[2:42] Good evening. This August 18th, 2026
board of alderman meeting is hereby
[2:47] called to order. Is Pastor Dodson with
us?
[2:54] Alman Earhart, if you would lead us in
an invocation in a moment followed by
[2:57] the pledge of allegiance, which I'll
lead. Please stand.
[3:04] » Thank you, Mayor. Excuse me.
[clears throat] Let us pray. Most
[3:06] gracious God and our heavenly father,
our creator, our sustainer and redeemer,
[3:10] we give you thanks, Lord, for this day.
Thank you, Lord, for the safety that we
[3:14] experience in Olive Branch. Thank you
for our prosperity. And as we go forward
[3:18] in all things each day, Lord, I just
pray that we would seek your wisdom and
[3:21] your guidance whether we're running a
city, running a business, or running a
[3:24] family because we know that all things
come from you and that uh we should do
[3:28] all things to honor and glorify you with
our decisions. May the decisions we make
[3:33] tonight uh be wise and pleasing in your
sight. Lord, thank you for the
[3:37] forgiveness of sins and bless this
meeting. In Christ's name I pray. Amen.
[3:41] » Amen.
[3:44] I pledge algiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
[3:50] republic for it stands one nation under
God indivisible with liberty and justice
[3:56] for all. Thank you be seated.
[4:04] Just a reminder for anyone who speaks
tonight, this meeting is streamed live
[4:09] on the city's YouTube channel and also
archived for playback. And if you plan
[4:13] to speak tonight, one of the blue
comment cards, you should fill one of
[4:16] those out up on the rail uh at the front
of the courtroom and give that to the
[4:20] clerk to my right, your left. Uh board,
and we should remember that when we're
[4:25] speaking, our microphones should be on
green uh so that the audience can hear
[4:29] what's being discussed.
Miss Stewart, would you conduct roll
[4:33] call?
>> Audrey,
[4:36] » here.
>> Collins
[4:38] » here.
>> Dickerson
[4:39] » here.
>> Yhart
[4:40] » here. Gamage
>> here.
[4:42] » Hamilton
>> here.
[4:44] » Wallace
>> 100% present. So a quorum obviously
[4:48] established.
Board you have before you the regular
[4:52] minutes of the August the 4th 2026
meeting. Any comments, questions or
[4:59] motion to approve those meetings
minutes.
[5:02] » Motion to approve.
>> Motion to approve by Miss Hamilton. Is
[5:05] there a second?
>> Second.
[5:07] » Second. Mr. Collins. Any discussion?
All in favor?
[5:12] » I.
>> All oppose. Motion carries.
[5:20] » Break protocol and change locations just
for one second.
[5:40] I'd like to ask our special Olympian
athlete, Joseph Tate, and his dad, Jose
[5:45] Tate, to come forward with us, if you
will.
[5:57] And Mr. Ed Crumper, are you planning to
present as well? Miss Diana Crumper,
[6:01] come forward.
[6:11] Yes, ma'am.
[6:26] We are pleased to recognize our hometown
Olympian, our special Olympics athlete,
[6:31] Joseph Tate, who on August, correction,
in the 2026
[6:37] Olympic Games in Minnesota. He won not
one but two medals. He won a silver
[6:42] medal in the 100 meter and the running
long jump. Is that right?
[6:48] » And
and and the bronze medal
[6:52] » in the 4x100 meter relay. So, these
games took place in Minnesota and we'd
[6:57] like to recognize our hometown athlete.
I'd like to give you a memorabilia of
[7:02] city hall and the crumpers have
something they'd like to share with you
[7:05] as well.
>> Never seen anything like this before.
[7:18] All of them up.
[7:30] [snorts]
[applause]
[7:40] Thank you brother
[8:03] board. Also, I'm pleased to announce uh
there's not a gift to be handed because
[8:08] the gift was wired to us, but uh our
friends Jim and Missy Flanigan have
[8:14] donated 37,975.33
[8:20] to the Lick Creek Conservatory for a
large B large raptor cage. Uh and that's
[8:26] done in memory of their son James
Bennett James Bennett Flanigan Jr.
[8:31] $37,975.33
[8:35] in memory of James Bennett Flanigan Jr.
They have relocated. They've moved out
[8:40] of the area at this time, but part of
their catalyst for this was to encourage
[8:44] anyone else that may want to give to
Lick Creek Conservatory to do that, but
[8:49] we're thankful to receive this and very
appreciative of the Flanigans making
[8:53] this donation.
[8:57] Also, board, you have some packets
before you, Emanuel. That's from the
[9:01] mayor's youth council. And that just
wanted you to get a feel for what the
[9:06] staff has put together for the mayor's
youth council this year. We had 80
[9:10] applications for the youth council.
That's our limit. We had 68 last year
[9:14] and 80 applications this year. So, we're
looking for a real robust uh class. And
[9:20] if you look through that, I think you'd
find it very interesting. some history
[9:23] and different uh challenges about the
city andformational items that the youth
[9:27] council I think will will sure benefit
from. So, special thanks to Miss Jen
[9:31] Griffith for putting that manual
together.
[9:38] Just as an FYI also
[9:44] from Fire Chief Clark,
we would like for you to know that Olive
[9:47] Branch Fire Department added four new
certified paramedics after their
[9:51] graduation on August the 6th, 2026 from
Northwest Mississippi Community College
[9:57] Paramedic Program. This is an intensive
three semester fasttrack program to
[10:02] obtain a nationally registered paramedic
license. These are our employees that uh
[10:06] the city incentivized by paying tuition
for them to get the paramedics program.
[10:11] Uh and also we have two other employees
that are currently in paramedic school
[10:16] and three will start in January 27. So
the board knows that paramedics are it's
[10:22] a challenge to get that level of talent
and we're certainly pleased that the
[10:26] fire department uh has these individuals
going through and we congratulate the
[10:29] the men and women that made it through
the paramedic school and got added to
[10:33] the registry.
[10:37] chief here. Chief, anything else to say
on that? Is that cover it well enough
[10:41] or?
>> Yes, sir.
[10:43] » Okay. Well, thank you. We're pleased to
get those without a doubt.
[10:49] Following the agenda, you have board the
consent agenda, more administrative and
[10:55] purpose. the uh items on the consent
agenda
[11:00] 1 through 27.
I know you've had those to look over if
[11:05] there's no are any questions or motions
on the consent agenda items 1 through
[11:09] 27.
>> Motion to approve.
[11:12] » Mr. Gamage motion to approve. Is there a
second?
[11:17] » Second, Mr. Wallace. Any discussion?
All in favor?
[11:22] » All oppose? Motion carries.
[11:27] Planning Commission Old Business. This
is a public hearing for consideration of
[11:31] an application for a zoning map
amendment submitted by Greg Russell of
[11:35] Civil Link on behalf of Diane Stoval,
James Allen Stoval, revoke revocable
[11:41] living trust property owner. The request
is to reszone 50.87 87 plus and minus
[11:47] acres from the AR agricultural
residential district to R1 single family
[11:52] residential district for the purpose of
creating Almondale Retreat a single
[11:57] family residential subdivision. The
subject property is located on the south
[12:01] side of Dninnesota Road at the Marshall
County line approximately 86 plus or
[12:06] minus miles east of Center Hill Road.
This was set on July the 21st for a
[12:12] public meeting today and this will be
led by uh Dr. Song.
[12:21] » Thank you very much, Mayor Adam. Before
you is a request to consider the
[12:26] reasonzoning of a 50.87 87 acres piece
of property that is located north of
[12:34] Highway 302 or Goodman Road just south
of Dotto Road east of Senah Road and
[12:42] line along the city limits with Masha
County. So this is the piece of property
[12:48] under consideration. It is currently
vacant as shown on this map. Surrounding
[12:56] the property to the south uh the Senah
retreat subdivision that has been
[13:02] developed in suburban style.
Further to the west of this particular
[13:08] piece of property, this is where you
have the Senahhee plantation plant unit
[13:14] development at this location. It's also
undeveloped at this time.
[13:20] The property is currently zoned AR
agricultural residential district
[13:27] shown on this map and the applicant
proposes that it be reszoned to allow
[13:34] the Amadela retreat subdivision. This
will be a single family residential
[13:40] subdivision.
There is an accompany accompanying
[13:44] subdivision plot as part of this
particular application which the board
[13:49] will have the opportunity to review.
With regard to the resoning criteria,
[13:56] the board is required to find whether
the original zoning classification for
[14:01] the property as it exists today is a
mistake. The applicant does not make any
[14:06] such claim that the existing AR zoning
of the property is a mistake. The
[14:12] planning commission did find that a
subject property was zoned a arrow in
[14:19] the 1980s. That's what our records show.
It has been zoned AR since the 1980s. It
[14:25] was annexed into the city in 2021 during
the last annexation and there has been
[14:30] no change in the zoning classification
of the property since then. As such, the
[14:36] existing AR zoning classification of the
property is not a mistake. That
[14:42] particular criterion therefore is not
met.
[14:46] The board of adamant is also required to
find whether the character of the
[14:51] neighborhood has changed to search and
extend to justify the proposed
[14:56] reasonzoning and not all and whether
there is a public need with regard to
[15:02] the character of the neighborhood
whether it has changed sufficiently to
[15:07] justify the reasoning of this particular
piece of property.
[15:11] The applicant submits that there have
been sewer upgrades in the general area
[15:16] of the property since the 1980s.
For example, Amad retreat to the south
[15:22] uh Senah retreat to the south for it to
have developed in this suburban style as
[15:27] opposed to the rural estate a district
configuration it ought to have had se
[15:33] the surrounding zoning system has also
changed so contest the applicant. We
[15:39] we've mentioned the center here retreat
to the south is zone arrow 2 that's in
[15:45] the county is zone arrow 20. Those are
lots that are generally uh 20,000 square
[15:51] ft in size as opposed to a arrow lots
that are minimum 1 acre in size. Now in
[15:58] the county arrow 20 does not really mean
minimum 20,000 square ft lots. There are
[16:05] lots in there that are far less than
20,000 square feet. It's a formula they
[16:08] use in the county and how they the kind
of call this are 20 but it really does
[16:12] not mean minimum 20,000 ft lots. There
are lots there that are 12,000 15,000 ft
[16:18] in size. So um the applicant also
contends that the AR zoning district as
[16:26] it were with a requested change uh for
the resoning will provide a transition
[16:31] between the AR20 lots to the south and
the AR lots that will remain to the
[16:37] north of the property.
The planning commission did find that
[16:43] yes there have been sewer upgrades in
this particular area and the city droad
[16:48] is also working on other uh sewer
infrastructure expansion in the in the
[16:54] area. Generally if you don't have
seawward the lots need to be minimum 1
[16:59] acre and in some cases one and a half
acre in order to have sufficient area
[17:04] and it's duplicate for subsurface
seawage disposal. But once sewer lines
[17:09] are extended to the area then that makes
it possible for the lots to be less than
[17:13] 1 acre in size. So we have had that
sewer infrastructure upgrades that is
[17:18] going on in the area of the property. Uh
secondly, there have been a number of
[17:22] reasonings that have moved this area
from a predominantly agricultural area
[17:29] to a development in character that is
more of suburban. Sub urban residential
[17:33] development involve lots that are
minimum 6,000 square ft right up to
[17:38] about 30,000 square ft.
We mentioned the center here retreat
[17:43] subdivision to the south and you also
have
[17:47] the center hill plantation to the west.
This area has lots ranging from about
[17:54] 12,500 square ft to 40,000 square ft
in the center he plantation. So those
[18:01] are that's a change that has occurred in
the area with regard to resoning just in
[18:06] the last 20 years with regard to whether
there is a public need for this
[18:10] reasoning. The applicant submits that
the reasoning addresses a continuous
[18:15] demand for single family residential
lots in the city and it will provide for
[18:21] the more efficient land use pattern that
minimizes sprawl and it's also
[18:27] consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The comprehensive plan of the city
[18:31] articulates the public needs of the area
as has been determined by the board of
[18:37] adan. Comprehensive future land use map
in the comprehensive plan designates the
[18:42] property as suburban neighborhoods. The
requested reasoning aligns with the
[18:48] future land use map classification of
the property and as such it meets the
[18:53] public need criteria. The planning
commission at its meeting on July 14 did
[18:58] review this application and determined
that the character of the area has
[19:03] changed in the last three decades from
agricultural to suburban residential
[19:06] land uses following the extension of
public seoning and development of
[19:10] multiple passes in the area and that the
reasoning of the property to R1 will
[19:15] align with the comprehensive plan 2040
designation of the property as suburban
[19:19] neighborhood. As such, it unanimously
voted and recommended that the board of
[19:25] adaman reszone this property from its
current AR district to R1 single family
[19:31] residential. That concludes staff's
presentation. Thank you.
[19:36] » Thank you, Dr. Song. Board, any
questions regarding the staff report
[19:39] before the applicant is afforded an
opportunity to come forward. Any
[19:43] questions?
[19:46] Hearing
[19:51] none, Mr. Smith or anyone would like to
speak to this for the applicant.
[20:01] Good evening, mayor and board members.
My name is Greg Smith. I'm with Civil
[20:04] Link Engineering and I am representing
the applicant here tonight. Uh staff's
[20:09] done a great job of explaining what
we're trying to do here, so I won't
[20:12] repeat much of what he said. would like
to point out that we are in conformance
[20:17] with your future land use plan which
slates lots anywhere from 6,000 to
[20:22] 30,000 square feet. We're asking for an
R1 zone which is a minimum of 125 but
[20:27] we're proposing 15,000 and larger. Some
of the lots I think there's one lot as
[20:31] large as 2 acres on this thing that that
you'll see later on should this get
[20:36] approved. Uh we feel like that we
substantially approve um approved public
[20:41] need and change in the neighborhood that
uh the staff has mentioned today and um
[20:48] we're just asking for a favorable
consideration and I can just answer any
[20:52] questions you might have about it.
>> Thank you Mr. Smith board. Any questions
[20:59] from the applicant? Any questions for
Mr. Smith?
[21:04] » Hearing none. Thank you. Yes sir.
[21:13] » Questions, discussions, or motions?
[21:18] » Oh, this is public hearing. Thank you.
This is this is a public hearing as
[21:22] well. Is there anyone here to speak as a
proponent you are for this application
[21:27] or an opponent that you're against this
application? Anyone scheduled to speak
[21:32] for or against this application?
[21:38] Final opportunities hearing and seeing
none public comments is closed.
[21:43] » Board any questions, comments,
discussions, or motions.
[21:48] » I make a motion we approve it.
>> Mr. Collins, motion
[21:51] » presented
>> to approve as presented.
[21:54] » Second.
>> Second, Mr. Gamage.
[21:58] Any discussion?
All in favor?
[22:01] » All opposed?
Motion carries. Item two, public hearing
[22:06] for consideration of application to
amend the project text for Marqu Marque
[22:11] Manor at Robinson Crossing submitted by
Bobby Britain Dabs Cannabis Dispensary
[22:16] on behalf of property owner Manver Singh
Singh Development Incorporated. The
[22:21] subject property is suite 125 at 5025
Church Road East within zone 8 of the
[22:28] Marquette Manor at Robinson Crossing
zone PUD plan development unit and is
[22:33] located on the south side of Church Road
East just east of Pleasant Hill North.
[22:39] The request is to add medical cannabis
as a permitted use in this unit. And
[22:44] before we start this uh staff report, if
anyone hears to speak on any items
[22:48] tonight, any public comment items
tonight, please complete one of the blue
[22:52] cards at the rail uh in the front of the
courtroom and give that to the clerk and
[22:56] they'll pass the cards to me in a
moment. Staff report by
[23:03] Andrew's
there, Mr. Thank you.
[23:06] » Andrew Hawin.
>> Yes. Thank you. The applicant is
[23:10] requesting to amend an existing PUD to
allow the new land use at 5025 Church,
[23:18] Church Road East, Sweet 2025.
And so that's highlighted in that yellow
[23:25] u um outline right there. Uh this is
near the intersection of Church Road
[23:30] East and Pleasant Hill Road northwest of
the Margaret Manor neighborhood. The
[23:35] existing land uses in the commercial
spaces include a restaurant, a vape
[23:39] store, a nail salon, a barber shop, an
insurance office, and a liquor store.
[23:44] So, that's currently what's in the area.
So, um, starting with the state distance
[23:49] requirement, state law requires that
cannabis dispensaries cannot be located
[23:54] within 1,000 ft of the nearest property
line of any school, church, or child
[23:59] care facility. this proposed location
uh satisfies this requirement and as you
[24:05] could see the radius is there on the
screen. So, uh, going into the the city
[24:12] specific requirements, section 14 of the
schedule of district regulations in
[24:16] article 5 of the city zoning ordinance
describes the purpose of the PUD
[24:21] district. And it's so that um, this
custom zone can provide for the
[24:26] development of planned total communities
that provide a full range of residential
[24:31] types as well as certain commercial,
office or light industrial uses designed
[24:35] to serve the inhabitants of the
districts. consistent with the
[24:38] comprehensive plan. And so when someone
submits a PUD application, um they have
[24:44] to present a list of permitted uses
within each planned unit development and
[24:49] um that will be um ultimately approved
by the board of alderman. So saying that
[24:56] this has already been um submitted
previously
[25:01] um as a PUD reszoning request. Um now
the applicant today is essentially
[25:10] resubmitting that same application but
requesting to add one land use and that
[25:16] is the um the retail of um medical um
cannabis. And so here from that old PUD
[25:26] document, uh I took a screenshot where
it has all of the uh zones that they
[25:33] have described laid out with um
particular uh land use um prescribed
[25:40] land uses. And so they are going into
what the original application calls zone
[25:47] 8. So, as you can see here, they're just
requesting to add
[25:53] they're requesting to add the medical
cannabis dispensary specifically in
[25:59] suite 125 at um in in that um retail
bay. So,
[26:06] um that concludes the presentation. Um
planning commission did um recommend
[26:13] approval 4 to one. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Tensentock. Board, any
[26:20] questions on the staff report?
[26:27] Does the applicant or applicant
representative wish to add anything?
[26:38] » Hi, Amy Silio1201
Old Goodman Road. Um, I do have some
[26:43] handouts. Would it be okay to approach?
