Zoning changes for a parcel of property located at the southwest intersection of County Road 13 and Highway 90 dominated the Daphne City Council meeting last week, as developers and citizens spoke out during a public hearing.

A representative from the companies looking to change the property’s zoning said the multi-zone change project was simply “consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan and good planning practices.

“This rezoning request is for that 77 acres there,” the representative said. “Basically, it’s an existing property where much of it is currently zoned R-3 (high density single family). We’d like to allow some changes at the edge of property along 13 and 90 that would be some commercial development.”

Those changes included creating some pockets of B-3 zoning (professional business district), B-2 zoning (general business district), B-2A zoning (general business alternate district - golf course) and R-7A (apartment district).

“There is currently no plan for the property to develop anything in those areas,” the representative said. “We just laid out the property to be consistent with the ideals and focus of the current comprehensive plan and other development changes in that area currently going on.”

Councilman Robin LeJeune questioned some of the usage for the golf course/green space portion of the parcel.

“It looks like that portion goes from a large area all the way down to a small portion near the waterway that’s there,” LeJeune said. “Is this going to cause any environmental issues, because the city and other groups have spent a lot of time and money trying to restore and protect our waterways here. I thought the larger part of the golf course green space was that wetland area couldn’t be used for any type of development.”

The representative said he didn’t anticipate any development on that portion of the property being an issue.

“That area on the western side is impacted by wetlands,” the representative said. “Whatever development occurs there would have to deal with that issue, but I don’t foresee that property being encroached on in that area.”

Councilman Joel Coleman asked if the property could ever get to maximum density given the topography of the property in question.

“I just think it would be difficult to reach maximum density given that issue,” Coleman said.

The development representative agreed.

“From a practical and realistic standpoint, we wouldn’t be able to build near the boundaries of where we’re talking about in some of the areas,” the representative said. “My answer is I don’t know whether the density would be met, but I do know the 100-foot setback the planning commission recommended, along with some of the other challenges to that site, should be enough to protect the properties to the west from a lot of nuisance.”

Nearby property owners in the Old Creek neighborhood said their main concern was not necessarily the zoning changes, but issues about property values and privacy.

“We’re not trying to prevent this development,” one neighboring property owner said. “Our biggest concern is the value of our homes. A 25-foot buffer in some areas is just not that much. We just feel that was to be some sort of separation to give us the privacy that we have invested in our homes.”

The council will likely take a vote on the zoning changes at one of their January meetings.