited again. In the press release to the Birmingham News and the Shelby County Reporter, the presentation was billed as a repeat program to minimize double participation. Results from both workshops have since been combined. Notifications were sent out as before especially to the abovementioned neighborhood. At this workshop, there were forty-seven new participants. Thirty-five of the new participants resided in the 35242 zip code, while nine lived in the 35094 zip code. Three participants did not identify their zip codes. Ninety-one individuals participated in the combined November Community Workshops. Seventy-two participants had their home in the 35242 zip code, while fourteen participants were a resident of the 35094 zip code. Five participants did not identify their residential zip codes.
The Steering Committee convened in December 2012 to discuss the workshops and provide their thoughts related to objectives and implementation strategies. They were asked to provide feedback on timelines such as immediate, short term, or long term that would be reasonable to attach to the strategies. After an initial draft plan was composed by staff, the Steering Committee met in May and June 2013 to tweak this initial draft plan in order to finalize the draft plan that would be presented to the Dunnavant Valley Community in August 2013.
[- 12 -]
II. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
TOPOGRAPHY
The Dunnavant Valley lies within one of five Alabama physiographical sections known as the Valley and Ridge, which is comprised of a series of zigzagging ridges and deep valleys that encompass the southernmost portion of the Appalachian Highlands Region’s Valley and Ridge Province. It is part of the sub-region known as the Coosa Ridges, which is one of two sixty mile long ridge districts – the other being the Cahaba Ridges. Within the Coosa Ridges in the plan area, the primary ridges comprise Oak and Double Oak Mountains with elevations extending toward 1,300 feet and 1,500 feet, respectively.
The Dunnavant Valley lies within the Coosa River Basin as all creeks that meander through the valley ultimately flow into the Coosa River. Meandering in a southerly direction is the Yellowleaf Creek, while flowing in a northerly direction is Shoal Creek. Long swaths bordering these creeks as well as areas surrounding them are situated within floodplains which are subject to periodic flooding.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), adopted the base flood standard. A base flood is a flood that has a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded each year; otherwise known as a 100 year flood. Base flood zone designations or Special Flood Hazard Areas found on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) within the valley are Zone A, which are determined by approximate methods of analysis. Examples of Zone A within the valley include Yellowleaf Creek, Shoal Creek, Lake Wehapa, Great Pine Lake, and Hillhouse Lake.
WETLANDS & ENDANGERED SPECIES
Wetlands are land areas where saturation with water is the primary factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of fauna and flora living within and on top of the soil. Their common theme is that soil in these areas are periodically saturated with or covered with water. Within the Dunnavant Valley, there exist two main types of wetlands, freshwater emergent wetlands and freshwater forested/shrub wetlands. Neither has long swaths along creeks, but the freshwater forested/shrub wetlands has several scattered patches along Shoal Creek from just south of Lake Wehapa north to Hillhouse Lake.
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 defines endangered species as those in danger of extinction and threatened species as those likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. As designated by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, critical habitats are specific geographic areas which may or may not be occupied by said species but are essential in their conservation. Eight of ten such mussel species within the county are found along the Coosa River tributary of Kelley Creek and its tributary of Shoal Creek, which includes northern portions of the valley. Endangered mussels consist of Southern acornshell (Epioblasma othcaloogensis), Upland combshell (Epioblasma metastriata), Ovate clubshell (Pleurobema perovatum), Southern clubshell (Pleurobema decisum), Southern pigtoe (Pleurobema georgianum), Coosa
[- 13 -]
MAP 3
DUNNAVANT VALLEY TOPOGRAPHY N SOURCE NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY TOPO! E E S U O MAP 4 H E L K IL LA H DUNNAVANT VALLEY SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS 4567101
456741 N 478 474 4567 4567 K L CR E E OA SOURCE SH FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) 4567470 DIGITAL FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (DFIRM) 456743 EFFECTIVE DATE 02/20/2013 4567480 AB25 4567487 456750 4567491 A AP H
E E W K AB25 L A 456741 CH AN BR E D K O A AB119 O L Y D H 55 R 4567 PU T B A E O GRE K B A 462 PINE L 4567 456741 456745 4567469 H AB25 U R R IC A N E H NG RO C C P R N Y D E 495 A UD E R M K 4567 B K
E E E L 43 E E 4567 R C AR BE
¤£280 41 4567 H C N A R AB119 B R R A 43
L 4567 55
P 4567 O
P Legend
100 Year Flood (Zones A / AE) 41 362 4567 4567 Floodway 280 51 NORTH FORK 4567YELLOWLEAF CREEK 4567 MAP 5
L E HIL HOU S DUNNAVANT VALLEY LAKE WETLANDS & ENDANGERED SPECIES
101 4567 456741
478 474 N 4567 4567K L CR E E OA SOURCES SH 470 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE 4567 456743 NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY 4567480 AND AB25 487 CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THREATENED 4567 456750 & ENDANGERED SPECIES 4567491 A AP H
E E W K AB25 L A 456741 CH AN BR E D K O A AB119 O L Y D H R PU T B A E O 456755 GR E K B A 462 PINE L 4567 456741 456745 4567469 H AB25 U R R IC A N G E H N RO C C P Y R N D E 495 A UD E R M K
4567 B E E L 43 E 4567 K E R E R C BE A
¤£280 41 4567 H C N A R AB119 B R R 43 A 4567
L 55 Legend
P 4567
O P Critical Habitat
Freshwater Emergent Wetland 41 362 4567 4567 Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland 280 51 NORTH FORK 4567YELLOWLEAF CREEK 4567
moccasinshell (Medionidus parvulus), and Triangular kidneyshell (Ptychobranchus greenii). Finelined pocketbook (Lampsilis altilis) is the lone threatened mussel species.
SOILS
The Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture in cooperation with the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, the Alabama Soil and Water Conservation Committee, and the Alabama Cooperative Extension Service conducted fieldwork between 1970 and 1980 to produce Soil Surveys. Although completed nearly thirty years ago, the soil characteristics have generally remained the same in undeveloped areas, following streams, and along ridges. General soil mapping shows broad areas that have a distinctive pattern of soils, relief, and drainage but should only be used to compare the suitability of large areas for general land uses. Detailed soil mapping can be used to determine the suitability, limitations, and potential of soils for a specific use.
Table 2 Shelby County Detailed Soil Map Units CS Choccolocco-Sterrett Association NcD Nauvoo-Sunlight Complex, 8-15% Slopes EtB Etowah Silt Loam, 2-6% Slopes NcE Nauvoo-Sunlight Complex, 15-25% Slopes
GrD Gorgas-Rock Outcrop Complex, 6-15% Slopes NMS Nella-Mountainburg Association, Steep
NaC Nauvoo Loam, 2-8% Slopes ToD Townley Silt Loam, 4-12% Slopes NaD Nauvoo Loam, 8-15% Slopes ToE Townley Silt Loam, 12-18% Slopes NaE Nauvoo Loam, 15-35% Slopes Source: Soil Survey of Shelby County, Alabama -- 1984
According to the Soil Survey of Shelby County, the Dunnavant Valley consists predominantly of NcE Nauvoo-Sunlight Complex, NaE Nauvoo Loam, and NMS Nella- Mountainburg Association soils. The NcE soil type contains moderately deep and shallow moderately steep well drained soils that formed in residuum of sandstone and siltstone, while the NMS soil type is found along the ridges. Although residential subdivisions have been developed on these soils, they are poorly suited for residential development because of limitations related to slope, depth to rock, moderate permeability, shallowness over rock, or low strength. While the above referenced soils are poorly suited for residential and urban development, the following soils are fairly suited for such development -- NaD Nauvoo Loam, NaC Nauvoo Loam, and NcD Nauvoo-Sunlight Complex.
[- 17 -]
ToE
MAP 6 CS
NcE NcD
W NaE DUNNAVANT VALLEY NcE NMS NcE 101 NcD DETAILED SOILS GrD 4567 CS NcE NaC GrD W
N 456741 NaD 478 CS NaC4567 W SOURCE 4567474 NaD NMS ToD 470 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE W 4567 W NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE NaD W 456743 ToE 480 55 SOIL SURVEY GEOGRAPHIC DATA (SSURGO) 4567W 4567 AB25 456750 487 CS 4567 ToD TsE 491 ToD NaD W W ToE 4567 W NaD NcE ToD ToD W ToE B25 EtB ToD A ToD NcE BmF 45 NcD 4567 MfD MfD W CS BmF 456741 CS W NcD NcD MfD ToD NcE W NcD ToE MfD W NaD ToD EtB 462 55 CS 4567 4567 BmF TsE EtB TsE ToD MfD AB119 TsE 469 NMS W 4567 TsE NcE Tu EtB NcD
MfE W CS AB25
QuB Ch W LEGEND TsE 495 ToD 4567 ToE W EtC MfD QuB 43 NcD ToD 4567 AnB DeC2 NaE GrDNcE NaE ToE EtB EtB W MuE NcE MfE NaC
NcE ToE MfD NaC NMS W AqC DtC HvD NcD TsE QuB W CS ToE 280 ¤£ NaENcE NaE 41 BmF DuB MfD ToE NcE TtE MfE 4567 W ToE NcE NcE ToE MfD CS
MfD EtB BrF DuD MfE NMS BmFTu NcD NaE AB119 NcD NcE EtB NaE EtB EtB BmF W ToE Ch DuX MuE Pits Tx ToE BmF MfE TsE W BmF W ToE NcD NaE TsE NcE CS EtB456755 NaC QuB Water 41 W 362 4567 TsE BmF EtB 4567 NcE MfD DeB2 ToEEtC NaD ToD MfE CS CS 51 W 280 4567 BmF BmF W ToD ToE MfD 4567 NcD ToD
III. SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS
DEMOGRAPHIC
The Dunnavant Valley is primarily an unincorporated area of north Shelby County. Population counts from Census 2010 show a population of 8,820 persons with 6,470 or 73 percent residing in unincorporated areas. As part of Census 2010, the United States Census Bureau classified three census-designated places (CDPs) within the Dunnavant Valley. A census-designated place is a concentration of population within an unincorporated area that acts similarly to an incorporated community. These census- designated places are identified as Highland Lakes CDP, Shoal Creek CDP, and Dunnavant CDP. Even though the census-designated place may have the name of a residential development, the CDP may extend beyond the development’s borders to pick up adjacent population concentrations. For instance, the Shoal Creek CDP is comprised of the residential developments of Shoal Creek, Mt. Laurel, Villas Belvedere, and Belvedere Cove. Highland Lakes, Aaaronvale, Birch Creek, Dunnavant Square, Fowler Lake, and the Village at Highland Lakes are included within the Highland Lakes CDP. Although three census designated places are recognized, there are 163 unincorporated residents not assigned to any CDP.
The Dunnavant Valley includes three municipalities whose populations account for 2,350 residents or 27 percent of the total valley population. Hoover has the largest population with Leeds and Chelsea trailing significantly. Residential developments within the Hoover city limits are Greystone Farms, North Lake at Greystone, and The Cove of Greystone.
Table 3 Dunnavant Valley 2010 Population by Place
Place Population Percent of Valley Population
Highland Lakes CDP 3,926 44.51%
Hoover 2,233 25.32%
Shoal Creek CDP 1,400 15.87%
Dunnavant CDP 981 11.12%
Unincorporated (unassigned) 163 1.85%
Leeds 106 1.20%
Chelsea 11 0.12%
TOTAL 8,820 100%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
[- 19 -]
MAP 7
DUNNAVANT VALLEY CITIES & CENSUS 4567101 DESIGNATED PLACES (CDPs) 456741 4567478 N 4567474 4567470 480 456743 4567 456755 AB25 456750 4567487 456741 4567491
AB25 456745
456741 4567462 456755 AB119 4567469 AB25
4567495 280 ¤£ 456743 Places with 2010 Census Population Highland Lakes CDP 3,926
Hoover 2,233 456741 Shoal Creek CDP 1,400
AB119 Dunnavant CDP 981
Unincorporated 163
280 ¤£ Leeds 106 456755 41 4567 Chelsea 11 4567362 4567280 456751
In the Dunnavant Valley, the majority of the population falls within four age groups between 35 years of age and 64 years of age. The combined total of these groups is 4,301 persons or 48.76 percent of the total population of the valley. Within these four age groups, the Highland Lakes CDP accounts for 2,045 individuals. A significant portion of the population lies within the ‘aging’ category. Senior citizens or those at least 65 years of age comprise 1,074 of the total population. When combined with the 1,406 individuals in the two ‘senior’ age groups from 55 years of age to 64 years of age, older valley residents encompass 2,480 persons or 28.12 percent of the total valley population.
At the other end of the age spectrum, the age groups of school-age children stand out as well. School-age children between 5 years of age to 17 years of age total 1,781 or 20.19 percent of the total population. The number of children below 5 years of age equals 588.
Table 4 Dunnavant Valley 2010 Population by Age Group and Place Age Group Highland Hoover Shoal Dunnavant Unincorporated Leeds Chelsea TOTAL Lakes CDP Creek CDP CDP (unassigned) Under 5 Years 301 81 129 63 6 8 0 588 5 to 9 Years 357 190 119 73 8 7 0 754 10 to 14 Years 295 233 81 58 8 9 1 685 15 to 17 Years 128 107 43 50 10 4 0 342 18 to 19 Years 38 36 17 23 2 0 1 117 20 to 24 Years 78 52 29 50 11 2 1 223 25 to 34 Years 337 116 146 104 18 14 1 736 35 to 44 Years 679 341 214 141 11 15 1 1,402 45 to 54 Years 697 405 201 140 33 14 3 1,493 55 to 59 Years 344 155 118 56 23 8 1 705 60 to 64 Years 325 167 116 76 13 4 0 701 65 to 74 Years 266 231 109 105 13 18 2 744 75 to 84 Years 63 106 67 36 6 2 0 280 85 Years and Over 18 13 11 6 1 1 0 50 Source: U.S. Census Bureau
As found in Table 5, 7,829 individuals in the Dunnavant Valley or 88.76 percent of the total valley population are white, non-Hispanic. The Highland Lakes CDP maintains the highest concentration of the white, non-Hispanic population with 43.49 percent. Blacks make up 5.25 percent of the total population with 463 persons, followed by Asians with 2.72 percent of the total population. Hoover has the greatest place concentration of Asians with 46.25 percent, while the Highland Lakes CDP has the highest place concentrations of both blacks (64.36 percent) and Hispanics (40.76 percent).
[- 21 -]
Table 5 Dunnavant Valley 2010 Population by Race / Ethnicity and Place Race / Ethnicity Highland Hoover Shoal Dunnavant Unincorporated Leeds Chelsea TOTAL Lakes CDP Creek CDP CDP (unassigned) White, Non-Hispanic 3,405 1,964 1,279 936 136 104 5 7,829 Black 298 90 67 4 2 0 2 463 Asian 89 111 31 0 5 0 4 240 Hispanic 64 33 19 23 17 1 0 157 Other 70 35 4 18 3 1 0 131 Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Clearly, the Dunnavant Valley is an area where families reside as the majority of all households are family households. The Highland Lakes CDP has the greatest percentage of family households at 88.44 percent. Of these family households, 93.09 percent are married couple families. As for the Shoal Creek CDP and the Dunnavant CDP, the family household percentages are 79.81 percent and 71.81 percent, respectively; while the married couple family household percentages are 88.29 percent and 74.07 percent, respectively. Within Hoover the percentage of family households is 74.68 percent, and the percentage of married couple family households is 88.50 percent. Family households with children less than 18 years of age in the three CDPs have percentages in excess of 44 percent, while the percentage in Hoover exceeds 46 percent.
Table 6 Dunnavant Valley 2010 Households by Type and Place Shoal Highland Dunnavant Unincorporated Creek HooverChelsea Leeds Lakes CDP CDP (unassigned) CDP Total Households 1,375 535 376 873 3 40 56
Family Households 1,216 427 270 652 3 29 50
With Own Children Under 18 Years 544 189 119 301 1 13 13
Married Couple Families 1,132 377 200 577 3 20 44
With Own Children Under 18 Years 499 161 85 258 1 8 12
Nonfamily Households 159 108 106 221 0 11 6
Average Household Size 2.86 2.62 2.61 2.56 3.67 2.65 2.91
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
[- 22 -]
MAP 8
DUNNAVANT VALLEY INCORPORATED PLACES 4567101 N 456741 4567478 4567474 4567470
480 43 4567 4567 456755 AB25 456750 4567487 4567491
AB25 456745 456741 Birmingham
4567462 456755 4567469 AB25
AB119 Hoover
4567495 456743 456755
¤£280 456741
AB119
Pelham 456741 4567362 4567280 Westover 456751
INCOME
Income figures were calculated for the three census designated places and census tracts rather than census blocks for incorporated areas within the Dunnavant Valley. To show any data for Hoover and Chelsea, Census Tracts 302.16 and 302.17 were involved. Census Tract 302.16 integrated portions of these cities south of Hugh Daniel Drive and west of County Road 41 as well as the Highland Lakes CDP. Those portions of Hoover north of Hugh Daniel Drive and west of County Road 41 are included within Census Tract 302.17. This latter tract encompassed areas of Hoover west of Oak Mountain and also portions of the Dunnavant CDP. Since Census Tract 309 consisted of the Dunnavant CDP, other unincorporated areas east of Double Oak Mountain, and portions of both Leeds and Westover, it was not included.
Overall, the majority of households had household incomes greater than $75,000. The Highland Lakes CDP had 73.80 percent of its households fall into that category, while the Shoal Creek CDP had 68.32 percent and the Dunnavant CDP had 53.52 percent of their households fall into that category. Both census tracts had over 70 percent of their households exceeding incomes of $75,000. Although the Highland Lakes CDP had the highest median household income in the valley ($124,855), the Shoal Creek CDP had the highest per capita income with $80,887.
Table 7 Dunnavant Valley Households by Income and Place (2007-2011) Highland Shoal Dunnavant Census Tract Census Tract Income Lakes CDP Creek CDP CDP 302.16 302.17 Total Households 1,485 483 284 2,331 1,830
Less than $10,000 39 0 24 63 45
$10,000 to $14,999 33 0 10 33 10
$15,000 to $24,999 0 0 14 7 62
$25,000 to $34,999 73 35 27 73 27
$35,000 to $49,999 169 60 45 328 98
$50,000 to $74,999 75 58 12 185 188
$75,000 to $99,999 84 63 32 164 149
$100,000 to $149,999 480 108 88 682 333
$150,000 to $199,999 173 67 0 326 239
$200,000 or more 359 92 32 470 679
Median Household Income $124,855 $112,344 $85,000 $121,250 $152,875
Per Capita Income $59,548 $80,887 $40,870 $58,326 $79,972
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey 2007-2011
[- 24 -]
The Dunnavant Valley has a very low unemployment rate with the rates for all areas below 7 percent. The Dunnavant CDP has the lowest unemployment rate with 0 percent, while the Highland Lakes CDP has the highest rate at 6.7 percent.
Table 8 Dunnavant Valley Employment by Status and Place Highland Shoal Dunnavant Census Tract Census Tract
Lakes CDP Creek CDP CDP 302.16 302.17 Population 16 Years and Over 3,256 902 511 4,763 3,925
Labor Force 2,213 611 360 3,425 2,115
Employed 2,064 595 360 3,251 2,041
Unemployed 149 16 0 174 74
Females 16 Years and Over 1,608 512 228 2,459 1,971
Females in Labor Force 1,008 301 112 1,668 658
Employed Females 935 301 112 1,584 632
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Occupations of those in the Dunnavant Valley are primarily those of management and the professional trades. Such occupations account for over 50 percent of workers found in the Highland Lakes and Shoal Creek CDPs and the two census tracts. Sales and office occupations come in second in these two CDPs and two census tracts, but the production and transportation trades come in second in the Dunnavant CDP.