[27:02] Thank you. Good evening [clears throat]
again. My name is Amy Silio. I'm the
[27:07] vice president of human resources and
development for DABS Cannabis
[27:10] Dispensary. Dabs is a Mississippiowned,
veteranowned company currently operating
[27:17] 26 locations across the state of
Mississippi. One of them currently
[27:21] already located in Olive Branch.
[clears throat]
[27:25] We are the we are the proud company we
have built. More importantly, we
[27:30] seriously we take the serious
responsibility that comes with becoming
[27:34] part of each community while we serve.
Bear with me. I am used to speaking
[27:38] about compliance to employees, not the
city, but we'll get through it.
[27:42] [clears throat]
I want to keep my comments tonight
[27:44] focused on the purpose of Margaret
Manor's project text and one simple
[27:48] question. How will allowing dabs at
Margaret Manor improved this development
[27:53] in the area of Olive Branch? Before I
address that, there is one important
[27:58] piece of the context I'd like to point
out. When Margaret Manor project tax was
[28:02] adopted, the Mississippi Medical
Cannabis Act did not exist.
[28:08] There was no legal medical cannabis
program for the project text to
[28:12] contemplate.
What the project text did contemplate
[28:16] and already allows our retail and
healthcare uses. Today, Mississippi
[28:22] Medical cannabis program brings those
two together.
[28:26] I want to emphasize one word tonight,
patients. The people we serve must have
[28:32] a qualifying medical condition, receive
a medical recommendation from a
[28:37] certified physician or nurse
practitioner, and then be approved by
[28:41] the Mississippi State Department of
Health before they can participate in
[28:45] this program. They are recognized by the
state, the DEA, and us as patients.
[28:52] This is a highly regulated industry. In
addition to the oversight through the
[28:57] Mississippi State Department of Health,
dispensary is regulated by the
[29:01] Department of Revenue through ABC. And
I'm happy to say that DABS has actually
[29:06] completed all 26 applications as well as
completed all of our DEA audits.
[29:13] [clears throat]
The regulatory environment today is very
[29:16] different from the one that existed when
Margaret Manor text was written. We
[29:21] aren't asking the city to change the
original vision for Margaret Manor. We
[29:25] are asking the project text to recognize
a legal, highly regulated healthcare
[29:31] retail use that did not exist when the
vision was created. I think the best way
[29:37] to determine whether DABS belongs here
is to look at the standards of the
[29:41] project text itself that have already
been established.
[29:45] It says development within Margaret
Manor should provide supporting
[29:49] neighborhood services, enhance
surrounding property, reflect
[29:53] sensitivity to adjacent land uses,
encourage the highest quality
[29:57] development, create a unique sense of
place. Those aren't standards we created
[30:03] for this presentation. They are
standards established for Margaret
[30:06] Manor.
And tonight, I'd like to show you
[30:09] specifically how DABS is committed to
improving each one of them.
[30:14] The [snorts] first one, we will improve
neighborhood services.
[30:17] The first goal is to provide supporting
neighborhood services. This is an area
[30:22] [clears throat]
where DAPS can make a real and
[30:24] measurable improvement. There is
currently no medical cannabis dispensary
[30:28] serving the west side of Olive Branch.
Our patient data demonstrates that the
[30:33] need is already there.
Our current Olive Branch location serves
[30:38] more than 3,800 patients in total.
1,66 of those patients live in Olive
[30:46] Branch.
>> How many? [clears throat]
[30:49] » 1,66 of our patients actually live in
Olive Branch South. Yes, sir.
[30:54] [clears throat]
>> 453 come from South Haven. And I want to
[30:58] point out this is only our Olive Branch
location where our patients come from.
[31:04] Um 453 come from South Haven.
five uh 358 Balia, 244 Hernando,
[31:13] 157 Horn Lake,
uh 113 Nesbbit, and 108 Holly Springs.
[31:21] [clears throat] These aren't projected
customers. These are patients who
[31:24] already travel to Dabs and Olive Branch
for their healthcare needs. And access
[31:29] is especially important when we consider
who these patients are. Approximately
[31:34] 85%
of the patients we serve are over the
[31:38] age of 60.
[clears throat] Many people don't
[31:41] realize that these people are living
with debilitating conditions, serious
[31:46] illnesses, and terminal diagnosis.
For these patients, improving access
[31:51] isn't simply about convenience.
reducing how far an elderly patient or
[31:58] someone battling a serious illness
[clears throat] to travel for the
[32:02] healthc care matters.
[32:08] [clears throat] So when we talk about
how this amendment can improve
[32:11] neighborhood services, we aren't talking
about creating a service and hoping
[32:15] people use it. The patients are already
here. The need is already here. What we
[32:21] have is the opportunity to improve
access
[32:25] at DAB's location at Margaret Manor
[clears throat] would would improve
[32:29] access for more than a thousand Olive
Branch locations we already serve while
[32:33] also providing more accessible westside
location for hundreds of patients
[32:37] already traveling into the Olive Branch
area from surrounding communities. At
[32:42] the same time, it gives those patients
another reason to come into this area of
[32:46] Olive Branch in particular where their
visits can benefit other businesses
[32:49] located within and around Margaret
Manor. We improve neighborhood services
[32:54] by bringing an existing needed health
care service closer to the patients who
[32:59] already depend on it. We improve
Margaret Manor by bringing an
[33:03] established patient base
and additional activity into this part
[33:07] of the city. Number two, we will improve
and enhance the surrounding property.
[33:12] The second goal of the project text is
to enhance the surrounding property. For
[33:15] DABS, that means something very simple.
The property should be better when we
[33:21] are there. DABs has committed to
improving the property, not simply by
[33:26] occupying the storefront. We have
committed to maintaining a clean
[33:30] professional exterior and investing in
the landscape and exterior improvement
[33:34] that will improve the the appearance of
our location and complement the
[33:38] surrounding development. We have also
committed to improving security beyond
[33:42] our own front door. [clears throat]
Doubs will extend our exterior
[33:48] surveillance coverage beyond our
immediate storefront, including
[33:52] towarding toward the neighboring area
near Pop's convenience store. We know
[33:57] that there was a robbery at POP several
years ago and while that incident was
[34:01] some time ago, it's one reason to
believe our security investment can
[34:05] provide a benefit beyond our own
location. And we've actually been able
[34:09] to assist um the police in our current
location in Olive Branch um with with
[34:15] incidents that have happened along
Goodman in front of our store as well as
[34:20] next door at Firehouse um and a few
other things that have happened. We are
[34:23] more than happy um to provide more
security for the area
[34:29] [clears throat]
[34:33] by intentionally positioning
surveillance to provide additional
[34:36] coverage of the surrounding area. DAPS
can help improve visibility and security
[34:40] for our neighbors as well as our own
patients and employees. We understand
[34:44] that becoming part that becoming part of
Margaret Manor also means accepting
[34:49] responsibility for contributing to the
quality of the overall development and
[34:54] we are committed to doing that. DAPS is
committed to improving the appearance of
[34:57] the property, improving security and
contributing to the overall quality of
[35:02] Margaret Manor. Our standard is simple.
If dads be if DABS becomes part of
[35:07] Margaret Manor, the property and area
around us should be better because we're
[35:11] there. This is how we enhance the
surrounding property.
[35:16] [clears throat]
The third, we will improve through
[35:20] thoughtful integration. The third goal
of the project text is to reflect
[35:25] sensitivity to the adjacent land uses.
To us, that means understanding that we
[35:30] aren't just investing in our own
storefront. We are becoming part of an
[35:34] existing development and our
responsibility is to improve the
[35:37] environment we share with the business
around us. Dabs is committed to being
[35:42] intentional about how our location fits
within Margaret Manor. Our landscaping
[35:47] and exterior improvements will
complement the development. Our
[35:50] expanding surveillance [clears throat]
will provide additionally additional
[35:54] visibility beyond our storefront and the
professional standards we maintain of
[35:59] our location will contribute to the
overall opinion, appearance, and
[36:03] atmosphere of the property.
[36:10] We want the businesses around us to
benefit from having dabs there. Our
[36:15] current Olive Branch location
established a patient base for more than
[36:18] 3,800 people. A westside location gives
us an opportunity to bring some of those
[36:23] patients into Margaret Manor,
introducing them to not only Gabs, but
[36:27] to the businesses around us. We want our
patients to discover those businesses.
[36:31] We want our presence to contribute to
the activity within development and we
[36:36] want the investment [clears throat]
we make in our in this property to
[36:40] contribute to the experience of everyone
who works, shops or visits there.
[36:49] That is what sensitivity to adjacent
land use means to us. Recognizing that
[36:53] our success should contribute to the
success of the development around us. We
[36:57] aren't coming to Margaret Manor simply
to look for a place to operate. We are
[37:01] coming with a commitment to be a good
neighbor, make meaning meaningful
[37:04] improvements and become an asset to the
business and properties around us.
[37:10] Number four,
we will improve the quality of the
[37:13] development.
The fourth goal of the project taxis is
[37:18] to encourage the highest quality
development. I think this is one of the
[37:22] most important things we can offer the
board tonight [clears throat] and that
[37:26] is you don't have to speculate about the
quality of business DAPs will bring to
[37:29] Margaret Manor. We can show you. We
already operate 26 locations across
[37:35] Mississippi and have established
standards for what DAPs location should
[37:38] look like, how it should operate, and
how it should represent the community
[37:42] around us. Our locations are designed to
provide professional healthc care
[37:46] focused environment that is clean,
secure, attractive, and professionally
[37:51] maintained. We invest in the appearance
of our property's landscaping technology
[37:56] and extensive security systems. We even
position our computer monitors so that
[38:01] patients can see what our employees see
during a transaction because
[38:05] transparency is part of the standard we
expect.
[38:12] But the quality of a development is more
[clears throat] is more than what you
[38:16] see from the outside. It's also the
quality of the business operating
[38:19] inside. DABS has established companywide
[clears throat]
[38:23] standing standard operating procedures,
operations manual, employee handbook,
[38:28] structured employee training, and
ongoing leadership development. Our
[38:32] locations are subject to regular
compliance audits by their directors
[38:37] each each month. We continually train
our employees and leadership because
[38:42] maintaining a high quality operation
requires more than just opening doors.
[38:46] It requires continually maintaining the
standard. Our investment in security is
[38:51] extensive. Our products are laboratory
tested accompanied by certificate of
[38:55] analysis and tracked from a seed to
sales system through the [clears throat]
[38:58] Mississippi regulated system. We heavily
invest in our people.
[39:03] We believe quality development should
create quality employment and DABs has
[39:08] made competitive wages. We actually have
the highest wages in the state.
[39:12] [clears throat] Um employee development
and opportunities for advancement are
[39:16] part of our investment in the
communities where we operate.
[39:20] These are not things we are we are
proposing to someday create for Margaret
[39:24] Manor. They are standards we already
operate under today.
[39:32] State regulation establishes what we are
required to do. DABS establishes the
[39:37] standards that we expect oursel of
ourselves and we are committed to
[39:41] bringing that same standard to Margaret
Manor. When the project text calls for
[39:45] the highest quality development, we
believe that means attracting businesses
[39:49] that will invest in their property,
invest in their employees, operate
[39:53] professionally, hold themselves
accountable, and continually work to
[39:57] improve. That is the kind of business
DABS has already built and that is the
[40:02] quality of development we are committed
to bringing to Margaret Manor.
[40:06] And the last one, we will help improve
and create a unique sense of place.
[40:12] The final goal of the project text is to
create a unique sense of place to dabs.
[40:16] A sense of place isn't something a
business creates by simply putting up a
[40:20] sign or improving a building. A sense of
place is created when businesses become
[40:25] invested in the people and the
organizations that make the community
[40:29] unique.
And in Olive Branch, we have already
[40:32] started to do that. DAPS has made
monetary donations to the local American
[40:36] Legion Hall, supporting an organization
that serves veterans and the families of
[40:41] this community. But that relationship
became more became more than a donation.
[40:47] » [clears throat]
>> I was invited to speak with local
[40:49] veterans to provide education about
cannabis and the medical cannabis
[40:53] program. I also understand that a young
lady uh from Olive Branch had the
[40:58] opportunity to represent Mississippi in
Washington through the American Legion
[41:03] Auxiliary Girls National Program. That's
a great example of why we believe
[41:07] supporting local organizations matters.
The impact
[41:13] those organizations make reaches far
beyond any one donation
[41:19] and our commitment isn't limited to one
donation or one type of cause. We see
[41:24] tremendous value in supporting many
different types of organizations because
[41:27] every community has different needs.
During Christmas, we we have held toy
[41:31] drives to support local families. When
we learned about individual families or
[41:36] in Olive Branch who were struggling or
needed help, DAPS has donated directly
[41:39] to the members of this community. Across
our company, the same philosophy has led
[41:44] us to support veterans, law enforcement,
and first responders, animal shelters,
[41:49] blood drives, children's organizations,
community cleanups, family in need, and
[41:54] other local causes. We don't believe
community involvement should fit into
[41:58] one category. We believe in identifying
where we can make a difference and
[42:02] showing up. That is creating a sense of
place for us. It means knowing your
[42:09] community around you. It means
participating in it. It means supporting
[42:13] the organizations that it serves and it
means recognizing when someone in that
[42:18] community simply needs help. We are
already doing those things in Olive
[42:23] Ranch. Margaret Manor gives us another
opportunity to deepen that commitment
[42:27] and improve our connection to the west
side of this community.
[42:31] [clears throat]
[42:34] We want to invest in the people around
it because when business because when
[42:39] businesses invest in people,
organizations, and needs of the
[42:42] community around them, they don't simply
occupy a place. They become part of what
[42:46] makes it special.
[clears throat]
[42:50] I want to close by going back to the
first question I asked at the beginning.
[42:55] How will allowing dabs
at Margaret Manor improve this
[43:00] development in the area of Olive Branch?
I believe we've answered that tonight.
[43:05] We will improve neighborhood services by
bringing needed healthcare access to the
[43:08] west side of Olive Branch, particularly
a patient population that is
[43:12] overwhelmingly over the age of 60 and
includes people living with debilitating
[43:16] internal dis illnesses. We will improve
the surrounding property through the
[43:21] commitments we have made to landscaping,
exterior improvements, professional
[43:25] appearance, and security that extends
beyond our own front door.
[43:30] We will improve the environment we share
with adjacent businesses by being a good
[43:34] neighbor, bringing an established
patient base to the development, and
[43:38] making investments that contribute to
the success of the area around us. We
[43:43] will improve the quality of the
development by bringing a proven
[43:46] Mississippi company with established
operating standards, extensive training
[43:51] and oversight, strong security, quality,
employment, and a commitment to
[43:55] continually raising the standard we
expect of ourselves.
[43:59] And we will improve the sense of place
by continuing what we have already
[44:03] started in Al branch. Investing in its
people, supporting its organizations,
[44:08] helping its families, and showing up
when the community needs us.
[44:14] Those are the five goals established in
the Margaret Manor project text.
[44:18] [clears throat and snorts]
And DABs approves each one of them.
[44:25] We are simply asking for an opportunity
to bring that same commitment to the
[44:29] west side of the city. If you approve
this amendment, our commitment to you is
[44:34] simple. Margaret M. Margaret Manor will
be better if we are there. We will
[44:40] enhance Margaret Manor. We respectfully
ask for your approval. And now I can
[44:44] check this off my bucket list. Thank
you.
[44:47] » Thank you. Thank you, board. Any
questions of the applicant? If I'm not
[44:52] mistaken, your location on the east side
is at Hacks Cross at the Solar Road.
[44:56] It's on Hacks Cross. Correct.
>> It's um on the It's It's actually on off
[45:00] of Old Goodman Road. It's a little past
Hack Cross. It's right next to um
[45:04] Firehouse Subs. Domino's.
[45:08] » Okay. Have you served what like 3,800?
You said 3,800 patients so far?
[45:13] » Yes, sir.
>> Okay.
[45:14] » We've we've been there um it was two
years in July.
[45:17] » Okay.
>> Yes, sir. Is this number 85% of patients
[45:21] over age of 60 is that consistent in
other counties and statewide or is that
[45:26] unique with this area?
>> That that is that is definitely um our
[45:30] experience statewide.
>> Okay.
[45:32] » If you if you pull um I believe the
Mississippi State Department of Health
[45:36] also has a breakdown by age group. If
you pulled that information,
[45:41] » okay,
>> you can see it there as well. Is that
[45:43] one of the requirements if you go in
there what age you are
[45:47] » or you have to I show you I do.
>> Yeah. Um so to before you to get your
[45:51] permit you have to be um 21 years old.
Okay.
[45:55] » With two doctor recommendations. If you
only you have to wait until you're 25 if
[46:01] you want to only have to get one doctor
recommendation.
[46:03] » Okay.
>> I wonder how you came up with the 85%
[46:08] over 60. Are y'all collecting that data?
So 85%
[46:13] of those 3,800 people are over the age
of 60 that have come to visit us.
[46:20] » I think his question
>> I think his question is how do you
[46:22] collect that? How do you obtain?
>> We have a a point of sales system where
[46:26] we have to enter all the patient
information when they come in and it
[46:30] it's it's just like a doctor's office
that we have to include all of your
[46:34] personal information, your patient
number and it actually connects to the
[46:37] state system and so we have all of that
information in our system. Okay.
[46:41] » Yes, sir.
[clears throat]
[46:44] » Ma'am, I had two quick questions. I'm
sorry I didn't I didn't catch your name
[46:47] when you first started.
>> My name is Amy Silio.
[46:50] » Amy, thank you.
>> Yes, sir.
[46:51] » Um, you operate 26 locations in the
state of Mississippi, right?
[46:54] » That's correct.
>> And how long has DABS been in business?
[46:57] » Three years.
>> Three. Okay.
[46:58] » Yes, sir.
>> How many employees do you have?
[47:01] » Almost 200.
>> 200.
[47:03] » 200. Yes, sir. We'll actually be opening
in Oxford, so we'll be on Monday.
[47:07] » Okay.
>> We'll be adding to that as well. Are you
[47:10] operating in any other states or just
Mississippi?
