Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting – April 20, 2026
Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting – April 20, 2026
The Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission met on April 20, 2026, at 6:00 PM to consider a full agenda including annexations, rezonings, preliminary plats, and a street vacation. The meeting included a presentation on upcoming subdivision regulation updates and public comments on several items. Decisions were made on multiple cases, with several matters recommended to the City Council for final action.
Consent Calendar
- S2326 and S2526 were approved as part of the consent agenda after no public comments or questions were raised.
- S2926 was removed from the consent agenda due to received public comment and was heard separately.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Z0726 (James Beard rezoning): Beverly Wilson expressed concern about a duplex on a single-dwelling street and questioned the existence of an alley. Cheryl Lewis and Alena Wilson initially thought their property was being rezoned but clarified their concern was about parking feasibility.
- River Bend Ranch (Rice Mine Road): Ian Kaazia (Gaineswood HOA president) opposed the multifamily component, citing concerns about site elevation (higher than Gaineswood), water drainage, buffer adequacy, and traffic. He noted a prior approval had a 50-foot buffer and 100-foot building setback; this proposal has a 20-foot landscape buffer and 75-foot building setback. He stated opposition to apartments but openness to lower density condominiums.
- River Bend Ranch (Rice Mine Road): Lewis De Villa expressed concerns about density, security (parking near his fence), and desire for parking on the north side. He opposed apartments but said townhomes or condos would be acceptable.
- River Bend Ranch (Rice Mine Road): Andrew Newby (neighboring resident) testified that turning left out of his neighborhood onto Rice Mine Road takes 7 to 9 minutes and opposed the project due to traffic concerns.
- 4B Spectrum (Alberta Parkway): Flora Thomas and Jacqueline Anderson raised concerns about the proposed alley vacation, drainage/flooding, and the visual impact of two-story townhomes. They noted the alley had previously been partially vacated and asked for a continuance to get more information. Commissioner Howard urged them to meet with the petitioner.
- S2726 (Cardin Family Subdivision): Evelyn Wilson spoke in support, explaining she wanted to divide property between her two daughters.
Discussion Items
- Subdivision Regulations Update: Staff presented a teaser on upcoming modernization of the subdivision regulations (last adopted September 1980) to align with the 2021 Framework Plan and 2024 zoning ordinance. Key goals include lake-specific standards, master planning procedures, and simplified lot consolidations. A new survey (four questions) was distributed to gather stakeholder input.
- Z0726 – Rezoning (2842 18th Street): Petitioner James Beard requested a rezoning from MR1 to SFR5 to build a duplex on a 0.2-acre lot. Staff noted concerns with the site plan (four parking spaces in the front yard not meeting maximum paving requirements). Commissioners requested more detailed plans, especially for parking. After public comment, the petitioner requested and was granted a continuance.
- S2926 – Collier Row (905 Almond Avenue): This item was pulled from consent due to public comment. The petitioner proposed a 5‑lot subdivision with four townhomes and one existing home. The design had been approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. No public speakers came forward, and the commission approved the plat.
- Z0826 – Rezoning (2093 Veterans Memorial Parkway): Longleaf Engineering petitioned to rezone 1.25 acres from SFR1 to General Commercial for a contractor’s office and small retail. The framework plan designates the area as Limited Commercial. No public comment; approved unanimously.
- River Bend Ranch – Companion Cases (4178 & 4202 Rice Mine Road): Five items considered together: annexation of 1.05 acres (approved), three rezonings (GC to MFR on 2.5 acres, SFR1 to MFR on 1.1 acres, SFR1 to GC on 0.04 acres – all approved), and a preliminary plat for a 3‑lot subdivision with 52 multifamily units and two commercial lots. The applicant clarified the units would be for-sale condominiums (not rentals) with three bedrooms around 1200–1250 sq. ft. After discussion, all items were approved.
- 4B Spectrum – Companion Cases (620–634 25th Avenue East): Rezoning from SFR4 to MR2 and a 7‑lot subdivision (six townhomes and one duplex) on 0.58 acres. Staff noted that the eight units are already allowed under SFR4 but the townhome configuration requires MR2. Engineering objected to waiving right-of-way dedication along an existing alley; the petitioner agreed to initiate an alley vacation process. The rezoning and subdivision were approved with a condition that the alley vacation be completed before a land development permit is issued.