Table 9 Dunnavant Valley Workers by Occupation and Place Highland Shoal Dunnavant Census Census
Lakes CDP Creek CDP CDP Tract 302.16 Tract 302.17 Employed Population 16 Years and Over 2,064 595 360 3,251 2,041
Management / Professional 1,117 316 105 1,864 1,180
Service 182 46 56 259 151
Sales / Office 638 175 74 907 687
Construction / Maintenance / Repair 10 30 38 55 23
Production / Transportation 117 28 87 166 0
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
[- 25 -]
IV. LAND USE
The Dunnavant Valley comprises 31 square miles or 19,853 acres. Existing uses of land can be divided into the broad land use classifications of rural, residential, commercial, institutional, and recreational as well as undeveloped vacant lots.
Rural land use is defined as land that has by and large been left undisturbed and undeveloped in relation to the built environment. This land use is typically found on the outer fringes of the urban areas. The land within this classification comprises agricultural lands such as croplands, pasturelands, and forestlands. Not all of the land is used for agricultural purposes as large tracts of land do exist without agricultural activities on them. Developers may own large undeveloped tracts within this classification. Typically, the only structures found on these large tracts are barns, farmhouses, ranches, and scattered houses and manufactured homes that are not part of larger subdivisions. Dunnavant Valley has 23 square miles or 14,566 acres of rural land.
Residential land use is defined as land that has been subdivided and/or developed with structures such as single family dwellings, manufactured and mobile homes, apartments, duplexes, trailer parks, and senior living facilities. The dwelling units within each type of structure are either owned or rented by individuals who typically consider such units their permanent residences. Dunnavant Valley has 2,810 acres of residential land.
Commercial land use is defined as land that has been subdivided and/or developed to primarily carry on a wide range of business and office activities such as retail; professional, scientific, and technical services; financial, insurance, and real estate agencies; information services; medical, health, and animal care; and accommodation services. Dunnavant Valley has 61 acres of commercial land.
Recreational land use is defined as land used for the operation and/or provision of public or private services for a variety of leisure activities such as active parks which include baseball / softball fields, football fields, soccer fields, tennis courts, and basketball courts; passive parks which include open fields for general use with a scattering of picnic tables, pavilions, and trails; golf courses; recreational centers; and historic sites. Dunnavant Valley has 1,542 acres of recreational land.
Institutional land use is defined as land used by public and quasi-public entities such as governments, religious organizations, and non-profit agencies for administrative buildings, fire and police stations, libraries, schools, churches, and cemeteries. Dunnavant Valley has 81 acres of institutional land.
Undeveloped Vacant Lots land use is defined as land that has been subdivided and prepared for development that includes but is not limited to clearing, grading, utility connections, and/or roadway connections, but has not been fully developed with structures. Dunnavant Valley has 797 acres of unfinished vacant lots.
[- 26 -]
MAP 9
DUNNAVANT VALLEY EXISTING LAND USE
101 4567 456741 4567478 4567474 N 4567470 456743 4567480 AB25 4567487 456741 456750 4567491
AB25
AB119 456755 462 456741 4567 456745 4567469
AB25
4567495 456743 ¤£280 Legend
Agricultural
Recreational AB119 456743 Undeveloped Vacant Lots 456755 Residential 41 280 4567 ¤£ Commercial
4567362 Institutional 4567280 456751
V. ZONING
Pursuant to the authority granted by Act Number 82-693 in July 1982 and as amended by Act Number 84-454 in May 1984 enacted by the Alabama State Legislature, Shelby County was provided the ability to establish zoning districts and regulations. However, this authority is only granted to cover defined areas called zoning beats where an election has occurred in which the majority of unincorporated registered voters in a zoning beat signify by their votes desiring the zoning authority of the Shelby County Planning Commission and the application of the Zoning Regulations of Shelby County within said beat. The Shelby County Department of Development Services acts as staff to the Shelby County Planning Commission in zoning matters as well as matters related to subdivision regulations. Said staff is available to discuss zoning to residents in areas without zoning to better inform these residents on the zoning process, the zoning districts, and the zoning regulations. Zoning information may also be found on the Shelby County Government website.
A petition requesting a zoning beat election must be filed with the Shelby County Probate Judge. This petition must contain the signatures of no less than fifteen percent of the unincorporated registered voters who both live and own real estate in said beat. Following public notice posting, the zoning election will be held no less than 90 and no more than 120 days after petition filing and after the Voting Rights Act review by the United States Department of Justice. Only unincorporated registered voters will be permitted to vote.
During petition authentication by the Probate Judge and prior to the election, Development Services staff will conduct a land use study and prepare a proposed zoning map for said beat. Public workshops are conducted to gather feedback regarding the proposed zoning map. Also, during this period, the Shelby County Planning Commission will hold public hearings on the proposed zoning map and recommend its approved zoning map to the Shelby County Commission for adoption. If the zoning election passes, the Shelby County Commission, following a public hearing, may adopt the recommended zoning map, or may adopt a revised zoning map. However if said election fails, another petition may not be filed nor an election held until after 730 days have passed from the date of said election.
The fundamental purpose of zoning is to promote the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare. Specifically, the purposes of zoning are to encourage the use of land and natural resources according to their characteristics and adaptability; to limit the improper use of land; and to provide for the orderly development and growth. Further, the purposes include establishing the location, size, and the specific uses for which dwellings, buildings and structures may be erected or altered; providing for the minimum open spaces and the sanitary, safety, and protective measures required for all buildings; and avoiding congestion on the public roads. Also, zoning provides for safety in traffic and vehicular parking; facilitates the development of adequate systems of transportation, education, recreation, sewage disposal, safe and sufficient water supply, and other public requirements; reduces hazards to life and property; and stabilizes property values.
[- 28 -]
MAP 10
L eed s DUNNAVANT VALLEY ZONING 4567101 Dunnavant Valley North N 456741 4567478 4567474 4567470
AB25 480 456743 4567 487 55 456750 4567 4567 4567491 H-Z E-1 A-1
H-Z Birmingham 456741 North A-R E-1 A-R Shelby-I65 456745 462 456755 Corridor ______4567 E-1 A-1 ______A-R AB119 ______469 H-Z H-Z 4567 A-1 ______A -1 ______AB25 R-1 __ ___B-2 ______E-1 ______E-1 SD B-2 ___ H-Z ______H-Z R-5______Sterrett-Vandiver ______B-2 ______495 Hoover ______4567 A-1 ______E-1 E-1______SD ______456743 ______Chelsea 456755 ______SD______North-Dunnavant Valley ______SD ______SD H-Z South-Westover North E-2 ______R -4 SD ______¤£280______A-R 41 Legend ______R-5______4567 A-1 R-1 A-1 E-1 ______SD ______E-2 H-Z Holding Zone District E-2 Single Family Estate District R-4 Multi-Family Special District B-2 General Business District E-2 SD ______R-2 ______H-Z ______E-2 ______119 H-Z H-Z Holding Zone Special District E-2 Single Family Estate Special District R-5 Multi-Family District B-2 G eneral Business Special District _____AB ______A-1 ______A-1 ______A-1 Agricultural District ____ R-1 Single Family District ____ R-5 Multi-Family Special District ____ M-1 Light Industrial District R -1 ______A-1 A-1 Agricultural Special District R-1 Single Family Special District O-I Office and Institutional District M-2 Heavy Industrial District ______A-R H-Z E-1 ______Westover ______E-1 Pelham ______H-Z A-R Agricultural-Residential District R-2 Single Family District O-I(2) Office and Institutional District ____ SD Special District A-R ______E-1 Single Family Estate District R-2 Single Family Special District A-1O-I(2) Office and Institutional Special District Zoning Beat 362 456741 ______Chelsea4567 ______B-2 E-1 Single Family Estate Special District R-4 Multi-Family District B-1 Neighborhood Business District Municipality ____ A-1 H-Z South 280 R-1 A-R 51 4567 H-Z C helsea ____ 4567
Portions of the Dunnavant Valley are located in two zoning beats – the Chelsea North- Dunnavant Valley South- Westover North Beat, where zoning was adopted January 24, 2005, and the Dunnavant Valley North Beat, which has never filed for a zoning election petition.
The H-Z Holding Zone District, which is the predominant zoning designation in the zoned area of Dunnavant Valley, is intended to provide for the proper timing and phasing of growth within areas of undeveloped property. Permitted uses within this district consist of general agricultural activities which include pasturelands, croplands, and forestlands as well as single family dwellings on parcels of 10 acres or more. Conditional uses allow for single family dwellings on parcels of less than 10 acres and manufactured homes.
The A-R Agricultural-Residential District is intended to provide a zoning classification for low-density development of primarily agricultural purposes and single family dwellings with minimum lot sizes of three acres. Conditional uses are restricted to outdoor recreation. Stonegate Farms, Smyer Lake, and Hollybrook Lake are located within an A-R District. A- 1 Districts are primarily for agricultural purposes but allow single family dwellings and manufactured homes on parcels with a minimum lot size of one acre.Areas of A-1 Agricultural Districts are found along Hawksview Drive, Old Dunnavant Valley Road, and Dunnavant Valley Cove as well as Double Oak Way, Lane, and Court.
The E-1 Single Family Estate District is primarily a single family dwelling district with the minimum lot size is one acre. Conditional uses include outdoor recreation, churches, and schools. Lake Wehapa is a development within this zoning designation. Planned residential special districts (SD) can be added to certain districts such as the E-1 District to restrict use further to allow a development to better fit an environment. Shoal Creek is designated as an E-1 SD Single Family Estate Special District. Another estate district with the same permitted and conditional uses as the E-1 District is the E-2 Single Family Estate District; however, its minimum lot size is 20,000 square feet. Highland Lakes was approved as a planned residential special district and is designated as an E-2 SD Single Family Estate Special District.
A non-estate district with the same permitted and conditional uses as the estate districts but with a 15,000 square foot minimum lot size is the R-1 Single Family District. Aaronvale and Forest Parks are zoned R-1. The R-2 Single Family District is another non-estate district with the same permitted and conditional uses as the estate districts but with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Villas Belvedere and Belvedere Cove are R-2 SD Districts.
Planned special districts that may include a mixture of residential and commercial uses are found in the zoned area of the Dunnavant Valley with a zoning designation of SD Special District. SD developments include Mt. Laurel, the Village at Highland Lakes, Fowler Lake, and Dunnavant Square. Two commercial zoning districts, the O-I Office and Institutional District and the B-2 General Business District, are located near US 280. The O-I District includes a church, and the B-2 District contains Shelby County’s 1996 Fields Soccer Complex and Sports Blast.
[- 30 -]
VI. COMMUNITY FACILITIES
POLICE PROTECTION
The Dunnavant Valley is served by three police departments as well as Alabama State Troopers from the Department of Public Safety. The Shelby County Sheriff’s Office provides police protection for the unincorporated areas and by contract, the Chelsea city limits. The Hoover Police Department and the Leeds Police Department furnishes police protection for their respective city limits. Hoover police officers patrol its areas on a regular basis twenty four hours a day seven days a week using three shifts (day, evening, and night) or by incident occurrence and ‘response’ from its Inverness Police Substation located on US 280 at Inverness Corners. State Troopers are charged under State Law with enforcing all laws relating or pertaining to the operation or movement of motor vehicles on public highways – interstates, US highways, State routes, and County roads.
Deputies from the Sheriff’s Office patrol the Dunnavant Valley on a regular basis twenty four hours a day seven days a week using two twelve hour shifts. Shelby County is divided into twelve patrol beats serving the unincorporated areas and four patrol beats covering the contracted incorporated areas of Chelsea, Indian Springs Village, Westover, Wilsonville, and Wilton. Beat 5170 lies entirely within the Dunnavant Valley but does not encompass the whole valley. The southern part of the valley, basically south of Mt. Laurel, is covered by Beat 5150, which includes Highland Lakes and Birch Creek but also areas outside the Dunnavant Valley such as The Narrows and Eagle Point. Distribution of deputies is based on several factors including but not limited to available personnel, time of day, population, incidence frequency, response times, roadway network, and congestion. Ideally, each twelve hour shift should have between ten and twelve deputies assigned meaning each beat averages one deputy per twelve hour shift. Therefore, the Dunnavant Valley ideally could have two patrol deputies per shift during certain times but not always as the deputy assigned to Beat 5150 might be patrolling said beat’s areas west of Oak Mountain. If a neighboring beat such as Beat 5130 or Beat 5180 has an urgent call and that particular beat’s deputy is busy, then the deputy from Beat 5150 or Beat 5170 might be pulled to cover the call and vice versa.
Over the period between 2008 and 2012 as shown in the Crime Statistics table below, property theft was as the most reported crime in Beats 5150 and 5170 with a combined 506 cases reported. Domestic violence followed as the second leading crime with a combined 467 cases reported. In examining the annual cases for each of these two charges, no significant divide existed between the two beats as such crime was extremely high annually for each beat. Property theft reports for Beat 5170 actually exceeded ones for Beat 5150 in 2012 after trailing in all of the previous four years of the time period. Domestic violence reports for Beat 5170 surpassed ones for Beat 5150 in 2010 and 2012 with reports exceeding 60 in both years. Harassment and burglary have been the third and fourth most reported crimes within the two beats covering the Dunnavant Valley with 236 and 220 cases reported, respectively, over the five year period. Burglary reports in Beat 5170 have topped such reports in Beat 5150 annually, and Beat 5170’s combined harassment reports outdid Beat 5150’s reports.
[- 31 -]
MAP 11
DUNNAVANT VALLEY POLICE PROTECTION
4567101 N 456741 4567478 4567474 4567470 456743 4567480 AB25 4567487 456741 456750 4567491
AB25
456755 462 456741 4567 456745 4567469
AB25 55 AB119 4567
495 4567 Legend 280 456743 ¤£ Sheriff's Office (Patrol Beat 5150)
Sheriff's Office (Patrol Beat 5170)
Sheriff's Office (Patrol Beat 5330)
Sheriff's Office (Patrol Beat 5340) AB119 456743 Birmingham Police Department
Hoover Police Department 41 280 4567 ¤£ Leeds Police Department
4567362 Pelham Police Department 4567280 456751
As for traffic enforcement statistics in Beats 5150 and 5170 between 2008 and 2012, specific traffic citation data was not publically available. However, the total traffic stops per beat during that time period were 1,947 incidents in Beat 5150 and 2,169 incidents in Beat 5170. Traffic accident data can be found in the Traffic Accidents section of the Transportation chapter by roadway as opposed to by beat.
Table 10 Crime Statistics for Beats 5150 and 5170 by Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Charge 5150 5170 5150 5170 5150 5170 5150 5170 5150 5170 Assault 5 5 11 5 11 9 5 5 11 3
Burglary 14 26 23 42 18 39 13 19 7 19
Child Abuse 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 0
Criminal Mischief 16 10 15 26 9 15 12 10 11 5
Death Investigation 0 25 4 12 3 15 0 14 5 13
Domestic Violence 42 36 53 46 46 63 43 42 36 60
Fight 2 1 1 0 3 0 2 0 2 2
Fire & Arson 6 7 6 2 4 2 9 4 6 7
Harassment 27 17 32 27 23 35 18 26 17 14
Kidnapping 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
Rape 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
Robbery 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0
Sex Offenses 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 3 4 5
Stolen Vehicle 5 7 4 5 6 8 4 2 5 2
Property Theft 62 51 60 50 59 54 54 36 35 45
Vehicle Breaking/Entering 8 9 14 12 20 8 18 4 8 4
Source: Shelby County Sheriff’s Office
FIRE PROTECTION
The Dunnavant Valley is served by four fire districts or departments. The unincorporated areas are protected by the Cahaba Valley Fire & EMR District and the Dunnavant Fire District. Both are legally established fire districts with set boundaries and mandatory fire dues based on property values as assessed by the Shelby County Tax Commissioner. Cahaba Valley Fire & EMR District provides fire suppression and emergency medical services out of two stations. Station 183 in Mt. Laurel houses a 2004 Ferrara Engine (1,250 GPM) and a 2008 Chevrolet 3500 AEV Transport Ambulance. Located in The Narrows,
[- 33 -]
MAP 12 Leeds DUNNAVANT VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION AREAS
N 4567101 41 Station 4567 4567478 #2 4567474 4567470 456743 Station #1 AB25 456750 4567487
491 Station 4567 #1 AB25 456741 Birmingham Station #9 45 4567 456755 4567462
Station #2 AB25
AB119 Legend
4567495 Station Fire Station #8 456743 Birmingham Fire & Rescue Hoover Cahaba Valley Fire & EMR District
Chelsea Fire & Rescue Station Station Dunnavant Fire District 456741 #181 #183 Hoover Fire Department
280 Leeds Fire Department AB119 ¤£ 456743 Westover 456755 North Shelby County Fire & EM District Pelham Fire Department
Vandiver Fire District
Pelham Westover Fire Department 41 362 4567 4567 Station Westover Volunteer Fire & Rescue #185 Chelsea 456751
Station 185 holds a 2004 Ferrara Engine (1,250 GPM) and a 2008 Chevrolet 5500 Excellance Transport Ambulance.
Cahaba Valley Fire & EMR District also participates in a resident program. The resident program is a unique way for volunteer fire personnel to go to college, have a place to live, a part time job, and even a scholarship for school. Personnel enrolled in this program work one 24 hour shift per week and receive an apartment located at a fire station complete with all utilities. For one extra 24-hour shift per two weeks worked, personnel can receive a scholarship worth $4350.00 per year to pay for school. These personnel are scheduled for shifts within the department to supplement the career staff on duty. Personnel who are accepted into the program will be required to obtain an Ambulance Operators License and attend a 400 hour Firefighter I course within 1 year of entering the program. After completion of the Firefighter I/II course at the department's expense, participants are required to continue with the department for two years. Both fire stations maintain six, one bedroom apartments for the resident program.
The Dunnavant Fire District has its main fire station located at the intersection of Dunnavant Valley Road and State Route 25. Station 1 houses a 2010 Freightliner Engine, two Ford Tankers (1984 & 1976), a Chevrolet Military Ambulance (1980s), and a 1975 International Brush Truck. A secondary fire station sits in front of the Dunnavant Community Center and contains a 1976 Ford Engine and a 1957 International Engine. Although secondary in nature, Station 2 engines would be the primary responders for areas off Mimosa Road in the unlikely event this road’s railroad crossings are blocked by either a moving or stopped train.
The incorporated areas are served by their respective municipal fire departments – Hoover Fire Department, Chelsea Fire Department, and Leeds Fire Department. Hoover subdivisions are covered by Station 8 in Greystone on the west side of Oak Mountain.
WATER & SANITARY SEWER SERVICES
The Dunnavant Valley is served by three water systems. Birmingham Water Works serves the majority of the area with lines covering Highland Lakes, Shoal Creek, Greystone Crest, Stonegate, Lake Wehapa and the Dunnavant Community. Shelby County Water Services provides water to the residents of Mt. Laurel, Villas Belvedere, Belvedere Cove, Greystone Farms, The Village at Highland Lakes, and the Cove at Greystone. Residents within the Leeds city limits are served by the Leeds Water Department. Birmingham Water Works has three water tanks on Oak Mountain. Shelby County Water Services has one water tank on Double Oak Mountain and one on Oak Mountain.