[47:12] » No sir, we are only Mississippi and we
our our owners um Tony Wallace and Bobby
[47:16] Britain um are Mississippi uh gentlemen
and will not go out of Mississippi.
[47:21] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Yes, sir.
[47:24] » Additional questions.
[47:29] » Thank you.
[47:33] This is a public comment item, but I do
not see any comment cards. But is anyone
[47:38] here to speak for or against this
proposed application?
[47:44] Seeing none, public comment section is
now closed
[47:51] board. Any discussion, questions or
motions?
[47:57] I'll make a motion to approve as
presented.
[48:01] Motion to approve as presented by
Alderman Dickerson. Is there a second?
[48:06] » Second.
>> Second. Alman Earhart. Any discussion?
[48:10] All in favor?
>> I.
[48:12] » All opposed?
>> No.
[48:15] » Eyes have it. The motion carries.
[48:19] Next item, please.
Public hearing for consideration of
[48:23] appeal
of board of zoning adjustment decision
[48:27] regarding application for a conditional
use permit submitted by Greg Smith of
[48:31] Civil Link on behalf of property owner
CIP LLC. The request is to permit a
[48:37] dropyard facility to be constructed for
a period of 10 years. The 35.0 0 plus or
[48:43] minus acre subject property is zone M1
light industrial district and is located
[48:48] on the west side of Ross Road and on the
north side of Nail Road. Staff report
[48:54] please uh Dr. Song. Mayor Adman before
you is a request to consider an appeal
[49:01] of a board of zoning adjustment decision
as you did uh mention
[49:06] regarding a drop yard at this particular
location. So this is N road. [snorts]
[49:11] This is highway 305
and this is N road. So the property
[49:17] you're looking at is actually a
combination of a number of existing
[49:21] parcels. It is not a platter lot. There
are multiple parcels which put together
[49:28] make up that 35 acres and it's right
there at the end of the improved uh
[49:34] section of the ride of whale of N road.
Just south to the piece of property is
[49:40] an industrial warehouse. Uh FedEx is at
this location. GXO is right here. And to
[49:47] the north of the property, you have West
Sandwich Road and their residential
[49:52] developments in this particular area. So
there's a general area in the city that
[49:57] we're looking at with regard to this
request for a conditional use permit for
[50:02] the dropyard in the M1 Light Industrial
District. So the property is zoned M1
[50:09] light indust light light manufacturing
or industrial district. It allows dropy
[50:15] yards as a conditional use. What this
means is the applicant must go to the
[50:20] board of zoning adjustment and get
approval for a conditional use permit.
[50:25] To get that approval, the applicant has
to meet all the general conditions for a
[50:31] conditional use permit. But also dropy
in the M1 and in the M2 district have
[50:37] about nine very specific conditions to
them that the applicant is also required
[50:43] to meet all of them. So they are the
general five or seven general criteria
[50:48] for a conditional use permit and then
they are the specific criteria for the
[50:53] job just as we have specific criteria
for things like convenience stores with
[50:58] fuel pumps or or truck stops in the city
that the applicant is also required to
[51:03] meet all of them. So the request before
you basically this is an appeal of the
[51:08] board of zoning adjustment decision.
The applicant had requested
[51:15] to construct a 252 parking spot dropyard
will be a 24/7 operation valid for 10
[51:24] years at this particular location. This
is the site plan that was proposed. The
[51:29] board of zoning adjustment reviewed this
application at its meeting on June 11,
[51:34] 2026 and determined that the applicant
had not met all the conditions of the
[51:38] conditional use permit. As such, the
board denied the application. The
[51:44] applicant appealed that decision to you
within uh the 10 days appeal period.
[51:55] When appeals of board of zoning
decisions are brought before the board
[51:58] of arament the board years that
application are fresh as if nothing
[52:03] happened at the board of zoning
adjustment. Basically, as such, the
[52:07] presentation before you will go through
the same conditions of review that the
[52:12] board of zoning adjustment had and
present why the board of zoning
[52:17] adjustment made the decision that it
made it made and the board of man will
[52:22] have the opportunity to make its own
decision that will either override or
[52:27] sustain maintain the board of zoning
adjustments decision. The applicant has
[52:32] to prove the burden of proof is on the
applicant and the applicant has to prove
[52:36] that all conditional use permit criteria
stipulated in the zoning ordinance with
[52:40] regard to drop yards have been met. So
the question before the board really is
[52:45] have all those conditions been met. The
first criteria is whether the proposed
[52:50] conditional use will adversely affect
the character of the area. This is the
[52:56] subject property under consideration.
There are two main elements or three
[53:01] that define the specific character of
this area. You've got the industrial
[53:06] piece.
So there's an industrial character
[53:10] element to this.
So I did mention you have FedEx here.
[53:14] You have the ID industrial warehouse
building all of those to the south. You
[53:19] also have adjoining this piece of
property to the north single family
[53:24] residential homes.
So this area in yellow contains single
[53:30] family residential homes.
The board of zoning adjustment did look
[53:35] at this particular application
along craft. This is the location that
[53:40] has been proposed for the career tech.
The board of zoning adjustment looked at
[53:46] this particular application and
determined that while a dropyard may be
[53:52] fitting in the character of an
industrial area in the sense that it may
[53:56] take businesses, you know, you have
trucks going into an industrial park, it
[53:59] may provide an area additional area for
those trucks to park. Locating a truck a
[54:05] a a drop yard basically in the backyard
of a single f of single family
[54:10] residential development is not
appropriate.
[54:13] Uh there is not an area in the city
where you have a dropy yard directly
[54:17] behind single family residential homes.
That was the determination of the board
[54:23] of zoning adjustment with regard to the
character of the area. If the property
[54:27] were totally surrounded by industrial
uses and you had no residential
[54:32] development out there, it could be
appropriate. when you have trucks going
[54:37] in in a 247 operation, you have the
beeping sounds, the noise and all of
[54:42] that that is not conducive for
residential living for example. So that
[54:47] was a determination that board of zoning
adjustment made. The second is whether
[54:52] the proposed conditional use will overt
tax public utilities or community
[54:57] facilities. Water sewer is available in
the general area of the property. The
[55:02] board did not determine that it will
overt tax any of those utilities.
[55:07] Whether the proposed conditional use
will substantially increase traffic
[55:11] congestion or other hazards. This was a
question that the board wrestled with in
[55:15] the sense that although you have this in
an industrial area, is it the case for
[55:20] example that traffic for trucks going
down on 305 entering into particular
[55:27] this intersection could increase in any
significant way because of additional
[55:33] trucks. You have 254 parking spots that
will be accessing uh going down on 305
[55:40] going in on nail to park at this
particular location. Basically one way
[55:44] in one way out is this is this there was
no traffic studied in front of the board
[55:49] of zoning adjustment that made the case
um against any kind of increase in
[55:54] traffic. It is certain that of course
there will be trucks there that are
[55:59] already possibly using that industrial
park that you can have additional trucks
[56:04] just as you have in other jobs in the
city along highway old highway 78 for
[56:09] example. There are jobs there and trucks
constantly go in and out simply because
[56:14] they want to use a job. They are not
going to any of the industrial
[56:16] buildings.
The fourth is whether the proposed
[56:20] conditional use will increase the danger
of fire, flood or otherwise endanger the
[56:25] public health safety or general welfare.
The character of the area falls into the
[56:31] general welfare argument and I will also
touch on this on one of the specific
[56:36] conditions that applies to the state of
roads and the general welfare of the
[56:41] city when it comes to jobyards in
general.
[56:45] with the proposed conditional use
substantially diminish or impair
[56:48] property values of adjacent properties
or the neighborhood. There was no
[56:52] evidence submitted by the applicant in
front of the board of zoning adjustment
[56:56] to the contrary and the board was
concerned that would drop yardage behind
[57:00] single family residential homes. That is
concerning
[57:04] with a proposed conditional use comply
with the recommendations of the
[57:08] comprehensive plan 2040. The
comprehensive plan designates the
[57:11] property as industrial distribution.
Industrial distribution of course can
[57:15] include industrial warehouse buildings.
Doesn't necessarily have to be uh
[57:20] dropyards. A dropyard of course is an
industrial operation. It would align
[57:24] with a comprehensive plan. But a
comprehensive plan is not limited. The
[57:28] board found uh only to drops. You could
have other industrial distribution
[57:34] buildings at that particular location.
And there is sufficient land area for
[57:38] example in this particular area where
you could put up a building and be
[57:42] outside of the ditch.
[57:46] With regard to specific conditions that
are applicable to tractor trailer
[57:51] storage yards in the M1 zoning district,
not M2, please this should be M1. It's a
[57:56] typo. Uh district with regard to those
specific conditions that are applicable
[58:01] to jobyards. The applicant shall submit
a development plan for approval
[58:05] conforming to the requirements of the
design review ordinance except as the
[58:09] requirements of that ordinance may be
amended by the specific provisions. So
[58:14] this is a site plan that was submitted
by the applicant. It did show so the
[58:19] area the dark area here those that is
basically the drive aisles and all of
[58:26] those lines those are the five 252
uh parking stores. So this is proposed
[58:33] to be paved initially while the parking
stalls are proposed to be gravel and to
[58:39] be a different surface not paved uh
surface and then um fully paved over
[58:45] time.
24-hour
[58:50] uh on-site management shall be provided
located in a permanent building
[58:55] conforming to the requirements of the
design review ordinance. The board of
[58:58] adjustment may wave this provision upon
the applicant demonstrating that
[59:01] alternate management and security
provisions will be provided. Most of
[59:05] these dropy yards these days really do
not provide an office building in the
[59:10] front that is managed with a guard
because these days you can have cameras
[59:14] and monitor them from anywhere. That's
that's the way most of them operate and
[59:18] the border zoning adjustment took that
into consideration.
[59:23] All areas used for access, maneuvering,
standing, parking and old display of
[59:28] vehicles, trucks, trailers, heavy
equipment and cargo containers shall be
[59:33] paved. This is mandatory. It's a shall
shall be paved with Portland cement or
[59:38] asphaltic concrete surface. The zoning
ordinance is very specific on how this
[59:43] has to be done. Uh it was found the
board of zoning adjustment determined
[59:47] that the applicant did not meet that
requirement.
[59:52] Fifth, the party conducting the use
shall be responsible for any off-site
[59:57] improvements, water, sanitary, sea wage,
drainage or road improvements as
[1:00:00] determined by the city engineer required
to make the subject side usable for the
[1:00:06] proposed use. The fire department
reviewed this application and determined
[1:00:10] that for this number of um truck parking
spaces, it would be necessary to have
[1:00:17] fire hydrants out there. If you had a
situation where any of those trucks
[1:00:20] caught on fire, you you will need to
have fire hydrants installed across this
[1:00:25] particular piece of property. The site
plan did not include the provision of
[1:00:29] those utilities
[1:00:33] with regard this condition is important.
The party conducting the use sha shall
[1:00:39] submit a performance guarantee
acceptable to the city in an amount and
[1:00:43] for the time period established by the
city engineer to guarantee that the city
[1:00:47] streets are properly maintained to city
specifications as long as the proposed
[1:00:51] use is operated from the subject site
with the permission of the mayor. U this
[1:00:57] is a letter that the mayor had sent out
to the board and it was also available
[1:01:01] to the board of zoning adjustment back
in 2024. It was available to the board
[1:01:06] of zoning adjustment at the time that
the board reviewed this particular
[1:01:09] application. It beautifully analyzed the
impact of tractor or dropyard on public
[1:01:16] streets in the city and what general
welfare benefit that has or does not
[1:01:23] have to the city of Olive Branch. Uh for
example, large trucks damage the streets
[1:01:29] of Olive Branch. service made of the
streets where drop lots are currently
[1:01:33] located and adjacent streets reflect
damages likely made by heavy loaded
[1:01:37] trucks. Loaded trucks weigh
approximately $80,000 and damaged
[1:01:41] streets. In the last 24 months, if you
look at 2024, the city has spent spent
[1:01:46] over $12 million res resurfacing
roadways, have a multi-year plan in
[1:01:51] progress to continue resurfacing streets
and additional damages to to to the
[1:01:56] streets which was just not called for.
[1:02:01] The subject side shall not be visible
from any adjacent public street or
[1:02:07] residential area. If it is adjust
visible then the applicant is required
[1:02:12] to provide a 20 ft high bum to buffer
the residential area or the street from
[1:02:20] the dropyard. They exist a bum on nar
road. So it is more than 20 ft high.
[1:02:25] From near road you'll not be able to see
the trucks parked on this particular
[1:02:29] piece of property but from the
residential area to the north it will be
[1:02:33] visible and the site plan did not
include such a 20 ft high bum.
[1:02:40] The board of zoning adjustment therefore
on June 11, 2026 reviewed this
[1:02:46] application and determined that all the
criteria have not been met. As such it
[1:02:52] denied the request based on two main
elements. One adverse impact on
[1:02:58] character of the area with regard to the
residential area to the north. You also
[1:03:03] have a career tech proposed within that
particular area beautiful building and
[1:03:08] the board wrestled with a question of
um should you have a building with this
[1:03:13] aesthetic
looking this way and then within the
[1:03:17] same general vicinity you have a
dropyard. Secondly, the nonconformance
[1:03:22] with the zoning ordinance, the design
review ordinance. There are a number of
[1:03:26] elements in there that the plan
submitted to the city did not meet those
[1:03:30] elements with regard to the paving of
the the the dropyard of it has to be
[1:03:35] paved. Provision of the bum,
non visibility from the residential
[1:03:41] area, landscape plans and fire
protection measures. These were not
[1:03:46] provided to the board.
the recommendations before the board of
[1:03:52] adamant. The board has a number of
options that it can consider. The first
[1:03:56] is upon finding that all the criteria of
the conditional use permit application
[1:04:01] have not been met, the board may affirm
the decision of the board of adjustment.
[1:04:07] Secondly, upon the board of adamant's
finding that all the criteria have been
[1:04:12] met, the board may approve the request
for a conditional use permit at this
[1:04:16] particular location for the 10 years or
less. The board has the option of
[1:04:21] reducing the number of years if the
board so desires subject to a number of
[1:04:25] conditions uh 1 through 10 as provided
hearing. That concludes staff's
[1:04:32] presentation. Thank you.
>> Thank you Dr. Song. board. Any questions
[1:04:37] regarding the staff report?
>> Thank you.
[1:04:40] » How close are
how close are they to the homes on Ross
[1:04:45] and uh Sandage? Don't they back right up
to it?
[1:04:50] » The the ones on Sandage will back right
up to it.
[1:04:52] » And there's already noise complaints
from the warehouses there.
[1:04:58] » Yes, sir.
The ones on Ross, we get noise
[1:05:02] complaints all the time, especially from
this warehouse. And it's across the
[1:05:06] pasture and down the hill.
>> Yes, sir.
[1:05:12] » All right. Thank you.
>> Any additional board questions?
[1:05:20] » Does applicant have anything else to
add?
[1:05:29] Mayor, mayor and board, Bryant Cashen,
A1, Highway 305 South. I am representing
[1:05:36] CIP LLC. I got to put my glasses on. I'm
getting to where I can't see. Uh CIP
[1:05:42] LLC, that is uh Mike Bailey, uh the
widow of Bill Pass and the widow of
[1:05:48] Jimmy Eubanks are the owners as as well
as myself. Uh we are asking for this
[1:05:53] drop zone and if you look at the the
map, it would be perfect if we could fit
[1:05:58] a warehouse on this piece of property,
but this it is we have a ditch that goes
[1:06:03] through and it is a logistical nightmare
to try to get a warehouse into this
[1:06:09] piece of property. I do believe through
my conversations with some of the
[1:06:14] members of the city that the conditional
use for a dropy yard is so that the
[1:06:19] board could maintain where these went in
M1 zoning and across the city. And to uh
[1:06:26] Song's point about road and road damage,
the letter that was sent in 24 by the
[1:06:31] mayor to the board, I do believe that
the city received approximately $2
[1:06:36] million to build that road, nail road to
to standards to uphold truck traffic
[1:06:42] specifically for the FedEx place. And I
can be corrected if that's not true, but
[1:06:46] I'm about 100% sure that the city
received a grant to build that road, two
[1:06:53] truck traffic standards. U
we talked to uh a couple things about
[1:07:02] the the properties to the north on Ross
Road. I know it's in the deal that says
[1:07:08] that uh property values could be
affected. uh we talked about that in the
[1:07:14] board of adjustments. There is no data
that the city has provided through the
[1:07:19] planning department where this is true.
However, to the contrary, I have from in
[1:07:25] my hands from the DInnesota County Tax
Assessor's uh office 7679 Sandy Road. I
[1:07:35] will not name the name of the lady that
owns it. In 2021,
[1:07:40] her tax bill was based on a $67,000
value. And the assessor's office has
[1:07:48] assured me to make sure to assure you
that this is not true market value, that
[1:07:53] it is some percentage less than the
market value. Thank goodness for all of
[1:07:58] us on that. As of 2025,
that same piece of property now uh
[1:08:04] through the 2025 tax role is valued at
$96,000.
[1:08:08] We also have one I know that we talked
about over on uh the street here by the
[1:08:13] warehouse that comes down uh I don't
have a pointer to point to it right
[1:08:19] there beside the warehouses 5760 Ross
Road it in 21 had a tax valuation of
[1:08:27] $48,000
compared to 2025 of 70,000. So we have
[1:08:35] there is like I said no actual data that
supports the home value could be
[1:08:42] affected by this. If there would ever
have been a home value issue, it would
[1:08:47] have been the day that this property was
zoned M1 because with within the M1
[1:08:52] zoning, and I know you all are familiar
with this, and I I can I'm will point
[1:08:57] out a few things from our our viewpoint,
uh things that can go on this piece of
[1:09:06] property that does not require any of
your permission.
[1:09:10] Manufacturing. So we could build a small
manufacturing building on this property
[1:09:16] and have 282 parking spots without
anybody having to approve that. So
[1:09:22] unfortunately nobody's going to need a
manufacturing with 282 parking spots,
[1:09:27] but that legally could happen if we
foresee to do that. uh cannabis
[1:09:33] cultivation and or processing facility,
sexually oriented business including
[1:09:39] strip clubs and adult stores.