- Other Preliminary Plats: S1226 (Herman Avenue) – approved; S1326 (Harky Lane) – approved; S1526 (Old Farmhouse Subdivision) – approved; S1626 (Amber Drive) – approved; S1726 (Martin Estates) – approved after traffic study and design modifications; S1826 (Skelton Corner/Cleveland Farms) – approved; S2126 (Skelton McCracken) – approved; S2226 (Nutters Run) – approved; S2426 (McKinnon Subdivision) – approved; S2626 (Right House on Eighth) – approved; S2726 (Cardin Family Subdivision) – approved; S2826 (April Sound) – approved; S3026 (Emerson Court Condominiums) – approved.
- Street Vacation VO226 (South Side Drive): Vacating 0.08 acres of right-of-way abutting lot 1R of Factory Edition 3. No public comment; approved.
Key Outcomes
- Z0726 (James Beard): Continued to a future meeting to allow petitioner to submit revised site plan addressing parking and details.
- River Bend Ranch (Rice Mine): Annexation and all three rezonings approved (recommendations to City Council). Subdivision approved with engineering variance support.
- 4B Spectrum (Alberta Parkway): Rezoning and subdivision approved conditioned on completion of alley vacation process. Final decision on rezoning goes to City Council.
- All other subdivision plats (S1226, S1326, S1526, S1626, S1726, S1826, S2126, S2226, S2426, S2626, S2726, S2826, S3026): Approved with applicable variance requests supported by engineering.
- Street Vacation VO226: Approved.
- The meeting adjourned with a moment of appreciation for a commissioner’s family.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening and welcome to the April 2026 meeting of the City of Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission. Any written comments sent to staff or forward to the commission directly. At this time, I'll like to introduce our staff. We have Mr. Jimbo Woodson, Deputy City Attorney, Michael Garner, City Engineer, Zach Pons, Director of Planning, Leo to Coin, Principal Planner. There are nine members of the Planning Commission, all of them are appointed by the mayor for staggered terms, with the exception of the City Council representative who is appointed by the City Council. I would ask the Commission members to introduce themselves and state the occupation, beginning with Ms. Marsby. Ann Hornsby, attorney. Councilwoman Raven Howard, District 2. Eddie Pugh, retired. Stephen Rumsey, Business Owner. This duly UACAP is developed. Jim Harrison, General Contractor. A Bill Wright Business Owner. There were sign-up sheets located outside for public comment. Four speakers are allowed to speak in favor of a petition and four speakers are allowed to speak in opposition of a petition. All speakers will have a maximum of five minutes unless the commission votes to allow a longer time. The nice procedures, the commission will take up items in the order of our final agenda. The commission will initially receive a presentation from the staff as to the details of the agenda item. Additionally, we may hear certain matters involving the same property, such as an annexation and a zoning matter concurrently, although we will take separate votes on each matter involving the same property. After the staff presentation, we'll then call upon the petitioner to present their case. The petitioner will have a maximum of 10 minutes unless the commission votes to allow a longer time. At the conclusion of the petitioner's remarks, we'll then call upon any part in party in order of sign up who desires to support the petition. Thereafter will call upon any partner in order to sign up in opposition to the petition. When it's your turn for comment, please introduce yourself, stating your name and address to the commission to provide your remarks again. Any written comments have been included into the record. After receiving the remarks of those who oppose the petition, the petitioner will have the opportunity to respond to those objections. Any rebuttal will be limited to two minutes unless the commission votes to allow a longer time. If the petitioner presents any new information in response to the objections, the commission will allow those who uh oppose the petition the opportunity to respond to the new information only. Any response will be limited to two minutes unless the commission votes to allow a longer time. During the course of this presentation, you may be interrupted by any member of the commission for clarification or additional information. Such interruptions will not reduce your time. Once the commission members are satisfied that they have received all uh the pertinent information, then close further discussion by the public, at which time the commission will discuss the matter and then vote. After the vote, you are free to leave. These proceedings are video recorded and broadcast live. So all in-person public comments should be made at the podium into the microphone. Jurisdiction. In all matters pertaining to the following items, this commission serves as the final authority. One subdivisions located within city limits. Two, subdivisions located outside city limits, but within the city's planning jurisdiction, and three, developments with a special district, and four approval letters for developments in historic buffer districts. As to all matters remaining, including annexations, rezonings, planned developments, and street vacations. This commission serves as a recommending body to the city council. In that regard, our decisions are on the form of a recommendation to be presented to the city council, and the city council will make the final decisions. Subdivision approval requires the affirmative vote of six members of the planning commission. All matters which are recommendations to the city council require majority vote for an affirmative recommendation. At this time, I would ask do any members of the commission have any conflicts of interest as to any agenda matters before us tonight. If so, please state for the record. Having heard none, I would ask staff to confirm on the record that proper notice has been given to all parties and interests as required by law as to all matters before the commission tonight. It has.
openpublica.com