Wastewater collection, other than through septic tank usage, is primarily handled by the private wastewater companies of SWWC Utilities, Inc., a subsidiary of Southwest Water Company, and Double Oak Water Reclamation LLC (DOWR). In 2005 Southwest Water Company purchased the North Shelby Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) and associated infrastructure from Shelby County. With an un-expandable capacity of three million gallons per day and situated just west of Oak Mountain, the North Shelby WWTP treats, among others, wastewater from Greystone Farms, North Lake at Greystone, and
[- 35 -]
MAP 13 Leeds DUNNAVANT VALLEY COMMUNITY FACILITIES
4567101 N 456741 4567478 4567474
4567470 Dunnavant Senior 43 Center 4567 4567480 AB25 4567487 Vandiver50 491 4567 4567 Park Vandiver-Sterrett Senior CenterAB25 Lake 456741 Birmingham Purdy
456755 462 Lake 4567 Purdy Lake 456745 Purdy 4567469 AB25
AB119
4567495 456743 Hoover Greystone Elementary School Mt. Laurel Public Library Legend 280 ¤£ Mt. Laurel Elementary Æc Library School
Westover Post Office AB119 456743 456755 School Pelham Oak 456741 Senior Center Mountain ! ! State Park ! Dunnavant Community Greenway SportsBlast Oak Mountain 362 Shelby Forest State 4567 Public Parks County Parks Chelsea Park 4567280 456751 MAP 14 Leeds DUNNAVANT VALLEY WATER SERVICE 4567101
N 456741 4567478 4567474 4567470 456741
480 43 4567 4567 456755 AB25 456750 4567487 4567491
AB25
Birmingham AB119 45 456741 4567 4567462 456755 4567469 AB25
4567495 !! ! 456743 Hoover 456755
¤£280 456741 Legend ! ! ! Shelby County Water Services Tank 119 AB ! Birmingham Water Works Tank
Shelby County Water Services
Pelham Birmingham Water Works ! 456741 ! 362 4567 Chelsea Leeds Water Department 4567280 Westover 456751
!
The Cove at Greystone. Southwest Water Company acquired in 2008 the Riverview WWTP and associated infrastructure from the Birmingham Water Works and Sewer Board (BWWSB). Even though Highland Lakes is closer to the North Shelby WWTP, its wastewater is treated by the Riverview WWTP with an expandable capacity of three million gallons per day. DOWR, under an operational contract with SWWC Utilities, serves Birch Creek, Mt. Laurel, The Village at Highland Lakes, Dunnavant Square, Villas Belvedere, and Belvedere Cove with a one million gallons (expandable to six million gallons) per day capacity. None of the WWTP’s are near capacity, and a rule of thumb related to usage, is that one million gallons per day equates to usage by five thousand homes. The Shoal Creek Country Club has its own WWTP, which handles discharges generated by its recreational facilities such as maintaining its golf course and club amenities.
LIBRARY
The majority of the Dunnavant Valley lies within the North Shelby Library District, an area created in 1988 by an act of the State Legislature and a vote of the area residents to provide library services to an area which lacked a library and was not within any municipality. This act created a taxing district in order to provide mandatory continuous funding for library capital costs and operations. Property owners are assessed either a $15 homestead rate or 1.75 mils of the assessed value of their property as determined by the Shelby County Tax Commissioner. Homeowners who have a homestead exemption do not pay more than $15, but if they are over 65 years of age, they do not have to pay any taxes. Cities have annexed property within the district boundaries; however, the legislative act does not exempt future city residents from being taxed. Landowners south of the district boundary, which lies between Lake Wehapa and the Dunnavant Community, are subject to this tax, including residents of Hoover and Chelsea.
Located outside the Dunnavant Valley, the North Shelby Library is on Cahaba Valley Road (State Route 119). Volunteers formed a non-profit association known as the Friends of the Mt. Laurel Public Library and were able, through donations, to rent space in the commercial core of Mt. Laurel to open a temporary branch of the North Shelby Library called the Mt. Laurel Library. The goal is to build a permanent branch library, and while the land on Olmsted Street between the Mt. Laurel Grocery and the Double Oak Community Church has been donated, private funds totaling an estimated $250,000 are needed to construct the building as no government or library district monies will be used. Once built, it will be staffed, operated, and supplied by the North Shelby Library District.
PARKS AND RECREATION
The Dunnavant Valley has just one public park but it is geared toward one activity – soccer. The 1996 Fields Soccer Complex is a county-owned park located in the extreme southern portion of the Valley near the intersection of Dunnavant Valley Road and US 280. The complex has six soccer fields on over fifty acres. Adjacent to the complex is Sports Blast Shelby County, a county-owned dual-field indoor sports facility that caters to a wide range of indoor activities such as soccer, futsal, flag football, and fencing. The Mt. Laurel Elementary School has a playground and walking track on its campus.
[- 38 -]
The completed phase one of the Dunnavant Valley Greenway commences at a trailhead within the 1996 Fields Soccer Complex; traverses nearly two miles through wooded terrain roughly following the Yellowleaf Creek; and ending at a trailhead on Dunnavant Valley Road. This unpaved natural-base section of the greenway is located on both county-owned land and privately-held property, by agreement. Future phases are planned to take the greenway toward Mt. Laurel and Villas Belvedere using road rights of way.
The Dunnavant Community Center is located on Mimosa Road (CR 41). This facility houses the Dunnavant Senior Center, which provides programs and activities geared for senior citizens, and holds a weekly Thursday luncheon and an occasional turkey shoot.
Several residential developments offer their residents recreational opportunities. Shoal Creek has a golf course, while Shoal Creek along with Mt. Laurel and The Cove at Greystone offers tennis courts and swimming pools. Greystone Farms and Belvedere Cove have swimming pools. Lakes for swimming, fishing, and/or boating are numerous.
The Forest Park and Recreational Area, a county-owned park on US 280 is located on the eastern slope of Double Oak Mountain. This park is approximately 100 acres and has basketball courts, three soccer fields, a tot lot, swings, and a nature trail.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Three school systems, Shelby County Schools; Hoover City Schools; and Leeds City Schools, serve residents of the Dunnavant Valley. The unincorporated portions of the valley and those areas within the city limits of Chelsea are zoned for the Chelsea Attendance Zone of the Shelby County School System. Residents within the city limits of Hoover attend Hoover City Schools, while residents within the city limits of Leeds attend Leeds City Schools. Only one school, Mt. Laurel Elementary School, is physically located within the Dunnavant Valley being within the unincorporated development of Mt. Laurel.
Currently, Mt. Laurel Elementary School is one of two K-3 grade schools within the Chelsea Attendance Zone. Commencing in school year 2013-2014 with the completion of the Forest Oaks Elementary School, it will be one of three K-5 grade schools – with Chelsea Park Elementary School being the other one. Students currently move from Mt. Laurel Elementary School to Chelsea Intermediate School which houses all of the 4th and 5th grades within the attendance zone. However in school year 2013-2014, the students will move to the Chelsea Middle School which maintains all grades 6 through 8 and will utilize the adjacent vacated intermediate school for more space. The attendance zone’s grades 9 through 12 are at Chelsea High School. Enrollment numbers are shown below.
Enrollment at the schools within the Chelsea Attendance Zone has increased. Between 2008 and 2012, Mt. Laurel Elementary School increased its enrollment 16.92 percent, while the other elementary school had an increase of 18.95 percent. The intermediate school increased 24.67 percent, the middle school grew 35.36 percent, and the high school rose 29.30 percent. A new elementary school along with grade reconfigurations and additions are addressing the enrollment growth. Mt. Laurel Elementary School was restricted to a 750 student capacity when it was approved to be built.
[- 39 -]
Table 11 Chelsea Attendance Zone Enrollment by Year Year Mt. Laurel Chelsea Park Chelsea Chelsea Chelsea Elementary Elementary Intermediate Middle High 2005 431 NA NA 501 633 2006 563 NA 859 585 670 2007 645 651 307 651 733 2008 540 686 523 676 761 2009 592 731 584 747 775 2010 617 758 615 805 866 2011 629 782 652 874 960 2012 650 816 652 915 984 Source: Alabama State Department of Education
In Table 12, the Chelsea Attendance Zone had the third largest student enrollment for school year 2011-2012. Of note, the Thompson Attendance Zone will be the core for the new Alabaster City School System; the Helena Attendance Zone does not include a high school; and the Pelham Attendance Zone includes Helena high school students. Still, the Chelsea Attendance Zone’s closest neighbor is Pelham which will decrease once the Helena High School is constructed, and the remaining ones do not top 3,000 students. Only four attendance zones had enrollment increases between school years 2009-2010 and 2011-2012. Calera grew by 15.14 percent, but Chelsea followed with a 9.72 percent increase. Helena and Pelham trailed at 4.86 percent and 2.97 percent, respectively.
Table 12 Shelby County Schools Attendance Zone Enrollments by Year Shelby Oak Year Calera Chelsea Helena Montevallo Pelham Thompson Vincent County Mtn 2010 1995 3661 2086 2406 1402 5114 3805 6146 938 2011 2193 3897 2099 2452 1402 5070 3834 6096 905 2012 2297 4017 2055 2523 1380 4984 3918 6100 889 Source: Shelby County Board of Education
The Shelby County Board of Education maintains capital plans for its schools, and the 2011 Five Year Plan covers funding years 2011 through 2015. Only two school projects were listed for the Chelsea Attendance Zone. A large project budgeted for $20 million was for an elementary school (Forest Oaks); but, the other with a $1 million budget was for classrooms (ultimately twelve) at Mt. Laurel Elementary School, allowing for the removal of classroom trailers. These two projects with the reason for such being school enrollment had funding years of 2014 and 2015, respectively, but construction moved up to be completed for the start of school year 2013-2014. Much of these projects are tied to the 30 mill school tax rate, which was extended to 2041 from 2017 in a special 2011 election.
Hoover residents are zoned for the Spain Park Attendance Zone. Greystone Elementary School maintains grades K-5, while Berry Middle School has grades 6-8. Grades 9-12 are found at Spain Park High School. Leeds residents attend Leeds Elementary School for grades K-4, Leeds Middle School for grades 5-8, and Leeds High School for grades 9-12.
[- 40 -]
VII. TRANSPORTATION
ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
According to the character of traffic service that they are intended to provide and the degree of land access that they allow, roadways are arranged into classes known as the process of roadway functional classification. Roadways are sorted within three main functional classifications: arterial, collector, and local roads providing a balanced relationship between mobility and land access. Mobility is the ability to efficiently travel along the roadway, while land access is the ease of being able to connect to a particular tract of land. Arterials afford the top level of service at the maximum speed for the longest continuous distance with little or no access control. Collectors provide a medium level of service at a lesser speed for shorter distances by gathering traffic from local roads and linking them with arterials. Local roads consist of all other roads and primarily offer a high degree of access to land with little or no mobility.
Roadway functional classification is linked directly with the roadway design speeds and roadway cross sections such as lane width, shoulder width, and other design characteristics. Functional classification is different for urban and rural areas due to land use intensity. Thus as land use changes occur due to growth, the functional classification of roadways must also change including its design parameters. Failure to maintain adequate roadway functional classifications leads to inefficient traffic service such as congestion. As the federally designated transportation planning agency for the Jefferson County and Shelby County transportation planning area, it is the Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO) responsibility to assist the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) with the identification and maintenance of the roadway functional classification. This classification is also used in the allocation of federal roadway funds.
Arterials are further broken down into seven subclasses based on its urban setting: urban interstate, rural interstate, freeway, urban principal arterial, rural principal arterial, urban minor arterial, and rural minor arterial; and collectors are further broken down into three subclasses based on its urban setting: urban collector, rural major collector, and rural minor collector. Urban setting is based on the urbanized areas as set by the Census Bureau following Census 2010. The Dunnavant Valley does not entirely lie within an urbanized area as the urbanized boundary runs between Shoal Creek and Lake Wehapa.
Within the urban area, Dunnavant Valley Road is classified as an urban minor arterial, and Hugh Daniel Drive is classified as an urban collector. US 280 is categorized as an urban principal arterial. Outside the urban area, Dunnavant Valley Road and State Route 25 are considered rural minor arterials, while Mimosa Road (County Roads 41 and 101) is classed as a rural minor collector.
TRAFFIC COUNTS
Traffic counts on state routes and federal highways are monitored with annual average daily traffic counts (AADT) by the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). The Dunnavant Valley is crossed by two of these routes – US 280 and State Route 25. The
[- 41 -]
E E S U O MAP 15 H E L K Leeds IL LA H DUNNAVANT VALLEY ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION 4567101
N 456741 478 474 4567 4567 K L CR E E OA SH 4567470 456743 4567480 AB25 4567487 456750 4567491 A AP H
E E W K AB25 L A 456741 CH Birmingham AN BR
D L E O K Y O A D H 55 R 4567 PU T B A E O GRE K B A 462 PINE L 4567 456741 456745 4567469 H AB25 U R R IC A AB119 N
NG E L O
PR C E R
Y E E D 495 UD E
4567 B M K
R K E A H 43 E C 4567 R N C Hoover AR Legend BE Urban Principal Arterial ¤£280 41 Urban Minor Arterial 4567 H C N A R Urban Collector B AB119 55 R R 4567
A 43 Westover
L 4567
P Rural Minor Arterial
O P Rural Major Collector
Pelham Rural Minor Collector 41 362 4567 4567 2010 Urbanized Area 280 Chelsea 51 NORTH FORK 4567YELLOWLEAF CREEK 4567
Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham maintains an online AADT from various years of roadways not monitored by ALDOT. The combined traffic counts within the past decade are shown in the following table. Only three routes can be compared between years. Traffic on State Route 25 between 2007 and 2010 has decreased but only slightly at the county line. Also, traffic on County Road 41 near US 280 has decreased significantly between 2005 and 2010, but without other routes shown for the same years, the reasons for such are not known. Assumptions are that Hugh Daniel Drive bore the results of the vehicular decrease on County Road 41 due to the high traffic count in 2008 and the decrease on State Route 25 in 2010.
Table 13 Annual Average Daily Traffic Counts by Year Route 2005 2007 2008 2010 County Road 41 @ Shoal Creek 2,000 County Road 41 @ Lake Wehapa 1,400 County Road 41 @ Dunnavant 1,300 County Road 41 @ US 280 5,500 4,779 Hugh Daniel Drive 12,834 State Route 25 @ County Line 2,900 2,789 State Route 25 @ Double Oak Mtn 2,000 1,652 US 280 @ Highland Lakes 58,700 US 280 @ County Road 43 36,100 Source: Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham
TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS
As reported by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) from 2003 through 2012, there have been seven fatalities caused by just as many accidents. Five were within a 55 MPH zone, while each of the other two accidents happened within a 45 MPH zone and a 40 MPH zone. Of the five 55 MPH zone accidents, two occurred on US 280 – one in 2004 under wet daylight conditions and one in 2006 under dry nighttime conditions. Two other 55 MPH zone accidents took place on Dunnavant Valley Road in 2004 and 2008, both under dry daylight conditions. State Route 25 was the location of the other and it transpired in 2003 under dry nighttime conditions. In 2008 a fatal accident materialized on Dunnavant Valley Road under dry nighttime conditions within a 45 MPH zone, while the last of the seven accidents appeared in 2004 along State Route 25 under dry nighttime conditions within a 40 MPH zone. All but one accident (2006) consisted of speeding as a contributing factor.
Only three of the fatal accidents involved collisions with other vehicles with two of these on US 280. In 2004 the lone head-on collision took place on Dunnavant Valley Road. Trees were involved in two of the non-vehicular collision accidents, while each of the other two entailed a ditch and an overturned vehicle as the first harmful events causing the fatality. In fact, the tree-related accidents were not located in 55 MPH zones. With two of twenty- three traffic accidents involving fatalities within Shelby County in 2008, 9 percent of such
[- 43 -]
accidents occurred in the Dunnavant Valley. 2004 was far worse with three of thirty traffic accidents involving fatalities amounting to 10 percent of such wrecks occurring in the valley.
Using the Center for Advanced Public Safety (CAPS) at the University of Alabama’s Critical Analysis Reporting Environment (CARE) software package, public download versions of integrated crash data showed that there have been eighty-eight reported vehicular crashes on County Road 41 between 2008 and 2012, and as previously mentioned from FARS, only two of these included fatalities. The highest annual accident total was 2011 with twenty-one accidents, and the lowest annual accident total was 2012 with twelve accidents. Eighteen accidents were reported in both 2009 and 2010 with 2008 having nineteen accidents. Within this five year period, fifty-nine accidents resulted in no injuries, while twenty-one accidents involved one non-fatal injury each. Of the accidents, forty-nine were single vehicle ones, and thirty-nine involved two vehicles. A caveat is that the County Road 41 data could not be differentiated from the provided dataset between that portion located either north or south of State Route 25.
Driver age stood out in looking over the accident statistics as twenty-one accidents involved drivers less than 21 years of age, the highest accident total of any age group over the five year period. Eleven accidents each occurred over this period for the 21 to 25 years of age and 41 to 45 years of age groups. All other age groups, typically grouped every five years of age, had single digit totals over the stated time period. Conditions of the drivers were not primary factors as drivers in sixty-four of the accidents were considered normal with only five accidents having drivers being under the influence of alcohol. No primary contributing circumstance stood out among the accidents with the top two circumstances being unseen objects and DUI affecting eight accidents each, while following too close came in third as contributing to seven accidents.
Lighting conditions did not appear to affect the majority of the accidents as fifty of them occurred during daylight; however, twenty-one of them did occur on a dark unlighted roadway. Weather conditions also did not seem to contribute to the majority of the accidents as fifty-six transpired under clear circumstances, while fifteen happened during cloudy conditions. Pavement conditions may have contributed to twenty of the vehicular accidents due to wet conditions, but only ten accidents took place in a rain event. Four accidents came about during foggy conditions.
As for locations along County Road 41 where these accidents occurred during this five year period, the overwhelming majority (eighty-two) were found within the rural unincorporated areas with sixty-six of the accidents having taken place in areas considered open country. Forty-five accidents transpired along straight and level sections of the roadway, while thirty- two accidents happened along straight sections that had grade changes. Forty-four accidents occurred within 55 MPH zones, and thirteen accidents each came about within both 40 MPH and 45 MPH zones. Twelve accidents came to pass within 50 MPH zones.
Over this five year period, Shelby County Sheriff’s deputies prepared the accident reports for only forty-four wrecks along County Road 41, while State Troopers handled the reports for forty-two accidents with Hoover police officers covering reports in 2008 for the remaining two accidents. State Troopers turned in reports on the majority of accidents in
[- 44 -]
2008 (12) and 2012 (7), while Sheriff’s deputies administered reports for the majority of accidents in 2009 (13) and 2011 (12). Both agencies managed nine reports each in 2010. Arrival delays for fifty-one accidents were under thirty-one minutes; however, twenty-one accidents did have arrival delays between thirty-one and forty-five minutes. Six of the seven accidents where arrival delays exceeded an hour occurred over the last three years. Thirty- two of the thirty-six accidents which had arrival delays in excess of thirty minutes had accident reports written by State Troopers.