Uh
[1:09:45] aluminum can processing and recycling
and then numerous manufacturing that
[1:09:51] would have some type of some type of
noise going along with that that would
[1:09:55] be hard to handle. So, I understand that
we are trying to have smart growth, but
[1:10:00] we also were looking to at a piece of
property that currently the city is
[1:10:04] getting hardly any tax revenue from.
Through my conversations with Steven
[1:10:09] Goat at the assessor's office, upon this
construction starting, this property
[1:10:14] will be assessed at somewhere between 40
and $50,000 per acre
[1:10:20] as well as any structure built on it for
the tax purposes.
[1:10:26] Uh and
as far as some of the the other things
[1:10:32] that Assange brought up that where we
have asked for some uh deviations from
[1:10:40] the rag we are conceding to remove the
compacted concrete to asphalt asphalt or
[1:10:46] poured concrete uh agreeing to the 20ft
burn
[1:10:53] uh the landscape plan which is not
required. ired for your for initial
[1:10:57] approval. We will be more than happy to
submit that for for final approval once
[1:11:01] once approval is given. And we when we
met with the initial meeting, we had
[1:11:07] representatives from the fire department
there and we agreed at that meeting to
[1:11:12] pipe 8 in water pipe along with fire
suppression systems all through this
[1:11:20] development. So basically we are now
offering for your approval to uh remove
[1:11:28] some of the things that we were asking
not to do the 20ft BM the
[1:11:33] you know so that is I'm going to turn it
over now to Greg Smith with Civil Link.
[1:11:40] So if you have any technical questions
unless you have a question for me
[1:11:43] concerning anything that I've said here
today.
[1:11:46] » Mr. Cashion I I did have a couple. Thank
you. Thank you for your comments and I
[1:11:52] think your concessions are definitely
warranted because they they were needed.
[1:11:56] I I had a couple of questions though
that if this were to be approved whether
[1:12:00] it's here or another location. I know
it's a 24-hour
[1:12:05] station or proposed to be and it will be
manned and secured. One of the questions
[1:12:09] I had though will idling of the diesel
engines be allowed because that's a
[1:12:14] concern to me. I know I'm not a truck
driver, never have been, but I do know
[1:12:19] sometimes when it's cold or hot, they
keep the engines running for air
[1:12:23] conditioner and warmth when they sleep
over.
[1:12:26] » That's a noise issue and a a fumigation
issue, if you will, a fume issue. So,
[1:12:31] how would you address that?
>> Well, first off, I'm glad you brought
[1:12:34] that up because I if you noticed, I got
all these little notes drawn and I
[1:12:37] missed one and that gives me an
opportunity to bring up a point of of
[1:12:41] what this really is. When I say dropy
yard, I I don't know that we're all on
[1:12:46] the same page. What I don't know what
all the definitions are. I know that
[1:12:49] with planning has a a broad definition.
What this is designed for this what our
[1:12:55] intention is and we will put this in
writing every how we want to how we need
[1:12:59] to. This is not a day parking deal. This
is not for someone to bring in
[1:13:06] 280 trailers and park them and leave
them like we have in some parts of the
[1:13:10] city. This is more designed for the
individual that drives a truck that does
[1:13:16] that lives in a subdivision in Olive
Branch and doesn't have anywhere to park
[1:13:19] his truck over the weekend. This is for
someone to come in and pay us a monthly
[1:13:24] fee to come in and park his truck or her
truck, whoever it may be, and whenever
[1:13:30] they need to get it, they can go and
park their car, get in their truck, and
[1:13:33] then leave and go work and bring us our
goods that we all need. This is not This
[1:13:38] is not a daily. This is not It's more I
would say more on the lines of what you
[1:13:43] see at Crow's truck stop which is just
across the state line where he has some
[1:13:48] 700
spots that are full where people show up
[1:13:52] on Sunday night. They get in their truck
and they leave. They leave their car
[1:13:56] parked there. They come back on Friday
night, get in their car and go home,
[1:14:00] visit their family and then they come
back and and leave. So this So as far as
[1:14:04] the diesel engines, I don't know that I
can't sit here and guarantee that some
[1:14:08] guy's not going to show up in February
and crank his truck and let it run for
[1:14:12] 10 minutes. But I think uh based on the
25th foot BM and if you look and I don't
[1:14:18] have a pointer and it's tough to do,
there is a lot of ground
[1:14:24] away from these these uh turnarounds
between the homes. So by time you I
[1:14:30] think the county I mean the city's
ordinance requires us to do a 20 foot 20
[1:14:34] foot burn with landscaping on top of
that. So that's about as good as we can
[1:14:39] get about monitoring that.
>> But this is not a parking lot for
[1:14:44] overnight stay.
>> No it is not. No it is not. So it will
[1:14:47] be it will be manned as far as the
security part. It will have the
[1:14:52] automatic. Everybody has been given go
it would be given gate codes so we'll be
[1:14:56] able to track who's coming and going
license plate readers uh and may at some
[1:15:00] point in time if we had to we could we
would probably man it uh throughout the
[1:15:04] night but uh we we do not look for this
to be a comeand go everyday type
[1:15:10] situation.
>> Okay. Thank you. One other question. Um,
[1:15:14] since it's open 24 hours, do you propose
any limitation of someone rolling in at
[1:15:20] 2:00 in the morning and dropping their
truck off or starting at 3:00 or 4 in
[1:15:24] the morning, crank it up and leave?
>> We would have the same regulations
[1:15:27] probably as FedEx.
>> Whatever time they get there, they're
[1:15:31] going to be there and whatever time they
leave, they would leave. I mean, they
[1:15:34] can't we we wouldn't really have any
control over that. nor does is there any
[1:15:39] control over any of the other things in
this in this in this uh industrial park
[1:15:46] as are you aware of any limitations on
hours at the FedEx facilities is that
[1:15:52] 247 pretty much
>> as far as I I don't know I'm just
[1:15:57] » FedEx is 247 sir but if you look at the
location of FedEx it does not back up to
[1:16:03] residential
>> right
[1:16:04] » so FedEx is kind of like isolated on its
own um
[1:16:10] it's a FedEx is a 247 operation and it's
uniquely separated from anything
[1:16:15] residential.
>> Okay. Well, I would say too though this
[1:16:19] this I don't know if you can see this,
but all of this in here is buted up next
[1:16:22] to residential and it doesn't have any
any type of that I know of any type of
[1:16:28] restrictions on time.
Um, like I said, uh, this is a
[1:16:35] conditional use and we realize why the
conditional use is there, but I I don't
[1:16:39] know that I think we can do everything
we can to protect the the people that
[1:16:43] live on Ross Road or Sandage Road there.
But I think this is a a better option
[1:16:49] for them and for us than some of these
other things that are on the list.
[1:16:54] » What kind of BM are you planning on
putting up? Well, the
[1:16:58] » is it going to be a brick wall or
>> the rag is a 20 foot earthn BM? So, and
[1:17:05] and and I I'm going to speak out of turn
here, uh, Alderman Gamage, but I got
[1:17:09] Greg here to back me up. So, if you do a
20 foot BM, so at the peak of the top is
[1:17:15] 20 foot from ground level, but when you
do the slope off of that, it's about a
[1:17:23] 75 or 80 foot wide earthened deal. That
would be let that will be at the top
[1:17:29] will be a fence of course along with
vegetation. So how wide would that be
[1:17:35] Greg?
>> Uh you're doing 3 to1 slopes you got 20
[1:17:39] 60 actually be about 130 foot. So it' be
130 foot wide with a 20 foot at the top
[1:17:45] and then at the top we'll come in and
plant vegetation on top of that I
[1:17:48] believe is what's
>> you know that's been a concern the
[1:17:50] residents on Ross Road
>> as Alman Wallace said you know they was
[1:17:55] promised one thing and they have no way
of keeping that noise off them at night
[1:18:00] coming in bumping the docks and things
like that. So, uh, one other question.
[1:18:04] You know, you talking 2
>> 50
[1:18:08] » 250.
One way in, one way out.
[1:18:11] » One, two ways in. One way in, two ways
out.
[1:18:14] » Okay.
>> So, this, if you look right here, the
[1:18:17] fire department, which we didn't want to
do, and would love, if you could see
[1:18:21] fit, to strike it from this, we'll be
more than happy to take it out and put
[1:18:25] some extra fire hydrants in there. But,
we've got a Can you say that?
[1:18:29] » I can't. I got it. I got to say,
>> you got it. So that is a that is a
[1:18:32] emergency only entrance there in case
something was to happen. So if we we
[1:18:38] don't want to put that in we don't want
to touch any of that residential. We'll
[1:18:41] put we'll burn the whole thing and and
do whatever we need to do because that
[1:18:46] is that is 250 ft of road that is
basically a dead expense that we would
[1:18:52] love not we would love not to touch
Sandage Road.
[1:18:55] » Yeah. I mean, you know, you if you was
planning on connecting the egress
[1:18:59] andress to console,
you know, that's a that's not a truck
[1:19:02] ride.
>> No, no, that's just for emergency.
[1:19:05] That's just for fire because they'll
have a gate code. Uh I guess that's how
[1:19:09] they do that. I'd have to check with the
fire department how they'd want that.
[1:19:12] But that's just for police, fire, and
ambulance services to come into the
[1:19:17] property. No one would leave there and
unless it was an emergency of some sort.
[1:19:21] » Okay. But like I said, if if there's a
way that we can do it and we can up the
[1:19:26] water or do whatever we need to do and
cut that off right there to completely
[1:19:31] cut that off from Sandy's Road, we would
do that as well. Like I said, we're
[1:19:35] we're we want to be good stewards of the
city, but we have got to find something
[1:19:40] that fits on this property due to how it
lays. and this through our land plan uh
[1:19:46] with Civil Link. This was the the best
case scenario for what we could could
[1:19:51] could do for this piece of property.
>> Okay. Thank you,
[1:19:55] » Mr. Cash. Uh you got a warehouse in
front of this?
[1:19:59] » Yes.
>> Have y'all got their written permission
[1:20:03] that have y'all approached them how much
they would like this? Because this was
[1:20:07] all was owned as a pud under warehouses
and this is a change. to
[1:20:15] to my
>> He still own them,
[1:20:17] » do I? Now,
>> he doesn't own that warehouse, does he?
[1:20:20] » No. No, that was I guess from I and I'm
speaking out of term because I'm not
[1:20:24] exactly sure who owns what through
there, but my guess is that land was
[1:20:28] sold from this group to IDI. They built
the building and now they've sold it to
[1:20:34] a I think it's Barrett Barrett Industry.
So, you know, when I would tell you that
[1:20:38] IDI has looked at this and has basically
said they don't have a use for it
[1:20:43] because I I again, I can't point to
anything that that y'all can see. But
[1:20:48] basically, right down this line here is
a ditch that comes in and crosses
[1:20:54] crosses right here. And there's no way,
you know, unfortunately
[1:20:59] 10, 15 years ago, Mike and them had an
opportunity to move that ditch from the
[1:21:05] and and didn't realize that it was one
of those things that they moved it. That
[1:21:09] would be great. But that opportunity
would go away when the administration
[1:21:13] changed. And when the administration
changed back and uh I forget which one
[1:21:18] it was, but one of the one of the
administrations changed that and now
[1:21:22] they can't get any any uh clearance from
the core of engineers to move that
[1:21:28] ditch. So now we're stuck with having to
work within it. Of course, we all know
[1:21:32] that they probably didn't move it back
in the day because it was expensive to
[1:21:37] move a a ditch this size. But at the end
of the day, they uh I would say they
[1:21:43] felt like that if I got approval today,
then that approval was going to be here
[1:21:46] for for a while. And then if I ever find
a company like IDI that could have can
[1:21:51] build a facility here, uh they would
come in and and move the ditch. And then
[1:21:56] that didn't happen.
>> Okay. Uh I understand what you're
[1:22:01] saying. We went through a lot of this
getting this resone and promote and
[1:22:06] Yeah.
I don't know if the IDI who bought that
[1:22:11] thought it was going to be a drop yard.
I don't know if the
[1:22:15] residents
thought it was going to be a drop yard.
[1:22:19] Um [snorts]
I I just And you're going to add what?
[1:22:23] One employee or two employees?
>> Sir, I didn't I don't
[1:22:29] got to be minimum employees.
>> How many employees would staff?
[1:22:34] » It would be limited.
>> Can't be many. It wouldn't be many at
[1:22:37] all. It' probably be some part-time help
to come through and check and make sure
[1:22:40] that uh there's no garbage and things
are cleaned up, but minimal employees.
[1:22:46] » Yeah. Normally I'm for business, you
know, that I I don't know how it really
[1:22:53] helps the city us doing it and a bunch a
lot more trucks. Well, I would say that
[1:23:00] that I would say from from my standpoint
uh and CIP standpoint,
[1:23:06] uh hopefully the city and it's it's one
of those deals. It's kind of like the
[1:23:10] the the planning department's uh
allegation that this is going to hurt
[1:23:14] property values. This is me pulling it
out of a hat, but you know, if you have
[1:23:18] 252 people pulling in at late at night
at a truck stop, pulling in in a truck
[1:23:23] that's got to park it, their meter stops
when they turn off a 305 on the Sandage.
[1:23:29] So, they can drive up to that 10 hours
and as long as they can get off of
[1:23:33] Sandage, they pull right in the QT, fill
up with fuel, get a cheeseburger, piece
[1:23:37] of pizza, go park their truck. When they
leave, they hopefully maybe stop back by
[1:23:42] there and get gas. You know, that's
where the city I think not only is there
[1:23:46] going to be some se some property tax
increase, but hopefully you're going to
[1:23:50] have some sales tax off of fuel and
other things that are done there. Now,
[1:23:53] that's can't justify it. I can't prove
it, but can't prove that it's not going
[1:23:57] to happen as well.
>> Okay.
[1:24:00] » Like I said, we're just trying to find
something that will will fit and and and
[1:24:04] we've got, like I said, two
>> I I understand what you're trying to do.
[1:24:08] » Yeah.
>> I just have some
[1:24:11] apprehension about it. Sure. [snorts]
>> Thank you.
[1:24:15] » Any additional questions of the
applicant?
[1:24:17] » I have one question.
>> Okay.
[1:24:20] » You've agreed to do the burm and and the
concrete and everything.
[1:24:25] Why didn't y'all agree to do it at the
board zoning adjustment?
[1:24:31] You wouldn't have you probably wouldn't
have got turned down. So now
[1:24:34] » Well, no. No. What? So, so it's uh
really to be quite honest with you,
[1:24:41] we're unprepared
for what we got at the board of
[1:24:45] adjustments. We were not, we did not
think that what we talked about was
[1:24:48] going to be that big a deal until we got
here the night of and saw and then uh
[1:24:54] did not realize that in the board of
adjustments packet that we were not
[1:24:58] provided was a letter that the mayor
wrote saying basically
[1:25:03] turn this down because we're not going
to get any benefit out of it. And we
[1:25:07] really kind of walked up against a
loaded gun just right out of the gate
[1:25:10] with the board of adjustment.
>> The letter had nothing to do with
[1:25:13] » worms and concrete. Well, we talked
through the concrete and you know, to be
[1:25:18] quite honest with you, uh didn't really
think that what we were offering was a
[1:25:22] big deal. Our original meeting with the
mayor and a song uh song basically is
[1:25:27] the one that told us that, hey, this
thing was put into place 20 years ago to
[1:25:30] discourage people from doing it. And if
you want to try to do something
[1:25:33] different, put us together a plan. Uh we
did and it failed miserably. So
[1:25:41] that's why we have have you know 100%
failed. So
[1:25:46] » and and just for full transparency that
letter uh ladies and gentlemen was a 24
[1:25:51] letter regarding not this drop lot or
truck yard but any drop lot or truck
[1:25:56] truckard that brings a high number of
trucks in that damage our streets and
[1:26:00] the city gets little to no tax money. is
usually a guard at a co at a metal
[1:26:05] building and some of these are down to
10 and $12 a night. A very cashrich
[1:26:10] business and I doubt the city sees a lot
of the tax dollars and that was my
[1:26:14] stance in 24. Not particularly about
this site, just any sites because we've
[1:26:18] got enough trucks in and out of this
area. That's true.
[1:26:21] » But it wasn't specific just to this one,
Mr. Cast.
[1:26:23] » No, I understand.
>> Any additional questions? I don't I
[1:26:27] don't know that um this necessarily
going to hurt the property value, but
[1:26:34] » the information you provided was based
not based on the
[1:26:40] value increasing of the house, but the
appraisals that happened statewide.
[1:26:45] » Correct.
>> That that had nothing to do with
[1:26:47] anything, you know, whether the property
has gotten better because of M1 or M2 or
[1:26:52] whatever. That's just everybody's went
up. So,
[1:26:54] » Well, that's true.
>> Okay.
[1:26:56] Brian, some of these things that were
required by the board of zoning
[1:27:01] adjustment and Dr. Hassong and stuff
were just the standard.
[1:27:06] » Sure.
>> Understand things. They were just
[1:27:08] standard.
>> That is true. 100%. And we we we tried
[1:27:13] to uh put together a a plan that we felt
like was better. And like I said, so
[1:27:19] that's kind of why we have realized that
if we want to get this approved and this
[1:27:24] is the place to to, you know, to say,
hey, we were wrong and this is what we
[1:27:29] can do. And there again, if uh if the
board sees fit to prove it, great. And
[1:27:35] if they do not, then we'll go back to
the drawing board and try to come up
[1:27:38] with something. But I don't know that
what I come back with, one, that you'll
[1:27:43] ever see it, and two, that you're going
to like it. So I I don't I don't know. U
[1:27:47] you know it is what it is and uh but one
thing I will say and there may be a
[1:27:53] hundred people here today against it but
the board of adjustments who got the
[1:27:57] same letter and notification
not one single person showed up.
[1:28:05] Not one single person on Sanage. Not one
single person on Walsh. Not one single
[1:28:10] person out of Cedar Creek Cedar I mean
Cedar Creek Cedar Crest. Not not anybody
[1:28:15] showed up.
>> Well, they may not show up, but we get
[1:28:19] the emails and the phone calls.
>> I promise you that.
[1:28:22] » I understand.
>> Mayor, may I make a comment?