Of the three other numbered County roads within the Dunnavant Valley, only County Roads 101 and 470 experienced vehicular crashes over the five year period according to CARE. County Road 101 had four crashes -- one each in 2008 and 2009 and two in 2012, while two crashes occurred in 2008 on County Road 470. All but one of these accidents transpired during daylight hours and clear conditions, and the drivers in all of them appeared normal. Pavement conditions may have affected two of the crashes on County Road 101 due to wet conditions. Half of the accidents involved injuries, while the other half consisted of property damage only. Concerning posted speed limits, half of the accidents took place along stretches where the speed limit was 45 MPH, while the other half was on stretches less than 45 MPH. Although all of these wrecks happened on level roadways, three came about on sections involving a curve. These vehicular crashes were evenly split between one vehicle crashes and two vehicle crashes. No primary contributing factor stood out as speeding was such a factor in only one of the wrecks. Collisions with other vehicles happened with three of the accidents. Sheriff’s deputies wrote reports for one of the wrecks on County Road 470 and two of the wrecks on County Road 101, with State Troopers processing the other three wrecks. Arrival delays of the deputies were less than thirty minutes, while arrival delays of the State Troopers exceeded forty-five minutes for three wrecks including one on County Road 101, taking over an hour to arrive.
Of the crash data publically available where other roadways or their segments within the Dunnavant Valley could be spatially determined, Hugh Daniel Drive was the only one. Since the roadway extends from US 280 outside the study area to Dunnavant Valley Road, the total number of 139 crashes over the five year period of 2008 through 2012 would not show the number of crashes wholly within the study area. Therefore, the data was narrowed by selecting only the crashes occurring on segments with two lanes, non-level grades, and non-commercial areas. Thus, the data was clipped to show crashes occurring on Oak Mountain whether in the study area or not. For the whittled down segment of Hugh Daniel Drive which lies within the Hoover city limits, the total number of crashes was 94 which were covered by Hoover police officers responding to all but two within thirty minutes. Arrival delays to the other two exceeded three hours.
As for conditions surrounding the Hugh Daniel Drive crashes, ninety percent occurred in a 35 MPH speed limit zone, and seventy-eight percent happened during daylight hours. The problem that stood out related to the weather, in that, fifty-six percent of the crashes transpired during a rain event (sixty-three percent if misty conditions are included), while eighty percent of the crashes came about during wet roadway conditions. Sixty-three percent of the crashes surprisingly took place on the upgrade rather than the down grade, but with wet conditions, these particular wrecks may have had traction issues.
[- 45 -]
Conditions of the drivers of the Hugh Daniel Drive wrecks were primarily not abnormal, and the age ranges of the drivers were spread out though thirty-one percent of these accidents were committed by individuals less than 26 years of age. Eighty-one percent of the accidents involved only one vehicle, while sixty-nine and sixty-seven percent of the wrecks caused no injuries and property damage only, respectively. The first harmful event for thirty-three percent of the crashes consisted of collisions with trees. Pertaining to primary contributing circumstances, sixty-three percent of the wrecks entailed either driving too fast for conditions or the driver not being in control.
PLANNED TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
In June 2010, the 2035 Birmingham Regional Transportation Plan (BRTP) was adopted by the MPO. The BRTP, a collection of planned transportation projects to be implemented over time, was developed to provide a foundation for regional transportation planning in Jefferson and Shelby Counties by coordinating fiscally sound initiatives and investments to better the movement of people and goods over the next 25 years. Projects in the BRTP are considered for inclusion based on eight federal planning factors found in the Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Act which include economic vitality, safety, security, accessibility, connectivity, environmental, efficiency, and system preservation. Since most major transportation projects are beyond the fiscal means of state and local governments, said governments or sponsors seek federal funding of projects whereby the sponsors will only have to provide a twenty percent match. However in order to receive federal funding, the sponsors’ projects must be part of the fiscally constrained BRTP. Such projects are proposed to be pursued for development within expected funding constraints. The Dunnavant Valley does not have fiscally constrained BRTP projects listed.
In addition, the MPO in November 2012 adopted the FY 2012 Amended/Updated FY 2012-2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), a list of projects with funding assigned to be implemented over the next four years. The only project in the Dunnavant Valley involves an Alabama Transportation Rehabilitation and Improvement Program (ATRIP) Round 2 project sponsored by the City of Hoover to be performed in fiscal year 2014 related to guardrail and other safety improvements for Hugh Daniel Drive from Dunnavant Valley Road to US 280. The estimated total cost is $839,646. Funding for ATRIP comes through the use of GARVEE bonds whereby the State of Alabama accesses future federal dollars in order to pay for road and bridge projects now. Low interest rates of municipal bonds keep borrowing lower than the rising cost of inflation on projects. ATRIP will have at least three funding rounds.
Visionary roadway capacity projects are those where funding levels prevent such from being placed in the fiscally constrained BRTP. As funding levels improve, projects may be moved to the fiscally constrained BRTP. Dunnavant Valley projects are shown below in Table 14.
[- 46 -]
Table 14 Visionary Roadway Capacity Projects Project # Project Name Total Cost (Current 2010 $) 644 US 280 Improvements (West Segment) $710,000,000 645 US 280 Access Road (East Segment) $35,233,333 662 US 280 Frontage Roads (Eastbound) $35,233,333 662 US 280 Frontage Roads (Westbound) $35,233,333 Source: Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham
RAILROAD CROSSINGS
The Dunnavant Community has four at grade railroad crossings involving the Norfolk Southern Railroad, which runs three daytime and three nighttime trains along this main track. These railroad crossings are between the Oak Mountain and the Coosa (Double Oak) Mountain Tunnels. Crossing number 728318N (State Route 25) utilizes flashing lights for its active warning device. This crossing is located between a curve and a sharp bend of Highway 25 and a northbound train would be exiting a tunnel near this crossing traveling between 10 and 30 MPH. Northbound vehicles are heading toward this crossing following a descent of Double Oak Mountain and do not see the flashing lights until the sharp bend. The Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Handbook – Revised Second Edition August 2007 discusses placing a second flashing light to alert drivers prior to entering the curve. Mimosa Road has two crossings at each end of the loop. Both the southern portion of this road designated as County Road 41 (728319V) and northern portion designated as County Road 101 (728320P) have stop signs as their passive warning devices. Tunnel Road’s railroad crossing (728317G) has a stop sign as its passive warning device.
Even though the railroad track is not part of the Crescent Corridor between New Orleans and New Jersey, the new McCalla intermodal facility should still cause increased train volume between Birmingham and Macon, as its ultimate goal is to improve intermodal service to the seaports of Panama City, Jacksonville, Brunswick, Savannah, and Charleston. Increases in train volume could be tied to increases in train incidents. According to the Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis, Norfolk Southern Railroad has been involved in thirty five train incidents within Shelby County between 2003 and 2012. Of that figure, twenty five incidents occurred at railroad crossings resulting in one death (2007) and seven injuries (one each in 2004, 2005, & 2008 and two each in 2009 & 2011). The highest number of incidents per year was five in 2008 with the next highest being three in 2004, 2009, and 2012. Of the 103 incidents at railroad crossings in the State of Alabama between 2009 and 2012, ten occurred in Shelby County trailing only Jefferson County’s twenty two incidents. Between 2006 and 2012, the County Road 41 railroad crossing has had two train incidents resulting in no deaths or injuries.
[- 47 -]
MAP 16
DUNNAVANT VALLEY E E S AT-GRADE RAILROAD CROSSINGS U HILLH O LA K E N
4567101
Leeds
456741 !"$ 4567478 4567474
ÎÏ K 470 !"$ E 4567 !! E R C 41 L 4567 HOA S !"$ 456743
4567480 456750 4567487 AB25 !"$ 4567491 456755 ÎÏ !"$!! Warning Device AB25
A A
P A ÎÏ H Crossbuck E W E L AK EAR BRANCH !"$ Stop SignB C OD ÎÏ RE HO !! E OB ÎÏ K B !! Flashing Lights 456743 ÎÏ E !! T T !! K 55 A Flashing Lights with Gates A 4567
E L
R E
G Ë
N 462 ÎÏ I
P 4567 HURRICANE CREEK ¹º»¼ None
89:¢ Gated / Closed 456745 469 4567!"$
VIII. NOVEMBER COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS
Table 15 83 88 87 88 90 86 88 6 1 5 3 1 1 6 0 9 1 9 9 9 7 10 50 15 11 23 12 12 27 10 22 45 17 29 31 33 22 33 15 18 19 18 31 59 47 33 12 10 56 TOTAL VOTESTOTAL RESPONSES the above
No Yes Roll Tide! Roll War Eagle! War 1 to 5 years 1 to 5 years 5 toyears 10 5 toyears 10 Over 10 years Over 10 years All of the aboveAll the of Less than year 1 Less than year 1 All of the aboveAll the of All of the aboveAll the of None ofthe above None of None ofthe above None ofthe above None ofthe above None ofthe above None ofthe above QUESTION / ANSWER / QUESTION Increased police patrols police Increased Increased police patrols police Increased Install a pedestrian tunnel a pedestrian Install Neighborhood watch programs Controlled access to subdivisions to access Controlled Yes, at the Hwy 25 railroad atYes, the Hwy 25 crossing WHICH GREETING DO YOU PREFER? YOU DO GREETING WHICH Install striped crossings with warning signs Yes, atYes, both Mimosa Road railroad crossings Install striped crossings with pedestrianislands Reduction of posted speed limits in certain areas certain in limits speed posted of Reduction I live in Dunnavant and have never been stopped been never have and in Dunnavant live I Yes, at the Mimosa Road (CR 41) railroad atYes, the Mimosa crossing 41) Road (CR Yes, at the Mimosa Road (CR 101) railroad crossing atYes, Mimosa the 101) Road (CR Install striped crossings with flashing warning lights warning flashing with crossings striped Install Install stripedcrossings as part of raised crosswalks I doI notlive in Dunnavant and have been never stopped HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED IN SHELBY COUNTY? IN LIVED HOW YOU HAVE LONG HOW LONGHAVE YOU LIVED IN THE DUNNAVANTVALLEY? Increased police patrols and parking visible unmanned patrol cars in spots WHICH STRATEGY DO YOU FEEL IS THE BEST CRIME PREVENTION? CRIME THE IS BEST FEEL YOU DO STRATEGY WHICH Increased police patrols and reduction of posted speed limits in certain areas certain in limits speed posted of reduction and patrols police Increased Increased police patrols without the addition of a mannedSheriff ’sOffice substation Placement ofa manned Sheriff ’s Office substation with patrols being generated from it WHICH LONG TERM STRATEGY DO YOU FEEL WILL BE BEST FOR PEDESTRIANS CROSSING CR 41 AT MT LAUREL? 41 CR CROSSING PEDESTRIANS FOR BEST BE WILL FEEL YOU DO STRATEGY TERM LONG WHICH HAVE YOU BEEN STOPPED AT A RAILROAD CROSSING IN THE DUNNAVANT AREA BY A STOPPED TRAIN BLOCKING A ROAD? BLOCKING TRAIN A STOPPED BY AREA DUNNAVANT THE IN CROSSING AT A RAILROAD STOPPED BEEN YOU HAVE ) 9 8 1 2 3 45 WHICH STRATEGY DO YOU FEEL WOULD BEST REDUCESPEEDING ON DUNNAVANT VALLEY ROAD AND OTHER ROADS? VICTIM? CRIME VALLEY A DUNNAVANT BEEN HAS THAT HERE LIVING SOMEONE KNOW OR HAVE I 88 67 RESPONSE?AND PREVENTION CRIME TO RELATED SAFETY PUBLIC IMPROVE BEST WOULD FEEL YOU DO STRATEGY WHICH 89 (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (1) (2) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (1) (2) (3) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (1) (1) (2) (3) (2) (3) (1) (2) (4) (5
NUMBER
[- 49 -]
Table 16 87 87 88 88 90 87 2 6 0 0 1 2 3 6 3 6 0 3 3 4 2 2 2 6 21 11 10 14 11 36 25 14 22 68 11 19 19 11 11 13 35 TOTAL VOTESTOTAL RESPONSES d train 7 extended periods of time of periods extended 33 All of the above the of All Build turn lanes Mt Laurel Library Laurel Mt None ofthe above None ofthe above None ofthe above None ofthe above None ofthe above None ofthe above Keep theroad as is North Shelby Shelby Library North Chelsea Public Library Public Chelsea I doI not use any library QUESTION / ANSWER / QUESTION Add a continuous turn lane Add turn a continuous Add a continuous turn lane Add turn a continuous Leeds Jane Culbreth Library Culbreth Jane Leeds Install flashing warning lights warning flashing Install Another Shelby County library Shelby County Another Vincent McGraw Public Library Public McGraw Vincent Add or expand paved shoulders paved expand or Add Build turnBuild lanes with alight traffic Install street lights at the intersection Another library outside Shelby County Shelby outside library Another Add designated bike lanes on each side Build turn lanes with flashing warning lights warning flashing with lanes turn Build Place signagePlace to notify driversintersection of Install “Share signs TheRoute” Road” or “Bike WHICHLIBRARY DO YOU USE MOST OFTEN? Maintain CR 41 as a two lane rural road with no changes no with road rural lane two a as 41 CR Maintain Maintain CR 41 as a two lane rural road with no changes no with road rural lane two a as 41 CR Maintain Construct railroad overpass on Mimosa Road at either end either at Road Mimosa on overpass railroad Construct Replace the two lane road with four travel lanes and a continuous turn lane turn a continuous and lanes travel four with road lane two the Replace Replace the two lane road with four travel lanes and a continuous turn lane turn a continuous and lanes travel four with road lane two the Replace e the two lane road with a two lane median divided road with turn lanes at designated intersections designated at lanes turn with road divided median lane a two with road lane two the e ac WHICH STRATEGY DO YOU FEEL IS BEST FOR COUNTY ROAD 41 SOUTH OF HUGH DANIEL? HUGH OF SOUTH 41 ROAD COUNTY FOR BEST IS FEEL YOU DO STRATEGY WHICH Repl Replace the two lane road with a four lane median divided road with turn lanes at designated intersections designated at lanes turn with road divided median lane four a with road lane two the Replace 4) 15 25? HWY TO DANIEL HUGH OF NORTH 41 ROAD COUNTY FOR BEST IS STRATEGY TERM LONG WHICH 12 14 WHICH LONG TERM STRATEGYFEELYOU DO IS BESTFOR SOUTH COUNTY ROAD41 OF HUGH DANIEL? 11AREA? DUNNAVANT THE IN TRAINS STOPPED BY BLOCKAGES TO RELATED SAFETY IMPROVE TO BEST IS FEEL YOU DO STRATEGY WHICH 83 16 13 DANIEL? HUGH AND 41 CR OF THE INTERSECTION FEEL IS TO BEST IMPROVE YOU STRATEGY DO WHICH 10 AREA? DUNNAVANT THE IN CROSSINGS AT RAILROAD SAFETY IMPROVE TO BEST THE IS STRATEGY WHICH (1) (2)(3) intersectionsdesignated at constructed being lanes turn with road rural lane two a as 41 CR Maintain 51 (7) (4)(5)(6) intersections designated at lanes turn with road divided median lane a two with road lane two the Replace intersections designated at lanes turn with road divided median lane four a with road lane two the Replace 7 5 (1) (2)(3) intersectionsdesignated at constructed being lanes turn with road rural lane two a as 41 CR Maintain 39 (6) (7) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (5) (1)(2) by a stoppe blockages Road during dual Mimosa access provide to 41) (CR Road Mimosa and 25 Hwy between road access Construct EncourageSouthern Railroad Norfolk to reduceroad blockages by stopped trainsand limit durationstheir extended 15 (3)(4) Urge the Shelby County Legislative Delegation to sponsor a bill imposing penalties for road blockages by stopped trains for (3) (4) (5) (2) (1) ( (7) (2) (3) (8) (1) (4) (1)(2)(3) gatesand lights flashing red with crossings 101) CR and 41 (CR Road Mimosa at signs stop the Replace Replace the stop signs at Mimosa Road (CR 41 and CR 101) crossings with red flashing lights 51 (7) (5) (6) (5) (6) (4)
NUMBER [- 50 -]
Table 17 88 88 81 85 83 86 6 1 9 0 9 9 6 3 5 9 7 2 9 24 10 68 46 22 12 30 11 17 14 15 14 16 30 36 11 25 14 20 16 22 37 38 27 48 26 TOTAL VOTESTOTAL RESPONSES ROADS? 87 NT VALLEY ROAD? 87 ol, and highone school fine are Daily Weekly Monthly Mt Laurel All of the abovethe All of All of the abovethe All of abovethe All of Another location Another None of theabove None of theabove None of theabove None of theabove None of theabove None of theabove None of theabove None of theabove Keep the road as is Sports Blast/96 Fields Sports Blast/96 None, it is not needed not is it None, QUESTION / ANSWER / QUESTION Roundabouts would work would Roundabouts Textured pavement would work would pavement Textured Textured pavement would work would pavement Textured Add or expand paved shoulders paved expand or Add Rarely – I use US or280 SR 25 instead Add designated bike onlanes Add each designated bike side No -- We do not need a communitya need do not center We -- No No -- Other cities -- will Other Chelsea before No attempt Speed tablesand raised crosswalks wouldwork Speed tablesand raised crosswalks wouldwork Install“Share TheRoad” or “Bike Route”signs The Dunnavant Senior Center needs to be upgraded to be needs Center Senior The Dunnavant No --No Chelsea will never create its own school system Yes -- WeYes should have a County run community center Yes -- may Chelsea Yes attemptto create its own sooner than later WHERE IS THE BEST PLACE FOR ANOTHER SENIOR CENTER? SENIOR ANOTHER FOR IS WHERE THE PLACE BEST Yes -- We shouldYes havenon-county communitycenter such as a YMCA Senior citizens in the southern part of the Valley need a Senior Center Senior a need Valley the of part southern in the citizens Senior HOW OFTEN DO YOU USE HUGH DANIEL TO CROSS OAK MOUNTAIN? WHAT IS YOUR VIEW OF SENIOR CENTERS IN THE DUNNAVANT VALLEY? THE DUNNAVANT IN CENTERS SENIOR OF VIEW WHAT IS YOUR ARE YOU CONCERNED WITH THE ALABASTER CITY SCHOOL SYSTEM BEING CREATED? SYSTEM BEING WITH SCHOOL THE ALABASTER CITY CONCERNED YOU ARE Yes -- We need to renovate the County owned Sports Blast to function as such Blast a Sports owned community County the to renovate -- We need center Yes Our Our population will increase abut middle need not enoughschool just we here to our merit – own attendance zone IS A COMMUNITY CENTER WITH BASKETBALL COURTS, WALKING TRACK, AND MEETING ROOMS NEEDED? ROOMS MEETING AND TRACK, WALKING WITH BASKETBALL COURTS, CENTER IS A COMMUNITY opulation will increase but not enough to merit our own attendance zone – the three elementary schools, one middle scho schools,middle one elementary three the – opulation zone but our not own attendance willenough to increase merit p Our Our 3) 17 WHICH STRATEGY FEEL YOU DO IS BEST NORTHFOR ROADOFCOUNTY DANIEL41 HUGH TO HWY 25? 18 24 19 DUNNAVA ON SPEEDING TABLES TO CONTROL SPEED AND ROUNDABOUTS, PAVEMENTS, AS TEXTURED SUCH CALMING TRAFFIC OF VIEW WHAT YOUR IS 25 20 NEIGHBORHOOD EXISTING ON SPEEDING TABLES TO CONTROL SPEED AND PAVEMENTS AS TEXTURED SUCH CALMING TRAFFIC OF VIEW WHAT IS YOUR 21 22 23 HERE? EDUCATION OF FUTURE THE ON THOUGHT YOUR IS WHAT – INCREASES ZONE ATTENDANCE CHELSEA THE IN POPULATION AS 84 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (2) (3) (4) (1) (2) (3) (4) (4) (5) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (2) (3) (4) (1) (2) (3) (4) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (2) (2) ( (1) Zone Attendance Valley a Dunnavant for a need justify will population unincorporated our in Increases 45 (3) (4)
NUMBER
[- 51 -]
Table 18 85 89 54 86 85 90 7 0 2 2 4 2 1 3 1 2 4 7 1 6 0 4 1 6 20 15 55 17 37 24 22 24 13 48 18 20 15 24 11 52 12 29 28 14 25 23 18 21 10 TOTAL VOTESTOTAL RESPONSES DS MEMORIAL PARK NEEDED? PARK MEMORIAL DS 86 mes a year mes i Daily Daily Daily Leeds Never Never Leeds Never Pelham Chelsea Brook Highland Heardmont Park Heardmont Park None of the above None of the above None of the above None of the above None of the above None of the above A few times a year times A few None of the above I have no children no have I A few t A few A few times a year times A few A few times a week times A few A few times a week times A few A few times a week times A few A few times a month a times few A A few times a month a times few A A few times a month a times few A We do not play play tennis not do We QUESTION / ANSWER / QUESTION Yes -- My family would use would My family -- Yes Spain Park Sports Complex Sports Spain Park No -- My family would not use Another facility outside the Valley the outside facility Another Another facility outside the Valley the outside facility Another No --No We do not needany of theseparks No --No We do not needany of theseparks My children do not play baseball or softball or baseball play not do My children Yes -- We need this type of community park south of Hugh Daniel Drive Daniel Hugh of south park community of type this need We -- Yes Yes -- We need this type of community park south of Hugh Daniel Drive Daniel Hugh of south park community of type this need We -- Yes Yes -- We need this type of community park in the Dunnavant Community Dunnavant the in park community of type this need We -- Yes Yes -- We need this type of community park in the Dunnavant Community Dunnavant the in park community of type this need We -- Yes HOWOFTEN WOULD YOU USE THE DUNNAVANT VALLEY GREENWAY ONCE COMPLETED TOHWY 25? HOW OFTEN WOULD YOU USE THE DUNNAVANT VALLEY GREENWAY ONCE PHASES II AND III ARE COMPLETED TOBELVEDERE? VILLAS COMPLETED ARE III AND II PHASES ONCE GREENWAY VALLEY THE DUNNAVANT USE YOU WOULD HOW OFTEN ) 28 LEE OR PARK HEARDMONT TO SIMILAR PAVILIONS AND PLAYGROUNDS, PATHS, WALKING COURTS, TENNIS BALLFIELDS, WITH PARK A REGIONAL IS 2729 AS TENNIS? SUCH SPORTS LEAGUE IN PARTICIPATE CHILDREN YOUR OR YOU DO WHERE NEEDED? PAVILIONS AND/OR A PLAYGROUND, PATH, A WALKING A BALLFIELD, COURT, A TENNIS WITH PARK COMMUNITY ACTIVE AN IS 85 3031 NEEDED? PAVILIONS AND PLAYGROUND, A PATH, A WALKING WITH PARK COMMUNITY PASSIVE A IS GREENWAY? VALLEY THEDUNNAVANT OF I PHASE THE COMPLETED USE YOU DO HOW OFTEN 33 32 26 SOFTBALL? OR AS BASEBALL SUCH SPORTS LEAGUE YOUTH IN PARTICIPATE CHILDREN YOUR DO WHERE (2) (3) (1) (1) (2)(3) (4) -- No My family would rather use such a facility elsewhere due to the crowds such a facility might bring 12 (1) (2) (3) (4) (1) (2) (3) (4) (1) (5) (6) (1) (5) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (4) (8) (2) (5) (3) (4) (2) (6) (2) (5) (6) (7) (3) (3) (4) (4
NUMBER [- 52 -]
Table 19 82 85 72 78 81 83 6 8 6 6 9 6 5 2 3 1 2 7 8 4 12 18 70 11 25 22 16 24 15 10 12 42 11 22 13 10 44 21 30 52 11 TOTAL VOTESTOTAL RESPONSES RE MINIMUM LOT SIZE)? MINIMUM RE oposals Land purchases All of the above the All of All of the above the All of All of the above the All of All of the above the All of All of the above the All of above the All of All of the above the All of None of the above the of None None of the above the of None None of the above the of None None of the above the of None Road rights of way rights of Road None of the above the of None above the of None None of the above the of None QUESTION / ANSWER / QUESTION Easements across private properties Develop ridgetop development guidelines and regulations and guidelines development ridgetop Develop Promote the minimal use of herbicides in the public rights of way of public rights in the herbicides of use minimal the Promote Encourage property owners to place ridgetops in preservation trusts Direct commercial development to existing commercially zoned areas zoned commercially existing to development commercial Direct Hold community workshops about zoning in unzoned areas of the Valley the of areas in unzoned zoning about workshops community Hold Encourage property owners to place ridgetops in conservation easements in conservation ridgetops place to owners property Encourage Offer zoningOffer information and how to request zoning to citizens in the Valley Encourage developers to remove wayfinding signs for established developments wayfinding established remove to Encourage signs for developers Encourage the growth and propagation of native wildflowers in public rights of way of in public rights wildflowers native of propagation and growth the Encourage Properties zoned HZ with 10 acres or less should be allowed to rezone to an AR District an AR to should allowed less rezone be or to acres with 10 HZ zoned Properties Steer dense residential development such as apartments and townhomes to community to and townhomes centers such apartments as development residential dense Steer Encourage “Adopt A Mile” programs to provide localized litter control within the public rights of way of public rights the within control litter localized provide to programs A Mile” “Adopt Encourage Continue the County policy of not having speculative zoning to reduce sprawl patterns of development of policy having not patterns County sprawl to of reduce the speculative zoning Continue Manage mowing in the public rights of way to coincide with the natural reseeding cycle of native wildflowers native cycle of reseeding natural the with coincide way to of public rights mowing in the Manage WHICH DO YOU FEEL IS BEST TO REDUCE ADVERTISING SIGNS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY? OF RIGHTS PUBLIC THE IN SIGNS ADVERTISING TO REDUCE BEST IS FEEL YOU DO WHICH Encourage property owners to place restricted convenants on their land preventing development of the ridgetops Establish better communication with the local governments to keep advertising signs out of the public rights of way of public rights the of out signs advertising keep to local governments the with communication better Establish Properties zoned A-1 Agricultural A-1 Properties zoned District acre (one minimum should lot size) be allowed toto an rezone AR District HOW SHOULD WE DISCOURAGE LAND USES WHICH BURDEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND CREATE PAVEMENT ISLANDS? PAVEMENT CREATE AND INFRASTRUCTURE BURDEN WHICH USES LAND WE DISCOURAGE SHOULD HOW HOW DO YOU FEEL SHELBY COUNTY NEEDS TO INCREASE THE PUBLIC AWARENESS ZONING? OF THE OF BENEFITS THE TOPUBLIC INCREASE NEEDS COUNTY FEEL SHELBY YOU HOW DO WHICH DO YOU FEEL IS BEST TO MANAGE AND PRESERVE NATIVE WILDFLOWERS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY? OF RIGHTS PUBLIC THE IN WILDFLOWERS NATIVE PRESERVE AND TO MANAGE BEST IS FEEL YOU DO WHICH Ensure adequate public utilities such as sewer, water, power, and roads exist prior to consideration of dense development pr development dense of consideration to prior exist roads and power, water, sewer, as such public utilities adequate Ensure 35 WHICH DO YOU FEEL IS BEST TO PRESERVE THE UNDISTURBED RIDGETOPS OF OAK AND DOUBLE OAK? 36 40 34 GREENWAY VALLEY PHASES THE OF DUNNAVANT THE FEEL IS OF THE UNFINISHED LOCATION IDEAL YOU DO WHICH 83 37 39 38 AC (3 DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL TO AR PROPERTIES ZONE HOLDING LESS HZ OR ACRE 10 EXISITING REZONING WE PROPOSE SHOULD (3) (4) (3) (4) (3) (4) (5) (2) (5) (6) (5) (6) (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (1) (4) (1) (2) (2) (3) (4) (5) (2) (3) (4) (2) (3) (1) (3) (4) (5) (1)
NUMBER
[- 53 -]
The first three questions were general ones to not only train participants in the keypad use but to gather simple locational background information. Question 1 showed that of the participants 54 % lived in Shelby County for over ten years and 81 % lived in the county for over five years. However by the participant response to the second question, only 36 % lived in the Dunnavant Valley over ten years, while 69 % lived in the valley for over five years. These two questions showed that the participants were not only fairly new to the valley but rather new to the county as well. An “ice breaker” third question was provided.
Questions 4 through 7 dealt with the law enforcement issues raised in the September Community Workshop related to speeding and police presence. The first question of this group asked the participants’ opinions on the best way to reduce speeding. No response stood out as being the clear favorite. Of the four separate answers, the response involving increased patrols along with reduced speed limits garnered only 22 %, while increased patrols along with using parked unmanned vehicles had 20 %. This question’s “all of the above” answer also received 20 %. It appears some form of increased patrols is needed.
Question 5 was intended to learn about valley crime. 66 % of the participants have not either been or known a crime victim. By these responses, it seems that relatively speaking the valley is a safe place. The next question focused on the police substation issue from the September Community Workshop. Based on respondent selections, 53 % desired a police substation, while 47 % did not believe such was needed. In an “up or down” question, the police substation was not an overwhelming desire. For the last law enforcement related question, question 7 showed that 65 % of the participants felt all of the strategies were needed and the increased patrol strategy was the leader of the individual strategies as well.
Question 8 dealt with pedestrian crossings of Dunnavant Valley Road at Mt. Laurel. Based on participant selections, 31 % desired a pedestrian tunnel, while 26 % wanted striped crossings with flashing warning lights. Only 3 % felt no special treatments were needed.
Questions 9 through 11 dealt with railroad crossings in the Dunnavant Community. The first of these questions was meant to gather feedback as to who has actually been affected by stopped trains blocking these crossings, brought up as an issue during the September Community Workshop. Unfortunately, question 9 claimed that 57 % of the respondents lived in Dunnavant and had never been stopped which could not be correct considering that according to sign-in sheets the overwhelming majority of the participants lived in the 35242 zip code rather than the 35094 zip code associated with the Dunnavant Community. Although a misunderstanding occurred with the difference between Dunnavant and the Dunnavant Valley, 26 % of them who were primarily from the other Dunnavant Valley zip code had been stopped at one of these railroad crossings by a stopped train. More surprising is that the railroad crossing with the main stopped train problem was on State Route 25, which is a secondary route into the Birmingham Metropolitan Area, where 17 % of them had been affected. Secondly based on participant selections, the question showed that the second most problematic railroad crossing was the County Road 41 one where 14 % had been delayed, while 8 % had been held at the County Road 101 railroad crossing.
[- 54 -]
Question 10 dealt with improving safety at the railroad crossings related to warning devices. Based on respondent selections, 71 % desired replacing the passive warning devices (stop signs) at both Mimosa Road crossings with at least the basic active warning devices (red flashing lights), and 59 % preferred even adding gates as well; but building an overpass at either railroad crossing garnered 13 %. 66 % of the respondents in question 11 want a state law related to road blockages by stopped trains which is lacking in the state, while 45 % yearn for improved dialogue with Norfolk Southern Railroad on the issue.
Question 12 was intended to see where the participants used library services. Based on their answers, 69 % used the services provided by the North Shelby Library District, while 22 % did not use any library. A handful used libraries in Chelsea, Leeds, or elsewhere.
Questions 13 through 20 concerned roadway issues primarily with Dunnavant Valley Road. Initially, question 13 asked about the intersection of Hugh Daniel Drive with County Road 41. Based on respondent selections, 39 % felt that turn lanes with flashing warning lights was needed, while 21 % thought that turn lanes with a traffic light was required. Overall, 74 % of the participants desired the building of turn lanes here. The next two questions of this set dealt with what the participants felt as being the long term strategy for Dunnavant Valley Road. Concerning the section south of Hugh Daniel Drive, 57 % of the respondents believed it should remain a two lane rural road, and 45 % stated that the only changes needed on the two lane rural road were designated turn lanes. As far the section north of Hugh Daniel Drive, the 83 % of the respondents concluded that it should remain a rural two lane road, and 59 % perceived that the only changes needed were designated turn lanes. Related to an issue that arose from the September Community Workshop, bike lanes on Dunnavant Valley Road south and north of Hugh Daniel Drive were stressed by participant responses as both questions 16 and 17 equally had 77 %. Question 18 was utilized to gather use of Hugh Daniel Drive, which showed a 52 % daily rate and a 25 % weekly rate. Traffic calming was the centerpiece of questions 19 and 20, where overall the respondents were not too keen on installing any such device on Dunnavant Valley Road. Within neighborhoods, the use of speed tables slightly edged out using no devices.
Senior centers were discussed in questions 21 and 22. In the first question of this set, the participants, although primarily residing outside of the Dunnavant Community, felt with response rates of 43 % and 30 % that the Dunnavant Senior Center needed to be upgraded and a senior center needed to be located in the southern portion of the valley, respectively. Based on respondent selections, 46 % stated that no senior center work of any kind needed to occur. With the last question, 56 % backed up the initial question’s popular response by saying that no more senior centers were needed in the Dunnavant Valley.
Questions 23 and 24 centered on education. Based on respondent selections, 54 % felt that a Dunnavant Valley Attendance Zone was warranted in the future, while 29 % just want a middle school to be located here which arose as an issue at the September Community Workshop. Considering the creation of the Alabaster City School System, the last question dealt with the same thing occurring in Chelsea. 63 % of the respondents believed such would not occur in Chelsea, but 37 % did. These responses suggest increased population is fueling the need for more schools here whether as part of a new attendance zone or not rather than any thoughts of Chelsea creating its own city system in the future.
[- 55 -]
Question 25 dealt with a recreational based community center in the valley. Based on respondent selections, 31 % felt that the Sports Blast facility should be renovated to act as a community center, although 34 % responded negatively toward community centers. More respondents favored non-government run community centers rather than government run ones if a new one was situated here. Data gathering questions 26 and 27 followed in trying to ascertain where baseball, softball, and tennis league sport participation occurred since the Dunnavant Valley was lacking. Of the respondents who had children playing baseball or softball, it was a virtual tie between Chelsea and Heardmont Park. As for those participants who played tennis, it appeared that Brook Highland was the clear winner over Pelham by a margin of over two to one. Parks were the primary issue with questions 28 through 30 where 64 % of the participants desired a regional park and 72 % of the respondents wanted non-regional active community parks. Considering the issue related to participant residency, 58 % did not yearn for a passive community park, although 27 % wished for one in the Dunnavant Community.
Questions 31 through 34 involved the Dunnavant Valley Greenway. The first of the questions gathered data on the current usage of Phase 1. Based on respondent selections, surprisingly 44 % had never used the greenway, and 28 %, which was the next highest number, only used the facility a few times a year. Question 32 asked about usage once Phases 2 and 3 are completed, and 29 % of the participants stated that they would use the greenway a few times per month. A few times a year was the response by 33 % to the question involving completion of the greenway to State Route 25. Thus, it appears that with this line of questioning, usage of the greenway seems to be affected by the residences of the individuals and their abilities to access the greenway without using a car. However, at least 25 % of the respondents would never use the greenway at any time and appear to be opposed to it with 27 % being against all avenues of where to place the unfinished phases. On the positive side, road rights of way were the preferred location according to 57 %.
Questions 35 through37 dealt with the environment. The first question encompassed preserving undisturbed ridgetops where 49 % of the respondents wanted ridgetop development guidelines and regulations, and 44 % desired use of restrictive covenants. As for reducing advertising signs and managing wildflowers in the rights of way, all ideas for both questions had overwhelming support with 52 % and 64 % of the respondents, respectively, desiring to do all of the positive ideas presented for each question. Do nothing percentages were 8 % and 14 % of the participants, respectively.
The last three questions involved land regulations. Question 38 had 47 % of the respondents favoring the rezoning of properties zoned H-Z to A-R, although 42 % felt that no such rezoning changes were needed. 51 % of the participants believed that all positive ideas involving the discouraging of land uses that burden infrastructure were required to be used. As for the last question, 90 % of the respondents stated that all positive ideas shown were essential to increasing public awareness of zoning benefits.
[- 56 -]
IX. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES
A timeline is associated with each implementation strategy to indicate the amount of time that due to various factors including but not limited to priority, process, parties involved, and finances a strategy would take to commence and be accomplished. Timelines are categorized into four ideal time periods. Ongoing relates to strategies that are currently or soon to be underway and are continuous in nature. Immediate refers to those strategies where implementation should ideally occur within a period of less than three years. Short term means that the strategy should ideally be implemented in a span of three to six years. Long term denotes that the strategy will probably take in excess of six years to implement. These timelines are targets for strategies to be implemented, but due to the abovementioned factors as well as unforeseen events, the timelines may change categories.
GOAL 1: IMPROVE THE ROAD NETWORK
OBJECTIVE 1.1
Enhance and Expand the Public Roads in the Dunnavant Valley
STRATEGIES
1.1.1 Repave Hugh Daniel Drive with pavement material that reduces skid outs
As shown in accident data for the period between 2008 and 2012, the stretch of Hugh Daniel Drive on Oak Mountain has been a dangerous place during rain events and wet conditions. The City of Hoover has addressed this problem by submitting an ATRIP project to be performed in fiscal year 2014 related to guardrail and other safety improvements including resurfacing from County Road 41 to US 280. This project has been placed in the FY 2012-2015 TIP and in January 2013, was approved as one of fifteen projects selected countywide.
Timeline: Immediate
1.1.2 Add County-maintained paved roads to the annual repave list
Residents should discuss amongst themselves road conditions and, as a collective group via letter or spokesperson, contact the Shelby County Highway Department to communicate their concerns. Annually, its staff evaluates all County maintained roads. If it is determined that a particular road is in need of resurfacing, then the road will be placed on a list along with its estimated cost. Staff narrows the list based on available funds to produce a critical needs list. However if the road does not make this list, residents should continue the process every year. It is possible the road failed to make the list due to limited funding not being a critical need.
Timeline: Ongoing
[- 57 -]
1.1.3 Add County-maintained unpaved roads to the annual pave list
Residents should discuss amongst themselves road conditions and, as a collective group via letter or spokesperson, contact the Shelby County Highway Department to communicate their concerns. Annually, its staff evaluates all County maintained roads. If it is determined that a particular dirt road is in need of paving, then the road will be placed on a list along with its estimated cost as part of the Shelby County Unimproved Road Program. Staff narrows the list based on available funds to produce a critical needs list. However if the road does not make this list, residents should continue the process every year. It is possible the road failed to make the list due to limited funding not being a critical need.