[1:28:27] » Yes, ma'am.
>> I drove out there yesterday and I drove
[1:28:29] down uh Ross Road and to the end of the
Sandage Road.
[1:28:35] These poor people, there's no silence
over there for them if this comes in. We
[1:28:41] followed a FedEx truck out that took the
the uh FedEx lane and took the the
[1:28:47] Sandage exit with no emergency. I mean,
he just decided he didn't want to go out
[1:28:54] in the L road. So, now my brother drove
a truck. I'm not against truckers, but I
[1:28:58] do know that when they decide they're
going to go a certain route, they're
[1:29:02] going to take they're going to take the
shortest route to get there. We're
[1:29:06] already 10 maybe more years out getting
305
[1:29:12] widened to even think about adding 252
more trucks to exit out of there. So, I
[1:29:20] have a major concern with what's best
for our citizens when it comes to the
[1:29:26] safety. I have seen uh Nell Road exiting
on the 305 where it's lined up and I can
[1:29:32] see where truckers are going to find
another way to go out. They'll go out
[1:29:36] church or craft. They go down craft at
my location and it both ends it says no
[1:29:43] trucks but they take it anyway.
>> Sure.
[1:29:45] » So I think we as a board have to
consider the safety of the citizens when
[1:29:49] we're talking about
this particular location for this volume
[1:29:56] of trucks not even considering the noise
for the people on Ross and Sage.
[1:30:04] » And mayor I have one last question for
staff for Mr. cash and the picture you
[1:30:09] have on your computer, which we have. I
don't know if the public can see that or
[1:30:12] not, but do we know at this point what
is immediately to the east of that area
[1:30:17] in red and to the north of Nail Road?
Has that property been sold yet? I mean,
[1:30:22] I know it can it has the permitted uses
of M1, which can be warehouses and other
[1:30:27] things, but do we know if that's been
sold or any plans on that yet?
[1:30:33] » I don't know. Uh there is the other man
referring to these property or to this
[1:30:38] one?
>> Both of them but primarily the one at
[1:30:41] the bottom just north of Nail Road.
>> We there was a a warehouse that was
[1:30:47] proposed on that location. I think we
actually reviewed plans about 3 years
[1:30:50] ago but I think because of the economy
it didn't move forward. There is
[1:30:55] actually these two this this parcel and
this parcel we had approved plans I
[1:31:00] believe for industrial warehouses on
these two locations
[1:31:04] » where two two buildings proposed here
but just because of the way the economy
[1:31:09] kind of changed uh those were not have
not been constructed. One of the things
[1:31:14] in in line with that, we took the size
of this building just to scale and we
[1:31:20] were able to feed it on this piece of
property outside of the ditch. So this
[1:31:25] piece of property can be developed for
something different from a job. It is
[1:31:28] developable. It has developable area
outside of a ditch. Uh certainly not as
[1:31:34] large as this one,
>> right?
[1:31:36] » But comparable to this, it has a
developable area with parking spaces
[1:31:40] outside of outside of the beach.
And immediately to the north of the two
[1:31:46] properties we just discussed is uh is
that still AR? Is that M1?
[1:31:53] » Didn't we approve of the RV park?
>> Yes, this is approved for ROV park.
[1:32:00] » Okay, that's that's what I was wondering
if that was the exact property. Okay,
[1:32:09] » thank you. Welcome sir.
>> Okay.
[1:32:12] » Thank you Mr. Cashion and board just uh
for transparency as well. Mr. Cashion
[1:32:17] when he appeared uh earlier he in my
office he clearly said if the board
[1:32:22] doesn't want this then let him know what
will go here. He's trying to develop
[1:32:25] this 35 acres and he approached the city
in a professional manner and said if
[1:32:30] this is not what the city wants for the
city to tell him what what the city
[1:32:33] would allow there was his comment to me.
Uh this is a public comment item. Is
[1:32:38] there anyone here that is a proponent?
You're here to speak in favor of this
[1:32:42] application. You wish to see this
application go forward.
[1:32:47] Seeing none, if you're here to speak in
opposition, I believe we have Jark
[1:32:50] Rogers listed to come forward in
opposition to this application, come
[1:32:54] forward.
[1:33:02] » Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Uh
men and women of the board, good, good
[1:33:07] evening. Just want to make this short. I
think you guys have covered everything.
[1:33:11] Uh this is a simple case of give and
take or cause and effect.
[1:33:18] We give they take because they want this
the effect is what we receive. And what
[1:33:23] we're looking for in olive branch is a
type of structured growth.
[1:33:29] Um this falls under the category of
extrative which is parasitic. Um just
[1:33:35] going to give you some guidelines. I
heard the representative mentioned facts
[1:33:40] to to the matter. I brought those with
me today to review. Uh one fact is
[1:33:45] simply that the heavy wear and tear on
the road grids or services without
[1:33:51] paying proportional upkeep. Uh
leveraging loopholes. I just want to
[1:33:55] mention that. Um the applicant did
mention about the grants that were
[1:34:01] provided.
However, there's no type of supporting
[1:34:07] uh investments from this particular uh
request.
[1:34:11] Also, we must think about
when a parasite latches on to an object,
[1:34:18] you know, he sucks them dry and then
goes and finds something else. the
[1:34:22] serious damage that I see daily as a
citizen traveling um to and from work
[1:34:28] and various other activities
uh
[1:34:33] just can't be absorbed. And I know he
did mention FedEx. We do want business
[1:34:38] and to support our our citizens in this
town. But I think FedEx brings about uh
[1:34:44] approximately thousands of jobs
as well as other investments and with
[1:34:49] into the city infrastructure.
And then as Alderman Hehard mentioned,
[1:34:55] the pollutants
that this will cause is simply,
[1:35:00] you know, unfavorable.
uh these individuals in these
[1:35:04] communities and neighborhoods. They've
see out all the branch, Mr. Mayor, as a
[1:35:08] as a great place to live and work. Even
the um national rec recognition
[1:35:14] within our uh some of the media
identifies with that. So, I think I
[1:35:19] would like to implore the applicant as
he continues to say, "What can I do?" As
[1:35:24] you stated, he approached you. Let's
work together to look at something
[1:35:28] that's going to be productive,
more specific to um a better outcome for
[1:35:34] not only the the applicant, but the
city.
[1:35:39] We are responsible stewards of our
resources at this time, and it's
[1:35:45] something that we must take very
seriously. So, right now, I got to stand
[1:35:50] before you, Mr. mayor just in opposition
of this and uh asking the board to
[1:35:55] consider your uh citizens and your
community stakeholders. I'm going to
[1:36:01] leave you with this last thing sitting
there. I saw a lot of uncertainties as
[1:36:05] the a representative of a HOA board. Uh
they all say I'm going to do it until
[1:36:11] they get in there. Thank you guys for
your time.
[1:36:14] » Thank you, Mr. Rogers.
[1:36:18] I I I know we want to support each
other, but I'm going to ask just for pro
[1:36:22] that we not clap because one side can
clap as well. And once we start the
[1:36:26] clapping contest, then we'll able to be
here all night. So, just support each
[1:36:30] other, please, without clapping or any
kind of outburst. Mr. Chris Gillespie,
[1:36:34] are you here to speak in opposition to
this?
[1:36:46] Chris Gillespie, 7657 West Sanders Road.
Uh, thank you, mayor, board. U, just
[1:36:52] real quick, keep it keep it short. Um,
when they applied for it with the board
[1:36:57] of adjustments, they obviously didn't
meet the requirements. What have they
[1:37:01] done different now that they can come
back and say, "Well, yeah, you can get
[1:37:06] it now." And they haven't done that. And
like Mr. Dick Nichson asked him, "Why
[1:37:11] didn't you do it at first?" Well, they
never thought about it. and the automan
[1:37:17] damage with the people on Ross Road.
They were promised the BM, never got it.
[1:37:22] And how who's to say that they get
approved and they say we'll do the BM
[1:37:26] last? We're in phase two. We ain't got
the BM yet. We're in phase three. We
[1:37:31] ain't got the BM yet. And me being a
resident, lifelong resident, it's kind
[1:37:39] of dear to my heart because it backs
right up to my property.
[1:37:46] been there all my life, family,
everybody. And I just want all of y'all
[1:37:52] to kind of think about this. If it was a
dropy yard that was going to come to you
[1:37:58] all's neighborhood, your backyard, would
you vote for it? Would you approve it?
[1:38:04] Just keep that in mind. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Gillespie.
[1:38:09] » Not not at this point. Jacqueline Jones,
are you here to speak in opposition?
[1:38:25] Good evening. Thank you, mayor. Thank
you, Alderman. Uh, I'm here on behalf of
[1:38:29] the property at 7647
Sanage Road. And, uh, I appreciate the
[1:38:34] the presentation and the details, but I
didn't hear any benefits for the
[1:38:39] residents.
None.
[1:38:43] Only thing I heard is what the city
would benefit from and you wouldn't need
[1:38:48] to benefit it if you didn't vote for it.
So all the the and the property value,
[1:38:56] no one's house is sold based on the
assessor's value of property.
[1:39:02] As you said, everybody's property went
up.
[1:39:06] But who wants to buy a house that's
backed up to a dropard?
[1:39:13] the homeowners will have a very
difficult time selling their home and
[1:39:17] they will have to drop the price of that
sale if they just if someone is just
[1:39:22] wants to buy the home.
Um
[1:39:31] the security I mean I heard well well
one or two employees you know that's
[1:39:37] that hasn't been defined yet. I thought
I heard something about cameras. Um,
[1:39:43] normally
[snorts]
[1:39:46] the crime has already been committed
when law enforcement is informed of it.
[1:39:53] So, that's not going to um stop crime.
That's not going to prevent anyone from
[1:39:58] doing anything. And lastly, it is very I
consider it a danger to residents, to
[1:40:05] children
um who may get into that area and we
[1:40:09] know they all have a way of doing what
they want to do. It's just not a safe
[1:40:13] environment and it's just not good for
the residents. There were no benefits to
[1:40:18] the residents if you approve this. Thank
you.
[1:40:21] » Thank you, Mr. Jones.
Anyone else? Public comments section is
[1:40:27] hereby closed on this item. Mr. cash and
you can may come back forward and give
[1:40:30] information.
[1:40:35] » Mr. Mayor, board, it is evident that uh
people showed up tonight that is not in
[1:40:42] favor of this. Uh I can tell by how some
of the comments from the board has been.
[1:40:47] We respectfully withdraw our application
that that is allowed and we will find
[1:40:51] something that fits on this property
that doesn't require any kind of vote.
[1:40:57] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cash.
Application hereby withdrawn.
[1:41:01] » Mr. Mayor, I I will make a comment. Mr.
Cash, you did mention something earlier
[1:41:05] about the zoning and what could go
there.
[1:41:09] » Yes.
>> I'm not so sure that if we come if y'all
[1:41:13] come back with some, in fact, you
wouldn't have to come back in in certain
[1:41:16] cases.
>> Correct. that the residents may get
[1:41:19] something worse than what they and I
understand that there's some opposition
[1:41:24] to it, but we've had this situation
before where we turn down something and
[1:41:30] the people got something worse than than
what they had anticipated they were
[1:41:34] going to have before and were had buyer
remorse, wish they had taken the deal
[1:41:38] they had. So, I know that people are
that emails and you've gotten questions.
[1:41:45] We've had comments tonight, but there
are situations that they could put a
[1:41:49] warehouse there or some kind of small
manufacturing plant and it would never
[1:41:53] come back to anybody to say yay or nay.
So,
[1:41:57] » that is true. And and just so we're all
on the same page, that was not a threat
[1:42:00] because I promise you if I tried to open
shrimp joint, my wife would kill me. Uh
[1:42:05] and if I tried to do a cannabis, you
know, we she I even told her, I said,
[1:42:09] "We're going to name it Ken's Cat
House." Uh but she was like, "You better
[1:42:13] not do that. I'll, you know, I'll kill
you. But also, we wouldn't do the
[1:42:16] cannabis. So, we're going to try to find
something probably in the manufacturing
[1:42:19] or small warehouse and move forward.
>> Got to be over 60, 85%. The cannabis
[1:42:24] users over 60. Just remember when you
market that.
[1:42:27] » Thank you, sir.
>> We appreciate it. Thank you.
[1:42:31] » Next item following the agenda.
Consideration.
[1:42:37] Public hearing and consideration to
amend the zoning ordinance by adding
[1:42:41] various definitions restricting indoor
and outdoor smoking in public place
[1:42:45] establishments within 500 ft of public
parks. Specifying criteria for data
[1:42:50] centers as conditional uses in the M1
light industrial and M2 heavy industrial
[1:42:56] districts only. limiting the height of
freestanding monument signs in the
[1:43:01] office area and neighborhood commercial
C1 districts to 8 feet and in the C2
[1:43:06] highway commercial C3 general commercial
and C4 planned commercial districts to
[1:43:11] 12 feet and specifying the size,
location, and height of onremise and
[1:43:15] off- premise signs in the M1 light
industrial and M2 heavy industrial
[1:43:20] districts. The public hearing was set on
July the 21st for this particular item
[1:43:24] that we're about to hear today. Dr.
Song.
[1:43:30] » Thank you, Mayor Adman. Before you is
your request to consider amending the
[1:43:35] current zoning ordinance of the city of
Olive Branch by doing a number of
[1:43:40] things. Adding various definitions in
the zoning ordinance for clarification
[1:43:45] purposes.
So often words are used in the zoning
[1:43:50] code. They may mean different things in
different cities. So each city the words
[1:43:55] may be common, it may be a technical
word. It's very important that we
[1:43:58] clarify exactly what does that word mean
in order to avoid confusion when it
[1:44:04] comes to implementation of the zoning
ordinance. As such, um, various
[1:44:09] definitions are being proposed to be
added to the zoning ordinance regarding
[1:44:14] things like what is a cigar lounge, what
is hookah, hookah bar, what is a data
[1:44:19] center, what is a data center accessory
use or structure, what is a data center
[1:44:25] energy system. So those are words that
are proposed to be added to the zoning
[1:44:29] ordinance. This is very important
especially when we are if we are adding
[1:44:33] a section to the ordinance that
addresses something that is totally new.
[1:44:38] For example, data center. What is a data
center? Everybody that word is common
[1:44:42] out there but it may mean a lot of
different things to different people
[1:44:46] especially with regard to what goes on
inside a structure. So that is the first
[1:44:50] element that this uh amendment proposes.
The second is to address smoking and
[1:44:56] vaping around public parks. Uh public
parks are supposed to be places that are
[1:45:01] inviting. They are open to use by the
general public at large. Everybody
[1:45:05] should be able to go there and use it
and and use it. Sometimes certain
[1:45:10] activities especially with regard to
things like smoking uh in close
[1:45:15] proximity to the park can be deterrent
to folks with various health conditions
[1:45:19] in particular. So to ensure that the
public parks remain open, inviting and
[1:45:24] usable by the public at large, the
proposal is to limit or restrict vaping
[1:45:32] activities and smoking within 500 ft of
public parks. Of course, there may be
[1:45:37] certain uses that have designated
smoking areas. You may have a particular
[1:45:42] use that has a designated smoking area,
a business on that particular piece of
[1:45:46] property, especially if it exists
already. that will become kind of what
[1:45:50] the common term is grandfather so to
speak that is covered in the zoning
[1:45:54] code. Uh before I come to the element on
data centers with regard to reduction in
[1:46:01] the maximum height of freestanding signs
the office district serves as a kind of
[1:46:06] a transitional district between
residential area and more intensive
[1:46:11] commercial areas. Somehow in the zoning
code the signs that are permitted there
[1:46:17] are as intensive as those or intrusive
as those permitted in the commercial in
[1:46:22] highly intensive commercial zone
industry. So this change is intended to
[1:46:27] recognize that difference that
transitional difference as one goes from
[1:46:31] residential to commercial areas. The
same with neighborhood commercial C1
[1:46:35] zoning district. So the proposal is to
reduce those signs in height from 15 ft
[1:46:40] to 8 ft to make them more transitional,
more conforming, less intrusive with
[1:46:47] adjoining residential districts and also
to reduce the height of signs in the
[1:46:53] highway commercial C2, general
commercial C3 and plan commercial zoning
[1:46:57] district C4 from 25 ft to 12 ft. We
already we've been practicing this
[1:47:02] policy in the city for about the past
five years.
[1:47:07] But it's never really been in the books.
We want to give it teeth by actually
[1:47:10] putting it in the books. The if you look
at the sign, the old shine time,
[1:47:18] Oldtown car wash, what was previously
Oldtown Cars, that sign is 12 ft high
[1:47:22] and it's clearly visible to everybody on
Highway 305. If it were 25 ft high,
[1:47:27] rather it looks like when you're
driving, you're driving under the sign
[1:47:30] and you can't see it. So we've been
implementing this 12 ft high policy in
[1:47:34] the city for a while and it hasn't posed
any problem to anybody. We just want to
[1:47:38] make sure that we have it in the books
and as such it gives some teeth it gives
[1:47:42] uh staff some authority when enforcing
that particular regulation
[1:47:47] with regard to signs in the M1 and M2
zoning district size height and
[1:47:52] locations. The zoning ordinance, the
only district districts in the city of
[1:47:58] Holy Branch that allows signs that are
larger than 400 than 100 square ft
[1:48:04] really permit signs up to 400 square ft
is in the M1 light industrial and the M2
[1:48:09] heavy industrial districts. A sign that
is 400 square ft large is basically a
[1:48:14] billboard.
So really billboards one can say
[1:48:18] billboards are only permitted in the M1
M2 districts in the city. But there is
[1:48:22] no distinction
between on premise and off-remise signs.
[1:48:27] A billboard is an off-remise advertising
sign. So you could have let's say FedEx
[1:48:33] for example, your sign could be a
billboard 400 ft large. You could go on
[1:48:38] Goodman Road Legacy Park and have one of
those industrial Amazon put up a sign 5
[1:48:43] 400 ft large. That is what our zoning
ordinance basically currently permits.