Timeline: Ongoing
OBJECTIVE 1.2
Provide Safer Intersections on Major Routes
STRATEGIES
1.2.1 Install turn lanes on Dunnavant Valley Road at Hugh Daniel Drive
November Community Workshop respondents indicated the need here for turn lanes. In ATRIP’s Round 2, Shelby County was awarded two intersection projects involving dedicated left turn lanes in the Helena area. Each project had a cost of less than $500,000 with the County funding twenty percent or less than $100,000. This Dunnavant Valley project should be considered for inclusion as part of a future ATRIP submission, if the program is extended beyond three rounds, and jointly sponsored by Shelby County and the City of Hoover. The intersection involves two functionally classed roadways, and the last AADT for Hugh Daniel Drive in 2008 showed nearly 13,000 vehicles using it. A dedicated left turn lane would be needed on northbound Dunnavant Valley Road, and a dedicated right turn lane would be needed on southbound Dunnavant Valley Road. Using the abovementioned costs as an estimate, the total cost would be around $500,000 with each co-sponsor equally providing around $50,000.
Timeline: Short Term
1.2.2 Install downward illumination at intersections to provide better visibility and safety
While the Dunnavant Valley is still considered a rural area, its population growth and increased vehicular usage warrants the use of downward illumination at select major intersections along County Road 41. Downward illumination has been shown to reduce nighttime accidents, enhance traffic flow, increase sight distances, encourage surrounding facilities use, and foster security, while also reducing light pollution. Although the majority of traffic accidents between 2008 and 2012 took place during daylight hours, twenty-four percent happened along dark unlit
[- 58 -]
sections. Areas such as the Hugh Daniel Drive intersection, the Mt. Laurel area, and the State Route 25 intersection are prime locations to benefit from the installation of downward illumination. Options are the use of solar powered lights which range from $3,000 to $5,000 each.
Timeline: Short Term
1.2.3 Install signs along Dunnavant Valley Road to notify drivers of major intersections
Locating Hugh Daniel Drive at night can prove difficult as the intersection is located in an unlit wooded area with the only signage being two generic approaching intersection signs and the road sign itself. Traffic accident data for County Road 41 has shown a substantial number of accidents on unlit stretches during nighttime hours as well as the contributing factor of following too close. An accident with both situations could occur to anyone unfamiliar with the area looking for Hugh Daniel Drive. Guide signs having the message “HUGH DANIEL DR 1000 FEET” need to be erected 1,000 feet on each side of the intersection. Each sign which includes sign, post, foundation, and installation is estimated to be $250.
Timeline: Immediate
OBJECTIVE 1.3
Institute Traffic Calming in the Dunnavant Valley
STRATEGIES
1.3.1 Add textured pavement, speed tables, and / or raised crosswalks to the Shelby County Subdivision Regulations as acceptable traffic calming devices
In addressing the issue of speeding from the September Community Workshop and the slight majority of the responses from the November Community Workshops, textured pavement, speed tables, and raised crosswalks should be used as needed. The Shelby County Subdivision Regulations contain two other acceptable traffic calming devices, thus these three additional devices would need to be added as acceptable forms of traffic calming prior to constructing any in the unincorporated areas. Speed table and raised crosswalk use should be restricted to neighborhood streets only due to the fact such devices are not recommended for roadways with posted speed limits in excess of 30 MPH. Textured pavement could be placed in conjunction with speed tables and raised crosswalks or separately on neighborhood streets as well as roads in conjunction with pedestrian crosswalks.
Timeline: Immediate
[- 59 -]
1.3.2 Reduce traffic speed in subdivisions with traffic calming devices
Proposed subdivisions or phases of existing subdivisions should be encouraged to add roundabouts as part of the street network designs. Pending traffic calming device additions to the Shelby County Subdivision Regulations, the additions of textured pavement, speed tables, and / or raised crosswalks should be included in proposed street network designs where the tendency to speed such as straight long street segments or high pedestrian uses such as around clubhouses are planned.
Pending traffic calming device additions to the Shelby County Subdivision Regulations, existing subdivisions experiencing documented speeding problems should be made aware of these devices and if warranted and desired, textured pavement or speed tables could be implemented as part of the Shelby County Highway Department’s annual repave list. Respondents at the November Community Workshops favored textured pavement use more than speed tables.
Timeline: Short Term
1.3.3 Reduce traffic speed on Dunnavant Valley Road with roundabouts
The Shelby County Subdivision Regulations, as currently adopted, contain two acceptable traffic calming designs – roundabout (circular raised island around which traffic flows) and neck downs (curb projections). Since neck downs are primarily used in town centers, such a design would not work on Dunnavant Valley Road itself. However, a roundabout, if recommended by the County Engineer, would be a better fit for the two lane roadway at a future four way intersection where traffic volume would be high. Geometric intersection alterations are required for a roundabout that necessitates more land than a typical intersection requires. Roundabout costs can be rather high due to the additional land acquisition, but roundabouts, which received a large number of favorable responses at the November Community Workshops, could be incorporated as part of any future large development designs that would be considered a major traffic generator. Application of roundabouts at existing intersections may entail having to acquire residential or commercial structures due to proximity to said intersections which would increase costs. Therefore, roundabouts would be better suited as part of planned intersections as opposed to retrofitted intersections.
Timeline: Long Term
[- 60 -]
OBJECTIVE 1.4
Maintain Dunnavant Valley Road as a Two-Lane Rural Road
STRATEGIES
1.4.1 Continue keeping any widening plans out of any long range transportation plans
As for Dunnavant Valley projects, the 2035 BRTP does not have any fiscally constrained projects, and the FY 2012 Amended/Updated FY 2012-2015 TIP only has the Hugh Daniel Drive project. Visionary roadway capacity projects include only US 280 projects. November Community Workshop participants overwhelmingly supported keeping it a two-lane rural roadway, and a majority supported making changes to only allow designated turn lanes. Traffic volume and accidents have not reached a threshold to even warrant road widening.
Timeline: Ongoing
[- 61 -]
GOAL 2: IMPROVE PUBLIC SAFETY
OBJECTIVE 2.1
Increase Police Presence
STRATEGIES
2.1.1 Reduce Speeding on Dunnavant Valley Road
Speeding was identified in the September Community Workshop as an issue on Dunnavant Valley Road. This road does not have a consistent speed zone between US 280 and State Route 25 such as 50 MPH or 45 MPH, so the need to adjust speed several times or maintain constant speed exists. Dunnavant Valley Road has zones for 55 MPH, 50 MPH, 45 MPH, and 40 MPH as well as a 35 MPH School Zone. Unfortunately, specific traffic citation data is not publically available to determine not only the number of speeding citations issued but driver speeds and speed zones where citations were issued. Even though three traffic accidents involving fatalities on the road in 2004 and 2008 involved speeding as a contributing factor, recent historical traffic accident statistics did not show speeding as the primary contributing factor in many accidents. As previously mentioned, Beat 5170 had 2,169 traffic stops, while Beat 5150 produced 1,947 traffic stops by deputies between 2008 and 2012. Therefore the possibility exists that speeding may have been the reason for many of the abovementioned traffic stops. Based on combined responses from the November Community Workshops, the consistent choice to address speeding, real or perceived, was increased patrols. Although publicly available data does not show a speeding problem, residents believe speeding is a problem which might be shown on the traffic stop data. Valley residents need to set up a meeting with the Sheriff’s Office to discuss their concerns related to speeding and other law enforcement issues.
The Sheriff’s Office has radar speed signs and trailers used countywide during speed enforcement exercises usually over a course of one or two weeks. These devices are truly effective if used in conjunction with patrol deputies. Residents need to request the use of these devices along with at least two patrol deputies during rush hours as well as school departure hours as recent historical crash data shows younger drivers involved in a significant number of crashes. An unmanned patrol vehicle could be used in conjunction with these devices and a manned patrol vehicle to replace a manned patrol vehicle to save man hours, or the unmanned patrol vehicle could be used in conjunction with these devices alone in times of reduced staff distributions. Swapping of manned and unmanned patrol vehicles at the same location over time can be just as effective as potential speeders do not know which is which until the vehicle is passed.
For long term speed enforcement, residents can request that solar powered pole mounted speed displays be installed by the Shelby County Highway Department. Such a display which includes a flashing violator alert and a traffic statistics package
[- 62 -]
is priced at approximately $5,000. The acquisition of these on a permanent basis should only be done if the speeding problems continue to persist after attempts by the Sheriff’s Office to enforce speed limits through use of its portable equipment.
Although specific speed enforcement activities can reduce speeding, the best way to reduce speeding is having a constant police presence on the roadway, which is not necessarily involved in speed enforcement. Even though the Dunnavant Valley is covered by two beats, only one of the beats exclusively covers a portion of the valley. Residents need to suggest to the Sheriff’s Office the creation of one Dunnavant Valley beat by splitting Beat 5150 and adding the area on the east side of Oak Mountain to Beat 5170. Expansion of Beat 5170 will not solve the police presence situation on its own, but rather the addition of at least one patrol deputy per shift to increase patrol deputies assigned to the expanded beat to two per shift would improve the situation more.
Timeline: Immediate
2.1.2 Locate a Sheriff’s Office substation in the Dunnavant Valley
Due to staffing and funding levels, the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office no longer has manned substations covering aggregated beats. Substations, which used to be manned by patrol deputies, investigators, and clerical staff, have secondary functions as they are now strictly used by patrol deputies for meal breaks, report writing, meeting residents, and restrooms. Technology has also eliminated some of the uses that substations had. Daily shift meetings and roll call that were once held at substations have now been replaced with video roll call on mobile computers in the patrol vehicles. This has allowed patrol deputies to head directly to their assigned beats rather than start the shift possibly in an adjoining beat.
An issue arose concerning a substation in the Dunnavant Valley at the September Community Workshop; however, the need for a substation was only slightly favored, not overwhelmingly, based on the November Community Workshop responses. It makes sense that an unmanned substation could be centrally located in Mt. Laurel. Although its functions are now secondary, perception of ‘constant’ police presence at a permanent location is beneficial to the residents. Due to monetary limitations, spending funds on such is not fiscally sound. If exclusive or shared space was made available at no charge by an entity to allow deputies to have breaks, do office work, and meet with the residents, then a substation could exist.
Timeline: Short Term
[- 63 -]
OBJECTIVE 2.2
Increase Residential Participation in Law Enforcement
STRATEGIES
2.2.1 Commence a Citizen Observer Patrol (COP) program in the Dunnavant Valley
The Citizen Observer Patrol (COP) program is a national program sponsored by a local law enforcement agency whereby an unarmed volunteer group comprised of local residents patrol local neighborhoods and commercial areas. It was founded in 1995 in Flagler County, Florida, where it is still in place. They help deter crime by observing and reporting suspicious activities, and problematic situations or hazardous conditions directly to the local law enforcement agency. Also, the volunteers in teams of two may perform checks on unoccupied residences, conduct house watches while residents are away on vacation, ensure that the elderly and infirmed are okay, aid stranded motorists, and assist with traffic control and accidents. The volunteers are provided extensive training by the local law enforcement agency, special COP uniforms, specially marked patrol vehicles with green emergency lights, COP photo ID cards, and radio equipment. Typically, a volunteer must be at least 18 years of age, pass a background check, possess a valid driver’s license, pass a drug test, complete at least forty hours of training, pass a defensive driving course, and donate a minimum three hours per week for patrols.
COP programs across the southeast include the Florida counties of Broward, Marion, Palm Beach, Volusia, and West Palm Beach and the North Carolina cities of Charlotte and Durham. Since 1999, a successful local COP program has been in operation in the City of Chelsea. Even though this program uses individuals who donate their free time, non-labor operations costs related to equipment, uniforms, and/or vehicles exist and therefore the city funds the program. The Baltimore County Maryland COP program is funded by supplemental grants from the county government, residential association funding, and/or private donations.
A COP program would supplement the limited staffing of patrol deputies and provide numerous eyes and ears by members in patrol vehicles or members walking the neighborhoods and commercial areas. Such a program would address the issue and need related to more police patrols even though COP members are not law enforcement. Residents need to determine the initial participants and funding partners which would most likely come from the private sector. Its base of operations could be the abovementioned proposed substation as a joint use free facility since the COP program is volunteer based with limited operating funds.
Timeline: Short Term
[- 64 -]
2.2.2 Establish or enhance neighborhood watch programs
The Dunnavant Valley should create a network of linked neighborhood watch programs, which were identified very favorably in the November Community Workshops, with guidance from the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office or local police departments. These local law enforcement agencies can provide guidance and direction to the neighborhoods, and insight to the current happenings of the area. The participating neighborhood residents become the eyes and ears for abnormal activity and report such via the same contact number to local law enforcement agencies or an established COP program. Neighborhood watch signs using the same design can be placed throughout the Dunnavant Valley in participating neighborhoods. As part of the network, all participating neighborhoods can be linked via a notification email and/or text system to alert residents of criminal activity, missing children and/or pets, and emergencies.
Timeline: Immediate
2.23 Target domestic violence education and prevention programs for the Valley
Crime statistics in the Dunnavant Valley between 2008 and 2012 showed domestic violence as the second leading reported crime behind only property theft. In fact for 2012, domestic violence surpassed property theft as the leading reported crime in the Dunnavant Valley. Domestic violence is a continuing problem in the Valley, not only shown by the crime statistics, but as a crime due to its nature not often reported. Education and prevention programs can assist those residents who may either be a victim or know someone who is a victim in providing the necessary information to prevent future abusive situations. SafeHouse of Shelby County provides such programs to the community.
Concerned residents should contact SafeHouse to bring its education and prevention programs to the Dunnavant Valley, and such residents should arrange, as discreetly as needed, with local churches, schools, or community centers to host these programs. The abovementioned shared use substation, once available, could be a host site. Valley residents could open up their homes to be safe residences in providing confidential meeting locations for individual and / or group counseling for survivors and their families.
Timeline: Immediate
[- 65 -]
GOAL 3: IMPROVE AT GRADE RAILROAD CROSSINGS
OBJECTIVE 3.1
Upgrade Railroad Crossing Warning Devices
STRATEGIES
3.1.1 Upgrade the active warning device at the State Route 25 railroad crossing
Basic active warning systems in the Norfolk Southern Railroad network include flashing lights and gates called two quadrant gate systems. The railroad crossing may have an active warning system but needs to be upgraded to the basic active warning system having a gate mechanism on both roadway approaches. Adding simple median barriers on both roadway approaches would prevent the practice of driving around lowered gates. This location being adjacent to a sharp curve and near a railroad tunnel provides considerations to justify more protections. 2010 AADT counts by ALDOT showed 1,652 vehicles a day crossing here. Due to the curve, an additional flashing warning light, as suggested in the Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Handbook – Revised Second Edition August 2007 should be installed for northbound motorists who have not entered the curve.
ALDOT will ultimately determine if this gate and additional warning lights are warranted using its own formula with such criteria as the vehicular counts at the crossing, the types of vehicles using the crossing, the number of daily trains each way, and / or the collision history at the crossing. When a positive determination is made, the project would be placed in both the Statewide Highway Safety Plan and the Long Range Transportation Plan as a Safety Project in order to use federal monies as project cost is estimated between $185,000 and $400,000.
Timeline: Short Term
3.1.2 Replace the stop signs at the Mimosa Road crossings with active warning devices
Stop signs are passive warning devices and should be replaced with active warning devices. Recent history has shown two train incidents at the County Road 41 railroad crossing, more than any of the other railroad crossings in the Dunnavant Community. The Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis has given the County Road 41 railroad crossing a two percent chance of having an annual incident there; each of the other railroad crossings was given a less than two percent annual chance. Both railroad crossings would benefit from installation of basic active warning systems including flashing lights and gates as well as median barriers, but the primary need is the County Road 41 railroad crossing. Each project is estimated to cost between $185,000 and $400,000. Respondents at the November Community Workshops favored installing active warning devices.
Timeline: Short Term
[- 66 -]
OBJECTIVE 3.2
Minimize Road Blockages by Stopped Trains
STRATEGIES
3.2.1 Work with Norfolk Southern Railroad to reduce the number of blockages on Mimosa Road and State Route 25 and limit their duration
Leeds is where the Norfolk Southern Railroad’s North-South line, which runs through the Dunnavant Community, and East-West line converge into one line just west of downtown Leeds prior to entering Birmingham. A refuge siding exists in the Dunnavant Community from just south of County Road 101 to just south of the Oak Mountain Tunnel, while a passing siding exists in western Leeds between downtown and Interstate 20. During functions involving siding at either location, at least one road will be blocked. During functions involving siding or delaying of longer trains it appears that the Dunnavant Community bears the brunt rather than Leeds as more than one road gets blocked, thus blocking all access to residences off the loop of Mimosa Road. Long waits including some over one hour have occurred during the simultaneous blocking of both Mimosa Road crossings. Unfortunately, any uncoupling of railroad cars to open up the crossings would only increase delays as air hoses that activate railcar brakes have to be re-pressurized.
Dialogue needs to be initiated among the residents, the County government, the Shelby County Legislative Delegation, and Norfolk Southern Railroad officials to address the frequent blocking of County Roads 101 and 41, and State Route 25 in the Dunnavant Community. Discussions need to center around avoiding blocking County Road 41 and especially State Route 25 at all times. Solutions need to be proposed to alleviate those who use County Road 101 whereby drivers know to use County Road 41 – assuming it is not blocked. Such solutions could include the use of yellow informational traffic signs being installed near the change of County Road 41 to County Road 101 alerting motorists that lengthy delays are possible at the County Road 101 crossing or an electronic informational sign alerting motorists to current crossing conditions. Another solution might be building an emergency one lane roadway adjacent to the railroad right of way among the roads involved to be used by emergency personnel such as fire or medical; locking bollards could be installed to prevent access during times without train blockages. The ultimate solution, though costly, would be a Mimosa Road overpass.
Timeline: Immediate
3.2.2 Enact state law preventing a train from blocking a crossing for an extended period of time and preventing emergency vehicles from crossing
The State of Alabama does not have any applicable statute related to the blocking of a railroad crossing by a stopped train. However, the majority of states place restrictions on the amount of time a railroad crossing may be blocked by a stopped
[- 67 -]
train when such is not related to emergencies or train mechanical problems. Although time allowed for blocking varies, no state, where laws exist, allows such to exceed twenty minutes. All of Alabama’s neighboring states have applicable statutes with the exception of Tennessee. Mississippi places a five minute maximum on the duration of a blocked highway crossing and allows local municipalities to enact their own laws related to municipal streets; however, fines cannot exceed fifty dollars per offense. Florida requires that a stopped train blocking a crossing not due to mechanical failure must be cut, separated, or moved to allow an approaching emergency vehicle to cross. Other southeastern states such as Louisiana place a twenty minute time limit on a blocked railroad crossing with fines between $200 and $5000 per instance based on duration within a twenty four hour period and include a clearing clause for an emergency vehicle. South Carolina places a maximum of five minutes, while Texas has a ten minute period.
The Shelby County Legislative Delegation should be encouraged by Dunnavant residents, individually or via community meetings, to research various state laws related to blocked railroad crossings and pursue a fair law for all. Louisiana’s law addresses the two main problems blocked railroad crossings cause, and Alabama should seriously look at passing a similar law. Respondents from the November Community Workshops overwhelmingly favored this action.
Timeline: Short Term
[- 68 -]
GOAL 4: INCREASE COMMUNITY FACILITIES
OBJECTIVE 4.1
Enhance Educational Opportunities in the Dunnavant Valley
STRATEGIES
4.1.1 Create a Dunnavant Valley Attendance Zone
The Chelsea Attendance Zone has the fastest growing enrollment of any of the other County school attendance zones and currently has the third largest enrollment. A third elementary school is under construction at an estimated cost of $20 million, and once finished, all elementary schools in the attendance zone will move to K-5 grade formats. Chelsea is one of the fastest growing cities even through the national economic woes. Current residential developments like Mt. Laurel and Highland Lakes have not been built out, so growth will continue.