[1:48:48] The clean up here is to make a
distinction between on premise signs
[1:48:52] that are usually should be smaller in
size, maximum 100 square feet, just as
[1:48:56] you have in commercial areas and off-
premise advertising signs which are up
[1:49:01] to 400 square ft large. Those off-remise
advertising signs will become subject to
[1:49:07] conditional use permits as opposed to
onremise signs that are treated just
[1:49:12] like signs for any other business. So if
this were approved, a billboard in the
[1:49:16] city will have to go through a
conditional use permit approver by the
[1:49:20] board of zoning adjustment. A key reason
for that will be to ensure that wherever
[1:49:25] that billboard is proposed, the
character of that corridor is taken into
[1:49:29] consideration. It's important to avoid a
situation where you know you have too
[1:49:33] many billboards along a particular
corridor and driving down the city. All
[1:49:37] you see that B billboards sometimes have
in certain uh highways. The second
[1:49:43] element about this with respect to
locations is the distance between these
[1:49:51] very large off-remise advertising signs
is proposed to be increased from 1,000
[1:49:55] ft to 2,000 ft to avoid overcrowding of
these corridors. That's the purpose to
[1:50:00] avoid the corridor becoming overcrowded.
And for height, the billboard signs will
[1:50:06] remain maximum 35 ft high. But for
onremise advertising
[1:50:12] industrial use that will be reduced to
12 ft high just as we have in commercial
[1:50:16] areas.
With regard to data centers which I wish
[1:50:22] to focus on as far as this particular
regulations are concerned,
[1:50:28] the M1 zoning district in the city
has this particular language for
[1:50:34] permitted uses. The zoning ordinance has
conditional uses and permitted uses.
[1:50:40] Permitted uses are permitted by right.
Anybody wants to do anything on that
[1:50:44] particular piece of property. All you
need to do is to submit a site plan to
[1:50:48] the city is reviewed approved
administratively and the applicant goes
[1:50:52] in and puts up the the building or
proceeds with the development. It does
[1:50:55] not go before the board of zoning
adjustment for a conditional use. It
[1:50:58] does not go before the planning
commission. It does not come before the
[1:51:01] board of adamant. So permitted uses, one
of the permitted uses listed in the M1
[1:51:07] and as such also permitted in the M2
zoning district
[1:51:12] is this use number six says wholesale
merchandising or storage warehouses with
[1:51:20] or without accessory retail sales and
offices. Data centers as they are
[1:51:25] commonly known are essentially storage
warehouses for data. That's really what
[1:51:31] they are with or without accessory
components associated with them. So
[1:51:36] somebody walked into the city of Holy
Branch today with a data center
[1:51:40] application that person could argue that
all I have in front of me is a storage
[1:51:46] warehouse for data and as such in the M1
district I'm permitted by right and in
[1:51:52] M2 district I'm permitted by right.
Person could make that argument and we
[1:51:57] would not have a leg to stand on based
on this particular provision.
[1:52:01] In this regard, the city is pretty
susceptible, exposed so to speak,
[1:52:06] considering the negative externalities
or the impact that data centers pose,
[1:52:11] just as from what we have seen around us
go on in Memphis, go on in other cities
[1:52:16] like South Haven. The proposal,
the first thing with regard to this is
[1:52:26] to remove data center from the
possibility of it being a permitted use
[1:52:31] and making it a conditional use in the
M1 and M2 zoning district. As a
[1:52:38] conditional use, they will be subject
therefore to all the general conditions
[1:52:42] of a conditional use permit. I'm glad
you just went through this experience
[1:52:46] with a draward. So those are the general
conditions. Those seven conditions,
[1:52:51] those are character of the area impact
on traffic. All these conditions, those
[1:52:55] are general for every conditional use
permit that comes in. It gives the board
[1:52:59] of zoning adjustment a lot of tip to be
able to vet the application. If it were
[1:53:04] approved or denied, let's say it was
approved, anybody affected the way the
[1:53:09] city ordinance reaches, anybody who is
affected by the decision of the board of
[1:53:13] zoning adjustment can appeal it to the
board of adaman and the board will have
[1:53:17] the opportunity to look at that
particular application. Right now, the
[1:53:21] board has no opportunity to look at
anything. If it were submitted, it will
[1:53:25] be bu straight away. So this is intended
to move it from being kind of a
[1:53:30] permitted use by right to making it a
conditional use permit subject to review
[1:53:34] decision by board of zoning adjustment
appealable to the board of adamment. As
[1:53:38] a matter of fact any adment the mayor
and any adment can ask that it be
[1:53:44] appealed can appeal and require that it
be brought before the board.
[1:53:48] basically what cities regulation says
anybody affected by it anybody can can
[1:53:53] appeal that the decision should be
brought before the board of adamant for
[1:53:56] action. So there are those general
conditions but also there are specific
[1:54:01] conditions that are proposed
in the text before you with regard to
[1:54:06] data centers. Just as you had the
general conditions for for for dropy
[1:54:11] yards and also some very specific
conditions in the same way same thing
[1:54:15] with convenience store with pumps. There
are some very specific conditions. You
[1:54:20] must be at signalized intersection for
example to have uh to qualify for a
[1:54:25] convenience store with fuel pumps in the
city. In the same way you have the
[1:54:29] general conditions for the conditional
use permit that will be applicable and
[1:54:32] you will have some very specific
conditions that will be applicable to
[1:54:37] data centers with regard to their review
and permission as conditional use
[1:54:42] permits. What are these specific
conditions? They address issues of
[1:54:46] locations, setbacks, things that will be
pro prohibited. If we receive an
[1:54:52] application, one of the requirement is
that the applicant will have to submit a
[1:54:56] utility and infrastructure plan to the
city. That is critical.
[1:55:01] This particular use across the country
has significant infrastructure demands
[1:55:07] with regard to power, with regard to
water for example. And right now we
[1:55:12] don't have any of those in the books.
No, none of such requirements exist.
[1:55:16] These particular regulations will
specifically provide and require any
[1:55:21] applicant to provide to the city and
infra a utility and infrastructure plan.
[1:55:26] There must also be a site plan. That
plan must address how will power be
[1:55:31] provided to that particular facility in
a way that it does not pose any negative
[1:55:36] impact to residents of the city of Olive
Branch. Water and waste water.
[1:55:43] Do we have sufficient water in the city?
The plan must address water and
[1:55:47] wastewater issue. The plan must address
the provision of gas community digital
[1:55:53] ecosystem footprint. Sometimes data
centers are not all together. Everything
[1:55:57] about them is not negative. It's not
negative. It's not just also about you
[1:56:03] know you can have a vacant piece of
property that is developed and taxes
[1:56:07] increase because of that. But they can
also provide a certain digital footprint
[1:56:13] with respect to optic fibers that can be
beneficial to hospitals, to other
[1:56:17] institutions such as schools, all of
those elements. How would this benefit
[1:56:21] the city of Holybrang so to speak,
beyond just the tax element, you know,
[1:56:26] ground and roof mounted equipment, data
centers, if you look at the picture in
[1:56:30] front of you, that is an example of a
data center. They have a lot of
[1:56:34] equipment often on the roof and also on
the ground. It can really turn an area
[1:56:38] into a cluster looking overcrowded and
and losing a sense of aesthetics. How
[1:56:43] will all of that be burdened?
You know, the regulations
[1:56:49] call for the provision of those
measures, screening and assessing
[1:56:55] structures, cooling and energy systems.
A lot of the water that is used in data
[1:57:01] centers is really about cooling. You
have to cool those computers otherwise
[1:57:05] they will catch fire.
So how would those be cooled in a way
[1:57:09] that water in the city is not negatively
impacted aquifer and so on, water
[1:57:16] availability, water pressure, perimeter
fencing and security. How will all of
[1:57:20] that be provided? The regulations also
include performance standards.
[1:57:29] Often public opposition with regard to
data centers focus on these four or five
[1:57:34] main things. noise the experience from
South Heaven is significant you know uh
[1:57:39] generator and testing you have all the
turbines the generators that are
[1:57:44] producing all this noise cooling waste
heat that comes from these facilities
[1:57:49] the computers they keep running 24 hours
you stock all of them in one giant
[1:57:54] building you get a lot of heat coming
from there how do you manage all of that
[1:57:59] in the city so the regulations are
intended to address all of this I will
[1:58:04] speak to a number of the key adverse
impact or negative externalities
[1:58:09] elements and key points in the
regulations that are intended to address
[1:58:14] this. The first has to do with noise.
Number of provisions or stipulations are
[1:58:21] proposed in the ordinance to address the
noise issue. One of the approaches used
[1:58:26] is all data centers are not the same.
They're not all the same. They in
[1:58:31] different tiers. There are some of them
that more are more intensive what is
[1:58:34] called a super scale you know the X AI
those are usually the last one the last
[1:58:39] ones that create all the noise there are
some data centers that don't even
[1:58:44] provide or do not need external
redundancy measures you know external
[1:58:49] turbines and so on they don't include
all of that so the first year these are
[1:58:53] low intensity data centers they're less
than 50,000 square feet in gross floor
[1:58:58] area less than 10 megawatt peak
electrical demand less than 50,000
[1:59:03] gallons average daily water demand less
than no and one thing I should say is no
[1:59:08] matter how less this is all of them
still have to provide those
[1:59:13] infrastructure plans everybody goes
through the the process everybody no
[1:59:18] matter the tier that a data center falls
through it in so far as it's a data
[1:59:22] center it has to go through a
conditional use permit and meet all the
[1:59:25] criteria these tears just simply
acknowledge the nature of the industry.
[1:59:32] Can put it that way. With regard to tier
one, the minimum setback if
[1:59:39] a low inensity data center does not it
has no diesel generators, no gas
[1:59:45] turbines, no combustion based backup
generation. Then it has to be minimum
[1:59:51] 500 ft from all lines of schools,
hospitals, child care facilities,
[1:59:56] nursing homes, public parks, religious
institutions and residentially used,
[2:00:01] residentially zoned properties. These
are usually the elements that create the
[2:00:06] negative externalities, the noise and so
on. If it doesn't involve any of this,
[2:00:11] then it's just like any other you can
call it small warehouse almost like a
[2:00:14] contractor storage yacht so to speak. So
that is required to be minimum 500 ft
[2:00:19] separation from those protected uses. If
it involves any of this then it has to
[2:00:25] be minimum 1,000 ft.
For the second tier these are more
[2:00:31] intensive as one goes up. The building
for example increases from 50,000 to
[2:00:37] 250,000 square ft of gross floor area.
peak demand increases from less than 10
[2:00:44] 10 to 10 megawatts to 50 megawatt. If
you fall within this tier two, it has to
[2:00:50] be minimum 1,000 ft from all the
protected uses.
[2:00:55] terms of location if it is a tier three
this are the super scale greater than
[2:01:01] 250,000 square feet of gross floor area
greater than 50 megawatt peak electrical
[2:01:06] demand greater than 500,000 gallons
average daily water demand basically
[2:01:12] what you have in S heaven what you have
in in Memphis if you have any of this it
[2:01:16] has to be minimum 2,000 ft from all lot
lines of schools hospitals child care
[2:01:22] facilities nursing homes public parks
religious just institutions,
[2:01:26] residentially used, residentially zoned
property. So this buffer, this setback
[2:01:31] requirement is one of the measures with
regard to dealing with noise. The second
[2:01:36] and the third, the board of zoning
adjustment may require that that
[2:01:41] distance be increased
when reviewing the application. So the
[2:01:46] regulations before you have that
provision. the board of zoning
[2:01:49] adjustment can look at the particular
area, look at the other existing uses
[2:01:54] around them, especially if they're
already noisy because noise has a
[2:01:57] tendency to kind of add noise, the noise
waves, they add to each other and they
[2:02:02] can become significant. So the board of
zoning adjustment can require that that
[2:02:06] distance be increased. Lastly, and this
is important, the noise from routine
[2:02:11] operations including primary and
accessory structures and uses and all
[2:02:16] energy systems that include generators,
turbines, anything from that particular
[2:02:21] data from a data center shall not exceed
45 dibels and not all 45 dbc between
[2:02:29] 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. that is in the
night and shall not exceed 65 dBA and 55
[2:02:35] dbc at any other times that is during
the day. 45 dBA is the sound of a
[2:02:42] refrigerator in the house.
So inside a single family home 45 dBA is
[2:02:49] the sound of your refrigerator. Nobody
in their bedroom hears the sound of a
[2:02:53] refrigerator booming in the kitchen for
example. And this is not the sound at
[2:02:58] the residential property line property
line. This is the sound at the property
[2:03:04] line of the data center which shall be
minimum 500 a,000 or 2,000 ft
[2:03:12] from the residential property. So
there's absolutely no way that with this
[2:03:17] level of sound control anybody living in
a residential property will hear any
[2:03:21] sound. We actually bought a sound meter.
I went out and I carried out an
[2:03:25] experiment twice using this and there
was absolutely no sound. Three times
[2:03:30] during the day I carried out an
experiment using this. So this is not
[2:03:34] the sound at the property line of a
residential property. This is the sound
[2:03:38] at the property line of the data center
which must be 500, 1,000 or 2,000 ft
[2:03:45] depending on the tier from a residential
land use.
[2:03:50] The second has to do with water. Any
water used in that facility must be
[2:03:55] closed loop. I mentioned we have to
ensure in other words the water
[2:04:00] basically has to be recycled to cool the
system. Uh the study must show no
[2:04:05] negative impact on public use of water
in the city of Olive Branch with respect
[2:04:09] to quantity with respect to water
pressure with respect to cost to other
[2:04:14] residents in the city. The study must
show that there will be no negative
[2:04:18] impact. And if that impact begins to
show up, the board of zoning adjustment
[2:04:23] will step in and and and address that
that particular issue. Containment
[2:04:28] system required for all cooling fluids.
No discharge of untreated processed
[2:04:33] water or chemical waste to municipal
storm water systems, drainage
[2:04:36] infrastructure or the sanitary sew
system at any time. And lastly, any
[2:04:41] water infrastructure upgrades shall be
fully the responsibility of the data
[2:04:45] center developer, not the responsibility
of the city of Oly branch. One other
[2:04:49] very important one I forgot to include
in here.
[2:04:53] Uh city well where we have our wells in
the city. You cannot have a data center
[2:04:58] within 1,000 ft of a protected wellhead
in the city. So that is also included in
[2:05:04] the regulations.
The next has to do with power. The study
[2:05:10] must show no negative impact on public
use of power availability cost in the
[2:05:15] city. Any power infrastructure upgrades
shall be fully the responsibility of the
[2:05:20] developer.
The use of systems such as generators
[2:05:25] can produce all kinds of fumes
environmental concerns. The regulations
[2:05:30] specify that any backup diesel generate
generators shall be a minimum of tier
[2:05:36] four. That is the highest under EPA with
respect to environmental cleanliness is
[2:05:40] the highest uh level that you can have
and generators shall be tested only
[2:05:44] during the hours of 12:00 p.m. to 5:00
p.m. Monday through Friday during the
[2:05:49] day. Those are the most intensive busy
hours in the city. With respect to waste
[2:05:53] heat, the study must show no negative
impact on public use of power or heat in
[2:05:58] the system. any discharge, venting or
exhaust from any equipment from that
[2:06:03] data center cannot raise the ambient
temperature at the property line of that
[2:06:08] property up to 4 ft. You know,
[2:06:20] machinery or operation shall not raise
the ambient temperature at any external
[2:06:25] perimeter property line above naturally
occurring conditions when measured at a
[2:06:30] height of 4 ft above ground level.
So that is to ensure that we do not have
[2:06:36] heat dissipated and the instruments to
measure this. All of that have been
[2:06:40] provided in the regulations. Any rooftop
or wall-mounted heat exhaust systems
[2:06:44] shall be equipped such that we do not
have heat escaping from these areas.
[2:06:50] One area that is what addressing is
decommissioning.
[2:06:54] Data centers can sometimes almost be
like gas stations. They can go out of
[2:06:57] business in order to relocated to
different areas. There are attempts
[2:07:01] today to relocate them to space. They
are all relocated to space. What happens
[2:07:06] to the ones that have been constructed
on earth so to speak here on the ground?
[2:07:10] The city protects itself. These
regulations seek to protect the city by
[2:07:14] addressing the element of
decommissioning before operations begin.
[2:07:17] every data center. This is basically
like what we do for subdivisions. Every
[2:07:22] data center operator must provide to the
city of olive branch an irrevocable
[2:07:26] letter of credit of sufficient amount to
cover the elements of decommissioning
[2:07:30] and it's irrevocable. That means it
basically rend so far as the life it's
[2:07:35] not something that the very next year
it's it's going to expire. No, it
[2:07:38] remains in the books.
The board has before it a number of
[2:07:43] options. About four months ago when the
mayor asked staff planning staff to
[2:07:48] start looking into this issue of data
centers there were basically a number of
[2:07:53] options before us mainly three the first
was a do nothing option just let it go
[2:07:59] don't bother about it you know do
nothing we hear in the term data centers
[2:08:03] it may come one day it may not come to
branch so do nothing about it that was
[2:08:08] the first option we had that option does
not protect the public interest in any
[2:08:13] Today it leaves us, it leaves the city
of Olive Branch as exposed as it were in
[2:08:18] Memphis, as it were in South Heaven.
Noise pollution, problems with water,
[2:08:24] problems with electricity and so on. So
that was that is a do nothing option
[2:08:29] that we did not find attainable.
The second is to impose a moratorum.
[2:08:38] This is an option that certain cities
and counties have adopted across the
[2:08:42] state and across um across the country.
But it still leaves the city exposed to
[2:08:50] legal challenges with regard to any
moratorium when it comes to a use. A
[2:08:54] data center potential developer could
always argue that a moratorium, for
[2:08:59] example, denies that applicant certain
due process rights. I want to be able to
[2:09:04] have my day before the city before any
legal entity approving uh entity to
[2:09:10] examine my application. But the
moratorium essentially denies that
[2:09:13] opportunity. It leaves the city
unprotected if a judge overturns a
[2:09:17] moratorum and that is beginning to
happen across in in
[2:09:21] the country where those moratoriums are
beginning to be challenged by data
[2:09:25] center applicants. I forgotten the city.
I was reading one this morning. the the
[2:09:30] potential data center. The city passed a
moratorium. Potential data center
[2:09:34] applicant filed a lawsuit and then the
board immediately met and overturned
[2:09:39] their own moratorium because they
realize how long how much the city was
[2:09:42] exposed and if a judge were to overturn
that moratorum then the very next day
[2:09:47] the data center applicant could walk
into the office and hand over an
[2:09:50] application and we will be unprotected.
So that was not an option a wise option
[2:09:55] to take. The third option is what the
planning commission did basically to
[2:10:00] review this application to review the
regulations and the planning commission
[2:10:04] has had three public hearings on this
made a number of changes from what the
[2:10:09] initial proposal was added a number of
things have start worked on this for 3
[2:10:14] months and then finally proposed the
regulations recommended for approval the
[2:10:19] regulations that you have before you. So
the planning commission at its meeting
[2:10:22] on July 14 approved and recommended same
that the board of adaman amend the
[2:10:28] zoning ordinance of the city of olive
branch by repealing the language that is
[2:10:32] struck in in the draft that you have and
adopting the provisions that are
[2:10:36] underlined in the concern sections of
the zoning ordinance attached in your
[2:10:41] packet. Amendments I should indicate
include the with regard to signs in the
[2:10:48] M1 and M2 zoning districts. Those are
also before the board for approval in
[2:10:53] the text that you have. That concludes
staff's presentation. Thank you.
[2:10:58] » Thank you, Dr. Saw. Board, any questions
on this staff report?
[2:11:02] » I got I got a couple.
Can you go back to where
[2:11:07] were you with the timeline? Was there a
time on that like uh no
[2:11:15] generators at night and things at
certain hours? Was it 900 pm? Yes, sir.
[2:11:20] I believe. Yes.
Generator shall only be tested basically
[2:11:25] during the day between 12:00 p.m. and
5:00 p.m. Those are the most active
[2:11:30] hours of city life, so to speak. Not in
the morning when folks may still be
[2:11:34] sleeping or in the evening after work.
That can and even with this testing,
[2:11:39] this does not imply that while those
generators are being tested within those
[2:11:43] hours, the the noise at the property
line can increase beyond 45 dibs. No. At
[2:11:49] all times, the noise at the property
line cannot exceed 45 dibels whether
[2:11:54] you're testing the generator or not
testing the generator.
[2:11:56] » So, so that's to stop the noise from
traveling. I think they up to
[2:12:03] 4 and a half miles on level on quiet
night. They say that some of the low
[2:12:08] dust can you can hear the humming. I
know you can the one over in South
[2:12:12] Haven. You can hear
>> the the the humming noise comes from the
[2:12:18] DBC element. This is low frequency,
>> right?
[2:12:20] » So our regulations are written to take
care of both high frequency and low
[2:12:24] frequency noise
>> to eliminate it at the property line.
[2:12:28] » At at the property line. Yes, sir.
>> Okay.
[2:12:30] » So at the property line, whether it's
low frequency noise or high frequency
[2:12:33] noise, all of it is controlled.
>> So if it ever increases past that
[2:12:38] that maximum decibel at the property
line, what what do we do? shut them down
[2:12:43] or are they outside the do they lose
their conditional use or what is the
[2:12:48] proposal on that?
>> The board of zoning adjustment has the
[2:12:51] powers to withdraw the conditional use
permit.
[2:12:54] » So is it immediate or
>> I'm sorry sir
[2:12:57] » requires a hearing
>> a hearing it would require a public
[2:13:00] hearing. So if we had complaints that
this particular data center noise is,
[2:13:05] you know, they're getting noise from it
in the neighborhood, we will go to the
[2:13:08] property line, we'll do all the
measurements, notify the property owner
[2:13:12] and basically say you're in violation.
You have to tone down whatever noise you
[2:13:17] are producing here. If that doesn't
happen, we'll bring the applicant, the
[2:13:21] developer before the board of zoning
adjustment. And the board of zoning
[2:13:24] adjustment has the authority to pull
that conditional use permit to basically
[2:13:27] revoke it and require that that data
center be shut. And the board of zoning
[2:13:31] adjustment has done that with some
businesses in the city.
[2:13:33] » But before they ever get to this point,
they'd have to get a cup or conditional
[2:13:37] use permit. To ever get to that point,
they'd have to agree that this is what
[2:13:42] they're going to do.
>> Yes, sir.
[2:13:43] » Okay. their study and all the
structures, all the instruments they
[2:13:47] have in there will have to show that
they will meet this standard and they
[2:13:51] will commit to it. The board of zoning
adjustment in the granting of the
[2:13:54] conditional use permit is basically
granting it subject to all these
[2:13:58] conditions being met. So if at any time
any of these conditions are not been
[2:14:02] met, then the data center is in
violation of the conditions of his
[2:14:06] conditional use permit and that permit
is therefore subject to revocation.
[2:14:12] We have nothing in the books right now.
We have nothing.
[2:14:18] » Additional questions on the staff
report.
[2:14:21] » One question. I know everybody's
concerned about the data centers, but on
[2:14:25] the office signs where we're reducing
the monuments on the office. We're
[2:14:31] reducing the height they can have. Do we
have any signs in the office areas now
[2:14:36] that are going to exceed it and have to
be grandfathered in or is that going to
[2:14:40] be an issue?
>> If any sign exceeds it would be
[2:14:43] grandfathered.
>> Okay.
[2:14:45] » It will not it will not be taken on to
the day that the sign is taken down then
[2:14:49] it can it will be required to meet those
those new regulations.
[2:14:52] » All right.
>> Do we have any smoke shop things or
[2:14:58] whatever cigar what are they called?
cigar bars or whatever they are within
[2:15:02] that will be outside the ordinance and
be ground or will they something like
[2:15:07] that are they automatically outside the
ordinance
[2:15:10] » immediately
>> within 500 ft of a city park for example
[2:15:14] » u
>> I don't I'm not aware of any
[2:15:18] » none would be in violation today
>> in violation
[2:15:25] » any additional questions before public
comments
[2:15:30] public comments. Dion Jones.
[2:15:39] Thank you, board. Thank you, Mayor Board
of Alderman. Uh for those who may not
[2:15:43] know me, I serve as uh chairman of the
Olive Branch Planning Commission. And I
[2:15:48] just want to be clear, I'm not speaking
tonight on behalf of every commissioner.
[2:15:50] The commission has spoken through the
recommendations it's forward to the
[2:15:54] board. I'm also a resident of Olive
Branch and I care about the responsible
[2:15:58] growth, our neighborhoods, our
infrastructure and what the community
[2:16:01] will will look like in 20 or 30 years
from now. I don't believe we should
[2:16:06] approach this issue as simply being for
data centers or against data centers.
[2:16:11] Our responsibility in planning is to
make sure that if one is proposed, the
[2:16:15] city has the information, standards, and
tools necessary to evaluate the
[2:16:20] particular project responsibly. There
are legitimate concerns. Water use,
[2:16:25] electrical demand, power generation,
noise, backup generation, generators,
[2:16:30] infrastructure, setbacks, and impacts on
the surrounding property. Those
[2:16:35] questions deserve answers, but the
questions should not automatically
[2:16:39] become a conclusion.
Data centers can differ significantly in
[2:16:43] size, cooling technology, water use,
power supply, and impact. A problem
[2:16:48] associated with a facility somewhere
else may give us an important question
[2:16:51] to ask here, but it does not necessarily
give us the answer. We also looked at
[2:16:55] this from a land use perspective. Olive
Branch does not have an unlimited supply
[2:16:59] of large industrial tracks. How we use
that land matters, not just today, but
[2:17:04] for the long-term development of the
city. There was also another important
[2:17:08] consideration during the process. It was
explained that without a specific
[2:17:13] definition and regulations for data
centers, a proposal could potentially
[2:17:16] fall under existing warehouse or storage
classifications and depending on zoning
[2:17:21] become a use by ride. So to me, creating
regulations for data centers does not
[2:17:27] open the door to them. It gives the city
a better ability to control that door.
[2:17:32] It also allows us the questions to ask
the questions and require information
[2:17:36] before making a decision. How much water
will be used? How much electricity will
[2:17:41] you require? And how will it be
supplied? How will the facility be
[2:17:44] cooled? Whether the noise,
infrastructure and surrounding land land
[2:17:47] use impacts. Then evaluate the actual
proposal against established standards.
[2:17:53] And I think the distinction is very
important tonight. Establishing
[2:17:57] regulations for data centers is not the
same thing as approving data centers. A
[2:18:02] future proposal still has to stand on
its own merits and the city retains the
[2:18:05] ability to say no when a project is not
appropriate. The planning commission has
[2:18:10] already demonstrated that we recommend
that we can recommend against a
[2:18:13] particular proposal while also believing
that strong regulations should be in
[2:18:17] place for whatever comes next. I respect
the residents who have taken the time to
[2:18:22] come here tonight and voice our
concerns. I simply hope our decisions
[2:18:25] continue to be driven by facts rather
than assumptions. That we ask the
[2:18:29] questions that we require the
information. consider the land,
[2:18:32] establish strong standards, evaluate
each project on its own merits. That is
[2:18:38] what I believe responsible planning
looks like, both as a planning
[2:18:41] commissioner and as someone who calls
Olive Branch home. Thank you.
[2:18:46] Right on three minutes, Mr. Jones,
you've probably been on the other side
[2:18:50] of this podium before or the lectan.
Miss Ashley Shield Sh. Miss Ashley Sh.
[2:18:57] Okay.
[2:19:18] Hi, my name is Ashley Shide. I live at
6303 Darren Drive. Uh, Mr. Mayor and
[2:19:24] members of the board, I want to start by
thanking Dr. Song and Mr. Lewis um and
[2:19:30] the board of planning for the work
that's gone into developing these data
[2:19:33] center regulations. I wasn't sure how to
sign up today because I'm very much for
[2:19:38] this ordinance, but I do think that
there are a few areas that still leave
[2:19:41] the city a little bit vulnerable. Uh the
updated criteria are significantly
[2:19:45] better than what was originally
presented and the city has made some
[2:19:48] very meaningful improvements. I believe
that we share the same goal of creating
[2:19:52] a strong ordinance that serves the
interest of the city while
[2:19:55] simultaneously protecting its residents.
However, I don't believe we are quite
[2:19:59] there yet. I'd like to suggest three
things to be added to make the
[2:20:04] regulation stronger. First, uh put an
actual ceiling on water consumption. The
[2:20:09] ordinance does a much better job of
monitoring water use, but there's an
[2:20:13] important difference between monitoring
and limiting water consumption. I would
[2:20:18] ask that the city establish a maximum
allowable water consumption based on
[2:20:21] demonstrated excess capacity in all of
Branch's water system. Uh that limit
[2:20:26] should take into account not only one
data center but the cumulative water
[2:20:30] demand of every data center that could
eventually operate in our community.
[2:20:34] Second, require a drought and water
emergency plan. The ordinance should
[2:20:39] specifically address what happens if
Olive branch experiences drought
[2:20:43] conditions, water shortages,
infrastructure failures, contamination,
[2:20:47] or an emergency requiring water
conservation. During a water emergency,
[2:20:51] I believe data centers should have
mandatory conservation requirements and
[2:20:55] should be not be treated the same as
essential residential water use. Third,
[2:21:01] uh require continuous noise monitoring.
The new noise standards are a major
[2:21:05] improvement, but for the large tier
three facilities, I would ask for
[2:21:10] continuous publicly accessible noise
monitoring at the residential side of
[2:21:14] the property. Residents should not have
to call city hall at 2 in the morning
[2:21:18] and say something is wrong with the
noise. The city should already have the
[2:21:22] data and there should be clear
consequences when the facility exceeds
[2:21:26] its permitted limits.
I believe Olive Branch can be a
[2:21:30] community that welcomes responsible
economic development without sacrificing
[2:21:33] the quality of life that brought people
here in the first place. This is not an
[2:21:37] argument against data centers. It's an
argument for getting the rules right
[2:21:40] before we approve them. The updated
criteria show that board of planning has
[2:21:44] been willing to responsibly listen to
the public and make improvements. Our
[2:21:48] wonderful city has been given the gift
of time, resources, and the ability to
[2:21:53] learn from others mistakes. I am asking
you to respect your constituents
[2:21:57] concerns, protect the people who are
already live here, and continue this
[2:22:01] improvement process until we get it
right. Um, I'd actually like to end with
[2:22:05] a question for Dr. Asang, and I believe
he sort of was touching on this a few
[2:22:10] minutes ago, um, regarding conditional
use permit revocation. If a data center
[2:22:16] violates the established ordinance, um
who specifically is responsible for
[2:22:21] bringing this in front of the board of
zoning adjustment to revoke the cup? I
[2:22:26] don't like is it you? Is it the mayor?
Um basically, who are we as a community
[2:22:31] trusting to ensure the proposed
consequences occur if this ordinance is
[2:22:37] violated? That's it. Thanks.
>> Thank you.
[2:22:41] » Sure.
>> Question. uh the city's code enforcement
[2:22:46] department is uh charged with enforcing
the zoning ordinance. So if there's a
[2:22:50] violation of the terms of a conditional
use permit, the planning staff, which
[2:22:54] has the code enforcement department,
would uh coordinate that with the
[2:22:58] prosecutor uh in municipal court. If
there is not a satisfaction of those
[2:23:03] conditions initially uh through an
appeal or hearing at the board of
[2:23:07] adjustment level, if there's not an
addressing of those violations, the
[2:23:10] board of adjustment can revoke that
conditional use permit. And if there's a
[2:23:14] continued violation, there's a recourse
for the city either in municipal court
[2:23:18] or in chancry court.
>> But it's the city staff that would be
[2:23:22] responsible for enforcing uh the terms
of the ordinance or any violations
[2:23:26] thereof.
>> Okay. I appreciate that.
[2:23:28] » You're welcome. Thank you,
>> Mr. Michael Shide.
[2:23:41] » Hi, good evening. Michael Sh. Thank you
for the opportunity to speak here. Um, I
[2:23:46] too am in favor of a data center
ordinance, but I encourage the alderman
[2:23:49] to consider strengthening the current
text to better protect the citizens of
[2:23:53] Olive Branch. So, first, please don't
remove anything that's in the ordinance.
[2:23:57] Now, it's it's good as is, but there are
some areas I believe can be strengthened
[2:24:01] a bit. Um, first I ask you to take a
look at a particular set of paragraphs
[2:24:05] in the document on page seven of the
ordinance. So, I have the the full text
[2:24:10] here. It's a subsection B, location
setbacks. Um, there's some inconsistent
[2:24:16] language in these paragraphs A through
D. Uh, if you look closely, the last
[2:24:21] sentence of these paragraphs, um,
paragraph A refers to residential homes,
[2:24:27] while paragraph B, C, and D say single
family homes. Just wondering if we could
[2:24:32] change this language to be consistent.
Uh secondly, in paragraph B of this
[2:24:38] section, it contains the phrase but only
applicable to AR properties developed
[2:24:43] with single family homes. Um Chairman
Lewis advised during the July 14
[2:24:48] planning committee meeting that the word
but be replaced with the word and uh and
[2:24:53] it looks like this change might have
been missed. Um the these sections in in
[2:24:57] general I believe are are critical to
maintaining the day-to-day quality of
[2:25:01] life for residents at all branch uh by
keeping data centers a meaningful
[2:25:05] distance from home. So I believe they're
very important paragraphs in there. Um
[2:25:10] my other concern concern is regarding
the cumulative impact of data centers.
[2:25:14] So um don't believe we should evaluate
data centers as if you know it will be
[2:25:19] the only one. uh if all the branch has
two three 10 data centers lord help us
[2:25:23] in the future the impacts are cumulative
um the 10 facilities shouldn't mean 10
[2:25:28] separate projects um they should they
mean cumulative water consumption
[2:25:32] electricity demand substations
generators noise traffic etc uh I would
[2:25:37] ask the city to establish a mechanism
for reviewing the accumulative impact of
[2:25:42] the existing and proposed data centers
as part of this ordinance thank you
[2:25:46] » thank you anyone else to speak as a
proponent. You're in favor?
[2:25:51] » Get his attention, mayor. Hey, where was
that? Uh what paragraph was that?
[2:25:59] » Yeah. So, it's it's on page seven. So,
729 location setbacks and then
[2:26:05] paragraphs A, B, C, and D.
>> Dr. Song, I would think the intent would
[2:26:09] be for any residential housing, whether
it's multif family, single family, just
[2:26:13] any residential housing. Correct.
>> Okay.
[2:26:17] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[2:26:20] Anyone else to speak in favor? You're a
proponent of this of this proposed
[2:26:25] ordinance rather.
Speaking in opposition, Jake Crawford.
[2:26:39] I'm not just speaking against data
centers. I am condemning data centers. I
[2:26:46] implore you all to do the same.
>> [snorts]
[2:26:49] » We're trying to figure out what a data
center is, but let's take it from the
[2:26:55] mouth of the the mind behind the data
centers. Elon Musk was on an interview
[2:27:03] and he said that his god, a new god was
going to rise out of the mids south.
[2:27:12] I'm not a religious person, but I have
to face the fact that since the dawn of
[2:27:16] mankind, man has been trying to define
God. And not just that, but trying to
[2:27:23] become God. Elon Musk has a God complex.
He thinks his data center is so precious
[2:27:31] because he has all this junk data. And
the thing about God, God is omnisient.
[2:27:38] God is all knowing. And that's what Elon
Musk is trying to do. He's trying to
[2:27:43] gain all the data he can create AI and
become like this artificial god. I don't
[2:27:50] want any part of that in my city. I want
to I want to stay as far away from it as
[2:27:57] I can. This is pernitious. It is
delimitous.
[2:28:03] Albert Einstein said that he he he was
the most tellable person that ever lived
[2:28:10] and he predicted that technology was
going to lead to the destruction of
[2:28:16] mankind. Mankind the abolition of
mankind and the day is coming. If he was
[2:28:21] here today and stop all these data
centers, he knew the end was near. Y'all
[2:28:26] better wake up. God bless.
>> Thank you, Mr. Crawford.
[2:28:31] Frankie Gardner or Frank Gardner. Mr.
Frank Gardner.