Dunnavant Valley is home to a sizeable compact unincorporated population, second only to the Oak Mountain area containing the census designated places of Meadowbrook and Brook Highland as well as Inverness and Eagle Point. In the event other growing cities like Alabaster decide to form their own city school systems such as Pelham or even Chelsea, ‘what if’ scenarios need to be discussed. Residents of Saddlelake are facing such a challenge including being required to be annexed into Alabaster in order to continue attending the same schools or being rezoned to attend schools in Columbiana. South Forty was annexed into Alabaster by an act of the Legislature during the 2013 session in order to, among other reasons, continue attending schools in Alabaster. It should be noted that the fourth highest response to the issue generation exercise during the first Community Workshop was no annexation. The census designated places of Highland Lakes, Shoal Creek, and Dunnavant are too sizeable to face such a dilemma. Thus, it appears that residents would be opposed to any annexation to continue school enrollment within their attendance zones. Long term strategy discussions need to include locating, once enrollment dictates, schools such as a middle school on unincorporated tracts rather than within any city limits. Such schools would still be in the Chelsea Attendance Zone, but due to location, the schools would always be county schools whether or not Chelsea decides to create its own school system.
A grassroots committee needs to be formed to initiate discussions among residents, stakeholders, developers, government leaders, and Shelby County School Board officials concerning a long term strategy to form a Dunnavant Valley Attendance Zone within the Shelby County School System, over time separating from the Chelsea Attendance Zone. Efforts to form a Dunnavant Valley Attendance Zone would similarly mirror those of primarily unincorporated residents of north Shelby who worked over nearly a decade in the 1990’s to form the Oak Mountain Attendance Zone, which was carved out of both the Pelham Attendance Zone and ironically, the Chelsea Attendance Zone. Inverness Elementary School was in a
[- 69 -]
similar situation as Mt. Laurel Elementary School. Due to growth, Oak Mountain Elementary School was opened in 1990 to handle an overflow of students from both Inverness and Valley Elementary Schools. Oak Mountain Intermediate and Middle Schools followed. In 1999 the Oak Mountain Attendance Zone was finalized with opening of Oak Mountain High School. The process was not an overnight success, and fulfillment required a strong volunteer organization. Creation of the Helena Attendance Zone, which started with the Helena Elementary School and one by one added the Helena Intermediate School in 2001 and the Helena Middle School in 2008, is similar as it will remain within the County School System after the Helena High School opening in 2014.
Timeline: Long Term
OBJECTIVE 4.2
Enhance the Provision of Multiple Use Community Facilities in the Dunnavant Valley
STRATEGIES
4.2.1 Establish New and / or Renovate Existing Multiple Use Community Facilities
In the Dunnavant Valley, only two multiple use community facilities, Sports Blast Shelby County and the aged Dunnavant Community Center, exist. Sports Blast is used for indoor field sports such as soccer while the community center is used for the Dunnavant Senior Center. Residents wanting to play indoor basketball or use indoor walking / running facilities must cross Oak Mountain to the Greystone area to use such fee-based facilities at either the YMCA or St. Vincent’s One Nineteen. Such is the case on the other side of the county where residents of Pelham and Alabaster have to travel to its YMCA for such activities. The lone exception is the Helena Community Center which was a joint city / county venture; however, its use is restricted to city residents, and any similar city facilities may also restrict its use.
Residents need to form a grassroots committee to initiate discussions among all stakeholders concerning multiple use community facilities. The committee should discuss needs not being met and ways to address any inequities. Initial discussions related to renovations should focus on Sports Blast and the Dunnavant Community Center, but options for the latter should include a new facility. The new Vandiver Senior Center was completed for $440,723 using an Alabama Department of Community Affairs (ADECA) Community Enhancement grant and monies from the Shelby County Community Health Foundation, the Shelby County Commission, the Shelby County Legislative Delegation, and the local communities.
The Tuscaloosa County Park & Recreation Authority should be used as an example for countywide recreation centers. This authority has six centers which include gymnasiums, indoor tracks, fitness areas, pools, and conference rooms.
Timeline: Short Term
[- 70 -]
GOAL 5: IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST SAFETY
OBJECTIVE 5.1
Provide Safe Pedestrian Routes
STRATEGIES
5.1.1 Complete Dunnavant Valley Community Greenway Phases II and III
In May 2007, the Dunnavant Valley Community Greenway Plan was completed calling for three phases between 1996 Fields and Villas Belvedere. The first phase between 1996 Fields and Dunnavant Valley Road has been completed. Using the rights of way of Dunnavant Valley and Old Dunnavant Valley Roads, Phase II is proposed to travel between the trailhead at the end of Phase I and a point just prior to the first street in Mt. Laurel. Phase III would use primarily the street networks of Mt. Laurel, Belvedere Cove, and Villas Belvedere; however, short paths need to be constructed connecting the greenway to the Mt. Laurel street network and connecting the Mt. Laurel street network to the Belvedere Cove street network.
In 2011 the Shelby County Highway Department prepared a cost estimate of what it would cost to complete Phase II. The total cost is estimated at $1,076,832 with the most costly category being right of way acquisition. Unfortunately due to the terrain, the six foot wide paved greenway cannot be constructed completely within the rights of way and approximately 5.64 acres would have to be acquired along the rights of way at an estimated cost of $507,779. Clearing, grading, drainage, base, and pavement are the second costliest category at $314,267. Using federal funds which are competitive with other projects in the metropolitan area with an 80/20 match, the Shelby County match of this estimate is $215,366. Due to having a completed plan in place, Phase II is eligible, in addition to the existing Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds, for a new federal 80/20 program that the MPO is offering called the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP); however, the maximum cost of a TAP project is $500,000. Thus, TAP federal funds would only cover $400,000 of the proposed cost, and if federal funds were used for the whole project, then a CMAQ funding request would be needed.
The best option for completing Phases II and III might be applying for either TAP or CMAQ, and arranging for local private sector funding through land donations, cash donations from stakeholders, and material donations. Greenway amenities especially signage, mile markers, and trash receptacles could be acquired via greenway sponsorships. Phase III could easily be completed using the local private sector to fund the relatively short paved connections to / from Mt. Laurel and the signage. In a competitive world, leveraging using all sources means everything.
Timeline: Short Term
[- 71 -]
5.1.2 Determine the route of the Dunnavant Valley Community Greenway to Dunnavant
Shelby County will need to contract with a consultant to produce a corridor feasibility study to determine the ideal route of the greenway from the end of Phase III into the Dunnavant Community. It is anticipated that Phase IV would end around Smyer Lake, Phase V would finish at State Route 25, and Phase VI would culminate at a point on Mimosa Road. Due to the need to use federal funds for construction, the study will be required by the MPO to be eligible for federal funds it handles. The MPO does not have a corridor feasibility grant program similar to the one used for prior greenway plans. All funding would need to come from local sources, and estimated costs could run from $30,000 to $50,000.
Timeline: Short Term
OBJECTIVE 5.2
Accommodate Cyclists on Dunnavant Valley Road
STRATEGIES
5.2.1 Construct bike lanes from Highway 280 to Highway 25
Due to the increased use of recreational cyclists on Dunnavant Valley Road, population growth, pavement width, high speed limits, and terrain; safe travel by motorists and cyclists alike has been affected. The American Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials (AASHTO) recommends, at a minimum, either a four foot wide marked bike lane for roadways without curbs such as Dunnavant Valley Road or an unmarked two foot wide lane temporarily. In addition, bike lane maintenance to clear the path of debris is a required task when incorporating them. At the first Community Workshop, the need for bike lanes was the highest ranked issue, and respondents at the November Community Workshops overwhelming desired bike lanes on Dunnavant Valley Road.
Two situations exist concerning full implementation of bike lanes. One involves the repaving Dunnavant Valley Road (northern section in 2010 and the southern section in 2011) whereas repaving the same areas to install bike lanes may not be fiscally warranted. Second, Phase II of the Dunnavant Valley Community Greenway, with a cost estimate of over $1 million, would seem be the preferred project since Phase I of the three phase greenway plan has recently been completed and Phase II has been pushed over the years to be completed to Mt. Laurel. As proposed in the cost estimate, Phase II is only six foot wide but to effectively accommodate cyclists needs to be eight feet wide. Even if such width was changed, most cyclists would still use the road, as the increase in cyclist use of the finished greenway would come from cyclists who do not use the road due to safety.
Ultimately, bike lanes need to be incorporated into future repaving or widening projects. Bike lanes with a four foot width have been currently priced at $16 per
[- 72 -]
linear foot, placing the total cost for bike lanes on each side of Dunnavant Valley Road for the full length at $1.91 million. Even splitting the route in two – US 280 to Hugh Daniel ($783,168) and Hugh Daniel to State Route 25 ($1,121,984) would still be rather high. Realistically from a higher usage perspective, placing bike lanes initially between The Cove at Greystone and Mt. Laurel would only cost $290,400, but would link entrances to seven subdivisions with the Dunnavant Valley’s main commercial core. Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) funds could be conceivably used for such a project with eighty percent or $232,320 being federal funds and twenty percent or $58,080 being local funds. A Shelby County / City of Hoover partnership could be formed splitting local funds as the Hoover subdivisions of The Cove at Greystone and Greystone Farms would have direct access to such bike lanes, while North Lake at Greystone is only a short distance up Hugh Daniel Drive from Dunnavant Valley Road.
Timeline: Long Term
OBJECTIVE 5.3
Provide Safe Pedestrian Crossings of Dunnavant Valley Road
STRATEGIES
5.3.1 Install marked crosswalks in commercial areas
Marked crosswalks are painted pedestrian crossings, if properly placed, can encourage pedestrians to cross at preferred locations, enhance pedestrian safety, and heighten driver awareness. Such crosswalks should not be positioned where the speed limit exceeds 40 MPH. High visibility crosswalks with ladder designs should be placed between Mt. Laurel (Mt. Laurel Avenue & Hawthorne Street) and The Village at Highland Lakes (Highland Village Drive) and Dunnavant Square (Carlow Lane). The crosswalk costs are estimated to be $300 at each location. If the need arises and an engineering study warrants, then pedestrian hybrid beacons can be installed at these marked crosswalks.
Timeline: Short Term
5.3.2 Install a pedestrian tunnel in the Mt. Laurel Elementary School area
The Dunnavant Valley Community Greenway Plan called for a pedestrian tunnel beneath Dunnavant Valley Road connecting the Village of Highland Lakes as well as Highland Lakes to the Dunnavant Valley Community Greenway and ultimately to the Mt. Laurel Elementary School. This area is located in a small ravine between an undeveloped Village at Highland Lakes parcel and an undeveloped Eddleman Lands parcel. At the time of the greenway plan as a Safe Routes to School initiative, suggestions were made that involved Eddleman Properties funding the tunnel, as it would primarily benefit his developments, and Shelby County installing the tunnel. No pedestrian path has been built across the undeveloped
[- 73 -]
Village at Highland Lakes parcel and of course, the greenway has not been built. Tunnel installation needs to be combined as part of the greenway construction process – not after Phase II of the greenway is finished. Such a tunnel within the eighty foot right of way but not necessarily covering the full width would consist of one or more precast concrete box culverts with precast concrete wingwalls at each end. Respondents from the November Community Workshops preferred this type of pedestrian crossing over the other types.
Timeline: Short Term
[- 74 -]
GOAL 6: INCREASE PUBLIC RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
OBJECTIVE 6.1
Provide a regional park with diverse active recreational activities to cater to area residents
STRATEGIES
6.1.1 Build an active regional park in the Dunnavant Valley
Most regional and large scale parks with active recreational activities for youth and even adults such as baseball, softball, tennis, and football are found throughout the county within city limits, such as the Spain Park Sports Complex and the Chelsea Recreational Park, where the respective municipality may or may not restrict use to city residents whether or not such parks were created as part of a joint county-city partnership. Shelby County has one regional park, Heardmont Park, offering the abovementioned active recreational activities located in an unincorporated area. Heardmont Park, not only has a football stadium where Oak Mountain High School plays its games, but consists of three baseball fields, six softball fields, four multiple use / soccer fields, four lighted tennis courts, paved walking trails, and a playground as well as a senior center and a substation. This county park that covers 74 acres serves a populous unincorporated area similar to the Dunnavant Valley.
Heardmont Park’s creation involved a massive public-private partnership which would be needed for any plans in the Dunnavant Valley. Stakeholders not only included Shelby County but the Shelby County Board of Education; area athletic boosters such as Oak Mountain Athletic Boosters, Oak Mountain Youth Baseball, and the American Soccer Club; businesses; and concerned citizens. The County, which purchased the land with the Shelby County Board of Education, coordinated construction of all permanent park amenities and structures, while the local athletic organizations coordinated and built the athletic fields including the stadium complex. Corporate and individual donations were raised via the non-profit Summit Foundation for use at the stadium complex. Formed in 1993, this existing non-profit’s purpose is to provide recreational facilities for north Shelby County.
A grassroots effort has to be initiated to form an organization to focus on the development of a regional park. The organization would pursue partnerships between the public and private sectors to secure a centralized site minimally similar in size to Heardmont Park offering active recreational activities as well as acquiring additional land to be used for school athletics in case a Dunnavant Valley Attendance Zone is formed. Partnerships with Shelby County to construct permanent park amenities and structures, and youth baseball / softball athletic boosters to build the athletic fields need to be forged along with help from non- profit organizations like the Summit Foundation. Once finished, the Shelby County Park and Recreation Authority can run the park operations.
Timeline: Long Term
[- 75 -]
OBJECTIVE 6.2
Provide passive community parks where local residents may go to avoid crowds and noise
STRATEGIES
6.2.1 Build a passive community park in the Dunnavant Community
Shelby County has constructed and maintained small community parks such as ones at Almont (3.02 acres), Pea Ridge (3.3 acres), Shelby (5 acres), and Vandiver (6.5 acres) in unincorporated areas across the county. Characteristics of these parks include some of the following: a paved walking trail, playground, swings, basketball court, ball field, restrooms, picnic pavilions, and grills. These parks are smaller than the ones where team sports are played and are geared for families to enjoy throughout the week without worrying about crowds, parking, and noise.
The ideal location for such a park with all of the abovementioned amenities is adjacent to the Dunnavant Community Center similar to ones adjacent to community centers in Pea Ridge and Vandiver. For cost comparisons, the Vandiver Park was completed in 2004 at a cost of $285,000. However, the parcel in Dunnavant only comprises 2.4 acres slightly less than the site in Almont and less than half the size of the one in Vandiver. Additional land would need to be acquired from adjoining land owners via purchase, donation, and / or conservation easement. Concerned residents need to commence discussions among all property owners involved and Shelby County officials to produce a scenario to benefit the Dunnavant Community. Such an endeavor could be tied into either renovation work at the community center or a new construction project. If not feasible, then other sites need to be located.
Timeline: Short Term
[- 76 -]
GOAL 7: PROMOTE CONSISTENT GROWTH PATTERNS
OBJECTIVE 7.1
Insure Adequate Public Facilities Exist before Further Development
STRATEGIES
7.1.1 Adopt an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO)
The Shelby County Comprehensive Plan of 2004 listed an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance as one of its implementation strategies although such has not been fulfilled. An APFO is an ordinance that ties or conditions development approval to the availability and adequacy of public facilities and services, such as those relating to roads, water supply, wastewater collection, public schools, and public safety (fire and police protection), ensuring that infrastructure is available to support the new development. By affecting the timing of development to ensure that it is matched with the availability and adequate capacity of public facilities, an APFO paces and defers growth rather than stopping growth. Adequate capacity means that sufficient capacity in the facility exists, such that the absorption of the additional impacts of a proposed project will not reduce the level of service currently being enjoyed by existing users. Such an ordinance preserves the welfare of current and future residents by ensuring that adequate public facilities and services are available concurrently with the completion of the new development.
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances include variables to be considered related to design, available, and treatment capacities; supply sources; storage and pumping facilities; impacts of other ongoing projects; consumption needs; and generated flows. The ordinance can be written to include provisions for any number of public facilities and to address adequacy determinations. Language can be placed in the ordinance to remedy proposed developments deemed to be placing an undue burden on one or more existing public facilities such as delaying the project until planned major public facility improvements are made, requiring developers fund said improvements, or allowing joint ventures to fund improvements.
Timeline: Immediate
7.1.2 Continue policy of no speculative rezoning specifically to avoid commercial sprawl
Rezoning applications to the Shelby County Planning Commission must include a basic development concept. Shelby County maintains that vacant land outside of core development areas should not be rezoned to allow more intense development than the existing conditions on the site. The Shelby County Planning Commission, at the time of a rezoning request, evaluates the proposed use and all permitted uses with a zoning district to determine if a zoning change should be approved.
Timeline: Ongoing
[- 77 -]
OBJECTIVE 7.2
Correct Inconsistent Zoning Designations on Select Parcels
STRATEGIES
7.2.1 Rezone split parcels, within the existing Highland Lakes Special District Development, containing both H-Z Holding Zone and E-2 SD Single Family Estate Special Districts to E-2 SD Single Family Estate Special District
Since the old Beat 13 adopted zoning, land on the west side of Oak Mountain has been zoned H-Z Holding Zone District. Over time the land has been subdivided that overlap both the North Shelby-I-65 Corridor Beat and the Chelsea North- Dunnavant Valley South-Westover North Beat. The land on the east side of Oak Mountain has been zoned E-2 SD Single Family Estate Special District since the latter zoning beat adopted zoning leaving parcels, specifically lots within the 19th, 30th, and Amended 6th Sectors, split with two zoning designations.
Therefore, the following parcels should be rezoned from H-Z Holding Zone District to E-2 SD Single Family Estate Special District:
09 2 04 0 002 002.050 09 2 04 0 002 002.051 09 2 04 0 002 002.052 09 2 04 0 002 002.053 09 2 04 0 002 002.054 09 2 04 0 002 002.055 09 2 04 0 002 002.056 09 2 04 0 002 002.057 09 2 04 0 002 002.058 09 2 04 0 002 002.059 09 2 04 0 002 002.060 09 2 04 0 002 002.061 09 2 04 0 008 012.000 09 2 04 0 008 013.000 09 2 04 0 008 014.000 09 2 04 0 008 015.000 09 2 04 0 008 016.000 09 2 04 0 008 017.000 09 2 04 0 008 018.000 09 2 04 0 008 019.000 09 2 04 0 008 020.000 09 2 04 0 008 021.000 09 2 04 0 008 022.000 09 2 04 0 008 023.000 09 2 04 0 008 024.000 09 3 05 0 001 049.018 09 3 05 0 001 049.022 09 3 05 0 001 049.023 09 3 05 0 001 049.024 09 3 05 0 001 049.025 09 3 05 0 001 049.026 09 3 05 0 001 049.027 09 3 05 0 001 049.028 09 3 05 0 001 049.029 09 3 05 0 001 049.030 09 3 05 0 001 049.031 09 3 05 0 001 049.032 09 3 05 0 001 049.033 09 3 05 0 001 049.034 09 3 08 0 001 001.045 09 3 08 0 001 001.098
Timeline: Immediate
[- 78 -]
7.2.2 Rezone land near the intersection of Dunnavant Valley Road and US 280 with three different zoning designations into a single base zoning designation
County land holdings were acquired through various means including the donation of unusable land from a residential development and a land swap to allow the construction of Phase 1 of the Dunnavant Valley Community Greenway. These three zoning designations consist of H-Z Holding Zone District, R-1 Single Family District, and B-2 General Business District. The greenway lies on land zoned H-Z, R-1, and B-2, while soccer fields exist on land zoned B-2. Land swapped with Shelby County is zoned R-1 while the main land it is now attached is zoned H-Z. A community cemetery is zoned B-2. Ideally, the Shelby County parcels should be rezoned to A-1 Agricultural District similarly to Heardmont Park.
Therefore, Parcel 09 5 16 0 001 036.001 should be rezoned from H-Z Holding Zone District to A-1 Agricultural District. Rezoning should occur on Parcels 09 5 16 0 001 039.000 and 09 5 21 0 000 001.109 from R-1 Single Family District to A-1 Agricultural District. In addition, rezoning should take place on Parcels 09 4 17 0 001 031.002 and 09 4 20 1 001 001.000 from B-2 General Business District to A-1 Agricultural District. Due to the cemetery, Parcel 09 4 20 1 001 003.000 zoning should change from B-2 General Business District to A-1-SD Agricultural Special District. As far the two tracts of land swapped from the county government which are zoned R-1 Single Family District, the property owner should be encouraged to consider rezoning Parcels 09 5 21 0 000 001.501 and 09 5 16 0 001 036.000 as well as his B-1 zoned Parcel 09 4 17 0 001 031.000 to H-Z Holding Zone District.
Timeline: Immediate
[- 79 -]
GOAL 8: PRESERVE THE RURAL CHARACTER
OBJECTIVE 8.1
Preserve Ridges, Farmlands, Wetlands, and Green Spaces
STRATEGIES
8.1.1 Create a Coosa Ridges Overlay District
The Dunnavant Valley is part of the Coosa Ridges section of the Alabama Valley and Ridge Physiographic Region. Oak Mountain and Double Oak Mountain are prominent physical features on both sides of the Dunnavant Valley running northeasterly from US 280 all the way to the county border. These ridges are aesthetically pleasing for valley residents and area visitors alike and are home to critical habitats of flora and fauna that specifically live in areas of steep slopes and shallower soils. Economic benefits abound for residential developments that locate further down these ridges closer to the valley floor. Mt. Laurel and Shoal Creek subdivisions are large high end residential developments without any dwellings situated on the Double Oak Mountain ridgetop, and the ridge view scape is a benefit to their residents and potential residents. However, no ridge protections exist in areas where Shelby County administers zoning. Once these ridges are disrupted, they may never be restored.
Detriments to the Coosa Ridges have occurred throughout the county within incorporated and unincorporated sections between Pelham and Hoover with the exception of Oak Mountain State Park where the ridges remain pristine. Harm has occurred already within the Dunnavant Valley along Oak Mountain. The culprit has been the scrapping of ridgetops and replacing the vegetation with dwellings – not so much the random house on large acreage but lines of houses on subdivision lots. Antenna farms are another scar, and one of these already exists on Oak Mountain within the Dunnavant Valley. Potential for further damage to the remaining undisturbed ridges of the valley exists from those previously mentioned actions as well as a form of power generation that has never been seen here.
Wind farms are a real threat to the Dunnavant Valley as this form of power generation is growing in popularity and are catching unprepared local governments and unsuspecting residents off guard. These wind farms use several large wind turbines in the neighborhood of three hundred feet tall, some with Federal Aviation Administration required red lights, to constantly ‘catch’ the wind causing three large blades to rotate, which can impact noise levels and wildlife. At least three wind projects are currently in the planning stages within the state – one being in Baldwin County using wind off Bon Secour Bay and the other two in Etowah and Cherokee Counties catching wind blowing over Shinbone Ridge within the Lookout Mountain section of the Cumberland Plateau Physiographic Region. By the end of 2014, Pioneer Green Energy plans to have in operation eight wind turbines in Cherokee County and up to forty wind turbines in Etowah County spaced every
[- 80 -]
quarter mile on the ridges. Distances of wind turbines along this ridge could equate to two miles in Cherokee County and up to ten miles in Etowah County.
In order to preserve and protect the undisturbed portions of the Coosa Ridges, where zoning authority exists, an overlay district needs to be incorporated into the Shelby County Zoning Ordinance. This overlay district could include, where applicable, all areas above an elevation of 1,000 feet, comprised of the detailed soils of NMS or GrD, and/or containing slopes of fifteen percent or greater. The proposed overlay district would primarily affect land areas currently zoned H-Z Holding Zone District and SD Special District by adding additional restrictions to the ones found in the underlying zoning district and/or requiring permitted uses in the underlying zoning district to become conditional uses. Additional grading, clearing, and height restrictions could be placed within areas of the overly district.
Timeline: Immediate
8.1.2 Enact a Law to Regulate Wind-Generated Energy Production in Shelby County
As mentioned above, Shelby County has the authority to regulate wind turbines and wind farms through its zoning authority; however, such authority can only be administered in areas where zoning was voted in. The Dunnavant Valley North Beat is an unzoned area, and wind farm operators could situate, within this particular beat, its turbines along the ridges of Oak and Double Oak Mountains if they so choose without restrictions. Whereas, Shelby County could, following adding wind generation regulations to its zoning ordinance, regulate such activity in the southern portion of the Dunnavant Valley within the Chelsea North-Dunnavant Valley South-Westover North Beat, it could not regulate such in the northern portion. In order to protect the ridges in the northern portion of the Dunnavant Valley, either the residents would need to successfully both petition for a zoning election and vote for zoning, or have the Shelby County Legislative Delegation sponsor a local bill and ultimately pass it, similar to Baldwin County’s House Bill 676 which became law in 2013, authorizing the Shelby County Commission to regulate the permitting, construction, placement, and operation of wind-generated energy production facilities in the unincorporated areas of the county, whether zoning exists or not.
Timeline: Immediate
8.1.3 Create a Flood-Prone Area Zoning District
The Code of Alabama 1975 under Section 11 Chapter 19 authorizes county commissions to adopt zoning ordinances for flood-prone unincorporated areas countywide, not just in zoning beats where zoning has been approved. Zoning regulations may be placed on all lands within any area with a frequency of inundation of once in one hundred years being the special flood hazard area (100 year flood). Such regulations would prohibit inappropriate new construction or substantial improvements, and control land uses and elevations of all new
[- 81 -]
construction within such flood-prone areas. These regulations would protect the floodways and floodplains as well as wildlife and plant habitats existing there. Implementation may occur with either a countywide or, over time, area adoption.
A portion of the Dunnavant Valley already is governed by the Shelby County Zoning Ordinance as registered voters within the Chelsea North-Dunnavant Valley South-Westover North Beat voted for zoning in 2005. Regulations specifically for the flood-prone areas would provide additional protections within this zoning beat as either an overlay district or a separate zoning special district. The flood-prone area primarily abuts both Yellowleaf Creek as it meanders in a southerly direction from Dunnavant Square to US 280 and Shoal Creek with its associated lakes between the residential developments of Shoal Creek and Lake Wehapa.
Since this legislation authorizes flood-prone area zoning countywide, this particular zoning district could be implemented in the Dunnavant Valley North Beat. The majority of the beat would remain unzoned, all of the 100 year flood areas would fall under its regulation. This special flood hazard area primarily abuts Shoal Creek as it meanders northward from Lake Wehapa through the Dunnavant Community to, and including, Hillhouse Lake. Of particular note in this zoning beat, this flood- prone area zoning district would provide some protections for the endangered mussels that may exist along the portion of Shoal Creek in this area of the county.
Timeline: Immediate
8.1.4 Add the Dunnavant Valley Road to the list of Scenic Corridor Overlay Districts
Alter Article XVIIIA Scenic Corridor Overlay District of the Shelby County Zoning Regulations to add the Dunnavant Valley Road to the list which includes only State Route 119. The current language was written in 1996 prior to the 2004 Comprehensive Plan – A Path to the Future, and language needs to be incorporated related to the adopted Strategic Development Concept found in said plan. The Strategic Development Concept for the Dunnavant Valley looks very similar, and the need for a new adopted land use plan should not be needed to replace the one in the adopted Comprehensive Plan as called for in the Article’s 1996 wording. Alterations include a 120 foot setback from the Dunnavant Valley Road centerline from US 280 to Wehapa Drive. Maximum building heights should be set on county roads to thirty feet rather than the current fifty feet.
Timeline: Immediate
8.1.5 Maintain H-Z Holding Zone Districts on County-zoned tracts of at least ten acres
The H-Z Holding Zone District is intended to provide for the proper timing and phasing of growth within areas of undeveloped property for which the Shelby County Planning Commission's zoning authority encompasses. This district may be applied to any lands for which the Shelby County Planning Commission finds should be held in a primarily undeveloped state for an interim period of time
[- 82 -]
pending development and / or completion of the comprehensive land use plan for the respective zoning jurisdiction. Permitted uses contain single family dwellings on tracts with at least ten acres (conditional use if less than ten acres), raising / grazing animals, growing crops, and forestry. Conditional uses are manufactured homes.
Timeline: Ongoing
8.1.6 Rezone certain property zoned H-Z Holding Zone District to A-R Agricultural- Residential District to continue agricultural single family residential patterns
The A-R Agricultural Residential Zoning classification has a minimum lot size of three acres and permits single family residential use in addition to basic agricultural uses. Its intent is to provide a zoning classification for low-density development of primarily agricultural / forestry purposes and single-family homes on a minimum of two acres with an average lot size of at least three acres. Smaller tracts currently zoned HZ ranging between three and ten acres could be brought before the Shelby County Planning Commission for consideration of rezoning to AR, where maintaining residential and rural characteristics is desired. Permitted uses include raising / grazing animals, crop cultivation, forestry, and single family structures. Conditional uses comprise outdoor recreation.
Timeline: Immediate
8.1.7 Utilize the tiered development patterns from the Shelby County Subdivision Regulations to promote growth management emphasizing conservation subdivisions
A Conservation Subdivision, not a part of a form based development, provides incentives for the preservation of key natural resources in public or private protection and ensures development patterns that preserve and enhance the natural features and open spaces on the land. Such subdivisions shall include a minimum of twenty acres, and a minimum of twenty percent of the development be preserved as open space or conservation area, however, no more than fifty percent of this open space shall be lands which are undevelopable. This conservation area shall remain preserved in perpetuity. Residential lots are grouped into clusters based on three land suitability tiers which range in maximum cluster size from twenty five to twenty to fifteen dwelling units. Multiple clusters may exist but shall be buffered from each by a two hundred foot wide buffer or conservation area.
Timeline: Ongoing
8.1.8 Encourage the creation of a local non-profit land trust or increase the presence of accredited land trusts in Shelby County, especially the Dunnavant Valley
A grassroots effort needs to commence among a group of conservation-minded individuals to create a local land trust whose main mission is to protect and preserve undisturbed lands within Shelby County for existing and future generations to enjoy. Funds would need to be raised via monetary gifts, donations,
[- 83 -]
and grants. Once the land trust is formed and operational, a major outreach would need to occur to seek willing property owners to place their undisturbed land within a conservation easement for conservation purposes, or sell, donate, or bequeath their undisturbed lands or conservation easements to the local land trust.
If a local non-profit land trust is unable to be formed, then the group of conservation-minded individuals should approach accredited land trusts willing to cover Shelby County such as the Freshwater Land Trust (accredited since 2009) or the Nature Conservancy (accredited since 2012) to begin frank discussions on increasing their presence here in Shelby County. Accredited land trusts have met national quality standards for excellence, upheld the public trust, and ensured that conservation efforts are permanent. As of February 2013, only 201 land trusts have been awarded accreditation by the Land Trust Accreditation Commission, an independent program established in 2006 of the Land Trust Alliance.
A conservation easement is a legal agreement between the property owner and the land trust limiting the land’s uses for conservation purposes. The landowner relinquishes his developmental rights to the land covered by the easement but could retain the rights to continue farming and/or hunting the land as well as passive activities such as hiking or horseback riding on the land. Placing lands in conservation easements lowers its market value, thus lowering estate taxes when such lands pass from one generation to the next generation. Conservation easements, donated between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2013, may allow certain landowners, especially farmers and ranchers, to have higher than normal federal tax deductions through the Enhanced Easement Tax Incentive.
Timeline: Immediate
OBJECTIVE 8.2
Implement Best Management Practices for all rights of way
STRATEGIES
8.2.1 Enhance wildlife corridors
The Dunnavant Valley is fortunate to have both natural and manmade wildlife corridors in the form of Oak and Double Oak Mountains, streams such as Shoal Creek, and Alabama Power transmission lines. Preserving ridges in an undisturbed fashion is a way to protect wildlife corridors. However, a statewide program, if used to its fullest, would benefit the valley with its number of crossing transmission lines that stretch northward from the A. G. Gaston Steam Plant in Wilsonville.
Alabama Wild Power, which has existed approximately thirteen years, is a collaborative effort of Alabama Power, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the US Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service, and local county Soil & Water Conservation Districts that enhances wildlife habitat within
[- 84 -]
transmission line corridors. Landowners with transmission line crossings are eligible to apply for this reimbursable incentive program during the month of May, and if successful, receive funds after the work is completed for brush removal and plantings that promote, attract, shelter, and feed wildlife in these rights of way. Successful applicants shall contact the Shelby County Soil & Water District Conservationist who will evaluate, develop, and implement a wildlife conservation plan for the right of way. Qualified property owners must adhere to the recommendations of the conservation plan in regards to seed selection, planting, and rates; submit copies of bills and receipts to the district conservationist; and sign the finished conservation plan. Within the Dunnavant Valley, Alabama Power would verify transmission rights of way and issue its incentive payments at year end. Approved landowners, who may reapply annually, will receive a $50 per acre payment capped at $500, and first time applicants will be given first priority over previously awarded applicants. Otherwise, qualifying applications will be funded in the order they are received until annual funds which vary year to year are depleted.
Timeline: Immediate
8.2.2 Encourage the growth and propagation of native and acceptable wildflowers in rights-of-way to coincide with the natural reseeding cycles of wildflowers
Dunnavant Valley residents should form a wildflower grassroots group with the common goal to promote the growth and maintenance of wildflowers especially along rights of way. This group should meet with local government staffs, residential developments, and utility companies responsible for rights of way management to voice its concerns about vegetation management practices, and in turn, hear from such staffs about its management policies and requirements. The group should encourage the adoption of a policy and / or memorandum of understanding among all parties whereby growth and propagation of native and acceptable wildflowers are nurtured and protected. Wildflower plots, thru memorandum of understanding, could even be managed by this group.
Effective mowing operations should be coordinated with seasonal cycles whereas cutting does not occur during seed-head production, should use appropriate cutting heights of four to six inches to avoid damaging perennial varieties and scalping, should only occur where needed, should not take place during wet periods, should not occur on steep slopes, should coordinate with litter patrols, and should not happen within two weeks of herbicide applications.
Mowing operations should occur after the spring wildflower blooming season which runs primarily from March through May but prior to the summer / fall wildflower blooming season which takes place between late July and October. Typically, seeds will have matured following two weeks after full blooms. In fact, mowing aids in seed dispersal, diminishes undesirable weeds, and allows sunlight to reach emerging seedlings and infant plants. An inventory of wildflowers growing in the valley needs to be completed, and a specific mowing schedule needs to be determined to avoid interfering with overlapping blooming seasons of acceptable and native wildflowers.
[- 85 -]
Residents could ask the respective right of way agency to establish non-mow or natural areas along the rights of way. Suitable areas would include steep slopes, ravines, wide rights of way, and wildflower demonstration plots planted by residents. Other areas could include transmission line crossings where conservation plans might have been adopted as part of the Alabama Wild Power program. Such areas should be clearly marked to avoid being accidentally mowed
Timeline: Immediate
8.2.3 Encourage minimal use of herbicides in the rights-of-way
Vegetation within rights of way impacts drainage, erosion, pavement life, fire hazards, habitats, aesthetics, and vehicular safety. While herbicides can be efficient and effective to control weeds and manage vegetation, the downside to its use is the potential environmental impacts that may occur. Respective parties need to move toward an implementation plan to ensure herbicides are used appropriately not conveniently. Herbicide use is a necessity initially to solve vegetation problems, but should be minimized and even eliminated over time when combined with other control measures. Such herbicide applications should not transpire after a mowing operation or before the targeted noxious weed attains a correct growing condition.
Control measures include natural and managed native grass succession, annual strip cultivation, pavement edge drop off design, pavement or fiber mats beneath guardrails, and non-selective herbicides (pre-emergent (root-absorbed) and post- emergent (foliage-absorbed)). Pavement edge drop offs could be added during repaving work, and mats could be placed during guardrail installation or repair.
Timeline: Immediate
8.2.4 Reestablish the Adopt-A-Mile and Adopt-A-Stream Programs
Alabama PALS (People Against a Littered State) has partnered with ALDOT since 1988 to coordinate the Alabama Adopt A Mile and Adopt-A-Stream Programs. An organization or group willing to volunteer time to maintain litter-free rights of way and stream crossings may apply to join PALS. The participant, that pledges a two year cleanup commitment, will be provided Adopt-A-Mile and / or Adopt-A- Stream signs, posts, safety vests, and trash bags by PALS and ALDOT. Cleanups occur every four to six weeks, and ALDOT periodically inspects the rights of way to insure compliance. There are over thirty-four miles adopted countywide but none in the valley, although a defunct sign exists on County Road 101. ALDOT erects Adopt-A-Mile and Adopt-A-Stream signs on state and federal highways; however, the Shelby County Highway Department erects them on county roads.
A concerted grassroots effort needs to be initiated by a group of concerned residents to gather support for bringing back these programs to the Dunnavant Valley. More residents and businesses exist in the valley to support such volunteer
[- 86 -]
efforts and their continued success. Homeowners associations and the like along with businesses, schools, churches, and organizations need to be approached and asked to participate. Once a sizeable group is aggregated, the various eligible roads in the valley can be assigned (in-house) to avoid gaps; the Shelby County Highway Department needs to be contacted if county roads are involved; and then applications need to be sent to PALS. A kickoff cleanup event should be announced once all signs are in place that would have all volunteers working one day and then congregating at a centralized location for food, games, and music.
Timeline: Immediate
OBJECTIVE 8.3
Promote conservation education
STRATEGIES
8.3.1 Encourage schools to introduce formal conservation educational programs
The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources promotes three main conservation educational programs in which teachers are required to complete a free workshop prior to acquiring the curriculum programs. Using hands-on activities, Project WILD teaches students about wildlife and their habitat needs, while Aquatic WILD teaches students about aquatic wildlife and their habitat needs. Project WET instructs students about water resources. Other programs promoted by the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources are Hooked on Fishing-Not on Drugs (HOFNOD) developed by the Future Fisherman Foundation and Growing Up WILD. The HOFNOD program’s curriculum includes angling skills, fish biology, human dimension, and life skills in a combined effort to teach youth about the benefits of a healthy lifestyle. The later program is an early childhood education program, geared for ages 3 through 7, that introduces nature and wildlife to young children.
Timeline: Immediate
8.3.2 Construct Outdoor Conservation Education Teaching Station
Along the Dunnavant Valley Greenway within Phase 1, there exists an area on County property between the path and Yellowleaf Creek suitable, if built above flood level, to construct a deck with benches that could comfortably hold at least twenty-five students. The teaching station could be used to teach educational programs and provide a hands-on, no-walls outdoor teaching environment. This station could be completed using Eagle Scouts or local volunteer labor with donated materials and / or funds. Sponsorships could be used if needed.
Timeline: Immediate
[- 87 -]