[2:28:41] » Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Board of
Alderman. Um, I'm not going to get as
[2:28:45] animated. Um, my concerns are mainly for
the ecological and environmental aspect
[2:28:52] of things. Um, I moved to Olive Branch
roughly six years ago and small town is
[2:28:57] why I moved here. My concern is there's
a lot of promise economically for a data
[2:29:03] center. I get it. Uh trust me, from a
business perspect perspective, I get it.
[2:29:08] Uh the promises of jobs are not as great
as they look. Um Dr. And mentioned in
[2:29:14] regard to size of data centers for a
data center to make any real money, the
[2:29:19] operator has to be a bug of 50 megawatts
at any given time. And their employment
[2:29:24] is 10 to 15 people. It's not a large
headcount for the opportunity we're
[2:29:30] talking about. Now, it may be a large
tax base, but I looked earlier on your
[2:29:34] agenda and you're giving tax exemptions
to William Sonoma and then Barrett
[2:29:39] distribution mentioned earlier.
What I'm worried about is you're going
[2:29:43] to see that same thing happen in a few
years from these data centers, let alone
[2:29:47] the econological impact we're going to
have from it. Now, there are options.
[2:29:52] I'm a realist and I see this coming and
I realize that no matter [clears throat]
[2:29:56] how emotional we get about it, we may
not be able to stop it. I understand.
[2:30:00] Closed systems, Dr. And you've heard of
those obviously, right? Because you
[2:30:04] mentioned it in your presentation.
Glycol systems, right?
[2:30:08] Glycol cooled systems.
That's an option. I would like to see
[2:30:13] something like that maybe in the
verbiage so that we can in turn maybe
[2:30:16] not impact the water supply with that.
And then as well there's other options.
[2:30:20] You mentioned decel levels. 85 dB is the
threshold of pain. Correct.
[2:30:25] » Okay. If you will give give the public
comments to the board that have to have
[2:30:28] a vote
>> that that will probably come up in the
[2:30:30] future in regard to it. And I I I say
this with the idea of South Haven in
[2:30:34] Memphis. What's going on right now from
Memphis's city council to be starting to
[2:30:39] use the word moratorum? And I realize it
was mentioned and it's it's a legal
[2:30:43] issue attached to that. I understand. So
another option may be to do an
[2:30:47] exploratory research in regard to the
adverse effects of what we're looking
[2:30:51] at. Again, we've got a great city here.
I moved here from Michigan uh roughly 50
[2:30:57] years ago. We had a plant called the
Fermy 2 plant go against Lake Erie. You
[2:31:01] can't drink the water from there. Okay.
We don't know because of the infancy of
[2:31:07] data centers and the explosive. It's a
big opportunity. No one wants to miss
[2:31:11] out because everyone is saying you're
going to go somewhere else then. But
[2:31:14] ultimately, we should take the time to
really review it before we jump into it.
[2:31:19] I realize we probably can't stop it. And
the money-wise, you probably can't turn
[2:31:24] away from it.
But again, it's if for the citizens of
[2:31:27] it, and again, the the the planning
meeting in June, it wasn't considered
[2:31:32] even near my neighborhood. Chief and I
live in the same neighborhood. I think
[2:31:35] we do too, Mr. Mayor. Um, we talked
about transportation off of 305 and
[2:31:40] truck routes and all kinds of other
things that were mentioned earlier as
[2:31:43] well. It's the same problem. Same
problem. And then uh the gentleman
[2:31:47] previous uh Mr. Dickerson, you mentioned
it. Perception is reality when it comes
[2:31:52] to property values. Whatever the state
assesses it is one thing, but in turn,
[2:31:56] will somebody want to buy it? Okay.
Before we sign the check, let's please
[2:32:00] review. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Final call for public
[2:32:04] comments. For or against? Final call.
Public comments.
[2:32:09] Come forward.
[2:32:17] And since the clerk doesn't have your
card, would you give your name and
[2:32:21] address so she can capture that for the
record?
[2:32:24] » Um, my name is Pamela Boen. I'm 7107
Stanley Drive. Good evening, board. Um,
[2:32:30] I just have two concerns. Well, many
concerns, but um
[2:32:34] um see for the generators. I've heard of
cities um contemplating them use backup
[2:32:43] for battery instead of gas turbines,
which I think would be a great
[2:32:48] alternative. Um and then I think and I
would like to ask a question. Um where's
[2:32:55] the waste water going? And I I think
that's a big concern. Um, I know in
[2:33:03] Wyoming they just had a bacterium
problem and they couldn't use their
[2:33:08] water for irrigation because of it. So,
I guess my question is I do like the um
[2:33:15] what the man just talked about and I
forgot what it was called where they
[2:33:20] conceal the water and reuse it, but
where's the waste water going to go and
[2:33:24] how is it going to impact us?
Anything additional
[2:33:31] » is that can I I don't know who to ask.
>> Well, really you're giving public
[2:33:34] comments to the board. It's not a Q&A.
>> I can't I can't ask.
[2:33:37] » We give some legal direction, but no,
it's really not a Q&A. You just give
[2:33:40] your public comments about how you think
they should vote for the ordinance or
[2:33:44] not.
>> So, how would I how would how would we
[2:33:47] get that information?
>> I'm not sure.
[2:33:50] » Well, I think that should be addressed
and should be
[2:33:52] » It's not a question and answer. It's
your public. just stating at this point
[2:33:55] since I couldn't answer your question.
Um I just think that should be
[2:33:59] considered okay
>> of all the restrictions
[2:34:01] » where the gray water goes where the
where the water that's been used goes.
[2:34:05] Understood.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[2:34:07] » Thank you.
>> Anyone else?
[2:34:13] Seeing and hearing none, public comment
is hereby closed. Board any questions or
[2:34:19] directions to staff?
[2:34:24] Mayor, I'd like to make a couple of
comments if I could. [clears throat]
[2:34:27] I um appreciate everybody's input and
and I think this has been a long process
[2:34:32] for several months and thank you for
your concerns and also your research
[2:34:36] that you've done. I think at this point
I'd like for everybody to realize we are
[2:34:40] not approving or allowing any data
centers tonight. Uh I would commend our
[2:34:45] staff on the excellent job they did on
research to improve the situation that
[2:34:49] Olive Branch could be in should someone
want to build a data center here. Uh I
[2:34:54] think it's a a great job of research. I
think it was well thought out and it
[2:34:58] definitely protects not only the city
but our citizens. And I would like to
[2:35:03] say this that um every morning most of
us get up at least I do and we kind of
[2:35:08] scroll through our phone and start
looking at stuff. Then we go to work and
[2:35:13] we create documents. We create records
that need to be stored somewhere. And on
[2:35:18] weekends and vacations, most of us take
this device and take pictures of our
[2:35:22] memories and we also like those stored
somewhere. So, I get it that we have
[2:35:27] concerns and they're rightfully taken to
do acknowledgement and I think this
[2:35:32] document puts us in a great position to
protect ourselves and I'd like to
[2:35:36] further add that we can also add to them
at a later point and further make them
[2:35:41] beneficial to the city and the citizens
as a whole if need be. Uh so mayor with
[2:35:46] with those comments if nobody else on
the board has any questions or comments
[2:35:51] I will tender a motion to approve the
zoning uh ordinance adjustments as
[2:35:56] presented.
>> Miss Hamilton comments. You have
[2:35:59] comments?
>> No.
[2:36:00] » Okay. Any other comments?
>> I I will make a comment that I'm sure
[2:36:06] not many people here know when when
people talk about data centers there. I
[2:36:11] hear a lot of comments and read a lot of
comments about how dangerous they are to
[2:36:15] the environment and to people in
general. I found out this weekend, I've
[2:36:20] been volunteering at the St. Jude
Classic this weekend and I I talked to
[2:36:24] somebody that works out there.
FedEx uh the St. Jude has got a data
[2:36:30] center right on their campus,
three stories, 65,000 square feet, which
[2:36:36] would be a tier two here.
If St. you doesn't think that it's
[2:36:41] dangerous to its patients who are there
with cancer, to the doctors and staff
[2:36:47] that work there, the families that are
staying on site don't think it's that
[2:36:53] dangerous to have a tier 2 data center
right there on their campus. I I know
[2:36:59] there's different levels of it and and
South Haven's been a nightmare,
[2:37:05] but all data centers are not evil
and and I know a lot of people see when
[2:37:10] they hear that word, they just cringe.
They don't want anything to do with it.
[2:37:14] They don't want one around at all, but
they're not all as bad as South Haven
[2:37:20] and other parts of the country that have
had really bad problems with them. And I
[2:37:23] think this ordinance protects us. It
limits the ability of a data center to
[2:37:29] come to autoation to just a very few
properties.
[2:37:33] If anybody saw an actual map of once
this gets done, they're going to be
[2:37:38] surprised at how few locations would
ever be able to have a data center here
[2:37:42] in the city of VA branch. So, I'm I'm
totally for this this ordinance tonight.
[2:37:48] Thank you. Anything additional for Mr.
Hart makes his motion and Mr. hard if
[2:37:53] you would consider in your motion to
change the verbiage to where it says all
[2:37:59] residential housing or residential not
single family multif family but all
[2:38:04] residential that's numbered
>> yeah sure it's it's in gentleman
[2:38:07] mentioned it uh earlier in his comments
it's subsection B one and then A through
[2:38:12] D where it addresses AR homes
>> uh and single family homes that language
[2:38:17] does need to be in my opinion cleaned up
a little bit um I would defer to
[2:38:21] planning staff as to the best language
for that.
[2:38:25] » Typically, u I don't think it's a change
that's of such substance that would
[2:38:29] prevent the board from being able to
move forward tonight if it chooses to do
[2:38:32] so.
>> But I do think that if there's a motion
[2:38:35] to approve that it include that uh
language uh to be addressed by planning
[2:38:40] just for clarity sake. Mayor, may I
mention one other thing?
[2:38:43] » Uh if the board were to approve the
ordinance tonight, uh the ordinance
[2:38:47] changes tonight. My recommendation is
that the board make those effective
[2:38:50] immediately um for public safety. You
have typically under state law
[2:38:56] ordinances are effective one month from
passage. Uh but given uh the that what
[2:39:02] could occur with a potential application
during the course of the ensuing month,
[2:39:07] my recommendation is that the board take
advantage of a state law provision that
[2:39:10] allows the board to say that ordinances
are effective immediately if that's
[2:39:14] necessary to preserve public safety. And
I think that would be wise move for the
[2:39:18] board tonight if the board's inclined to
approve the amendments.
[2:39:21] » Okay. Thank you,
>> Mr. Mayor. Accordingly, then I I think
[2:39:25] that's wise council. I appreciate I will
add those two things that uh on page
[2:39:30] seven of 29 that language in
subparagraphs A, B, and C be changed to
[2:39:35] reflect any
residents housing a family. Is that
[2:39:40] fair?
>> Yes.
[2:39:41] » Okay. Any residents housing a family.
>> That's right. for planning staff to to
[2:39:45] direct
>> to revise that language appropriately.
[2:39:47] » That's right.
>> Clean up a couple of the other
[2:39:49] » and then also I do think it is important
because nobody knows what may come in
[2:39:53] the next day or two that we do make this
effective tonight immediately.
[2:39:58] » Thank you,
>> Miss Hamilton.
[2:40:00] » Second.
>> Got a motion, Mr. Hart. Second, Miss
[2:40:04] Hamilton. Any more discussion?
All in favor?
[2:40:09] » All opposed?
Eyes have it. Thank you very much,
[2:40:13] planning staff, planning commission. I
know this has been at least four months
[2:40:17] of work and uh if it needs fine-tuning
later, so be it. But at this point, I
[2:40:21] feel like this is probably one of the
best ordinances in the state and thank
[2:40:25] you for the time and energy spent
putting it together.
[2:40:28] Next item,
[2:40:32] consideration of application for a
preliminary plat for Almondale Retreat
[2:40:37] subdivision submitted by Greg Smith of
Civil Link on behalf of property owners
[2:40:42] Dne Stovall, James Allen Stoval,
revocable trust, revocable living trust.
[2:40:47] The request is to create 86 single
family residential lots and three common
[2:40:51] open spaces from 50.87
plus or minus acres. The subject
[2:40:56] property is located on the south side of
the soda road at the Marshall County
[2:40:59] line approximately 0.86 plus or minus
miles east of Center Hill Road. This is
[2:41:04] in reference to the uh motion and and
vote already taken earlier on this land
[2:41:09] but staff report please.
>> Thank you mayor. The request before you
[2:41:14] consider a preliminary plat preliminary
not a final preliminary plat for the
[2:41:19] development of this 50.87 87 acres piece
of property which you approved the
[2:41:23] reszoning as a very first item tonight
from AR to R1. Um the property
[2:41:31] is served by the number of utilities.
There's a gas line along the Sodto road.
[2:41:35] Actually a water line has just been
added following the utilities expansion
[2:41:40] that the city is doing in that area. Um
other infrastructure elements are
[2:41:45] currently under consideration with
regard [snorts] to things like seaw
[2:41:48] water and gas. The applicant, this is
the preliminary plot. The applicant
[2:41:52] proposes to develop this in three
phases. So phase one is this area in
[2:41:59] green that would begin from the soda
road. So construction will begin from
[2:42:03] the soda road. It will have 30 lots in
phase one. You have a common open space
[2:42:08] recreation area here that will have the
lake or large stormwater detention area
[2:42:15] with a walking trail around it and a
gazebo. And phase two will connect that
[2:42:21] subdivision to the center here retreat
to the south and then that will have 32
[2:42:26] lots and phase three is this area here
in purple which will have 24 lots. So
[2:42:33] this is proposed to be developed in
three phases as shown. The planning
[2:42:37] commission reviewed this application at
its meeting on July 14, determined that
[2:42:42] the plaid meets all subdivision and
zoning requirements uh with the property
[2:42:48] have being reszoned to R1 and made that
approval subject to a number of
[2:42:53] conditions 1 through 13. Condition
number four emphasiding emphasizing that
[2:42:58] sidewalk improvements are required on
all the streets in the subdivision. So
[2:43:03] they have to construct sidewalks on all
the streets. Condition number six for
[2:43:07] final plat approval. The applicant will
submit declaration of covenants and
[2:43:12] restrictions which will impose a number
of conditions. One, the declaration
[2:43:17] language should include the intent to
impose a 2,000 heated square foot
[2:43:23] minimum house size and secondly minimum
75% brick content on all sides of
[2:43:30] buildings and address the garage
orientation that needs to be addressed
[2:43:35] at a final plat and presented to the
board of adan at final plat approval. Uh
[2:43:41] with regard to the other conditions, I
want to call attention to condition
[2:43:44] number 13. That piece of property
basically has been clear, you know,
[2:43:49] there are no trees standing out there.
Condition number 13 will require that
[2:43:52] the developer or the home builder will
plant 2 in to 2 and 1/2 in caliber trees
[2:43:58] in front of each lot. That concludes
staff's presentation. Thank you.
[2:44:04] » Thank you board. Any questions on the
staff report?
[2:44:10] Does applicant have anything else to
add?
[2:44:17] » Question about the application. Greg
Smith.
[2:44:26] » I guess it's going to be twotory houses.
What is it? You got to address the
[2:44:32] garage orientation.
>> That's basically to ensure that there's
[2:44:37] no front-facing garages. Uh if you look
on this on the plat that you have in
[2:44:42] front of you, uh it says that all roads
garages ought to be the side loaded.
[2:44:47] » Okay.
>> So that's
[2:44:49] » hoping you'd say [laughter]
>> 2,000 square feet minimum on the
[2:44:55] footprint. Correct.
>> Yes, sir.
[2:44:57] » Correct.
>> Great.
[2:45:01] Yep. Anything else?
[2:45:10] » I'll make a motion we approve it.
>> Motion, Mr. Collins, to approve as is.
[2:45:14] Is there a second?
>> Second.
[2:45:16] » Second, Mr. Gamage. All in favor?
>> All oppose? Motion carries. Thank you.
[2:45:21] » Thank you.
[2:45:25] Next item, consideration of application
for second revision of bridges at of
[2:45:30] Camp Creek phase 2 lot 12 submitted by
Sha Ski Ski Engineering on behalf of
[2:45:35] property owner Deepac Patel. The request
is to divide the existing 2.93 plus and
[2:45:41] minus acre lot 12 into two lots. The
subject property is zone C4, planned
[2:45:46] commercial district, and is located at
the east end of McGregor crossing,
[2:45:51] approximately 750 ft east of the
intersection of McGregor Crossing and
[2:45:55] East Bridges Drive. Report, please.
[2:46:04] Thank you. Yes, the applicant is
requesting to divide the
[2:46:09] uh divide one platted C4 lot into two
separate lots for commercial development
[2:46:13] at the eastern end of McGregor crossing
a private commercial road between
[2:46:18] Highway 302 and Camp Creek. No zoning
amendment is required as this proposal
[2:46:22] to subdivide is keeping within the
general scope of the project text and
[2:46:26] preliminary development plan for the
existing subdivision.
[2:46:30] And so we have the utilities and
transportation aspect shown here. Lot 12
[2:46:36] has access to water and gas from the
northern edge of lot 11. Sewer is
[2:46:41] available to lot 12 as well. McGregor
crossing is a private road that
[2:46:45] currently connects to lot 12.
And so here's the detail of the proposed
[2:46:52] plat. It's just a close-up screenshot of
the plat showing the lot to be
[2:46:57] subdivided. The proposed plat needs to
show a continuation of the 5-ft sidewalk
[2:47:03] drawn across the proposed lot 12A to
connect to lot 12B. A gas easement needs
[2:47:08] to be shown moving across the proposed
lots. And uh the proposed lot the
[2:47:14] proposed plat satisfies all other
requirements in the subdivision design
[2:47:18] standards.
And so for the planning commission
[2:47:22] recommendation um the planning
commission unanimously recommended
[2:47:27] approval of the request for the final
plat um however after the uh planning
[2:47:32] commission meeting planning staff um
relooked at the entire proposal and um
[2:47:39] we are making a note to u we're
suggesting to have number six and number
[2:47:45] seven replace number one and number two.
They're uh very similar. But number six,
[2:47:51] um the addition is we uh as I just
stated in that previous slide, um please
[2:47:57] provide a 5-ft sidewalk along the
entirety of the um McGregor crossing
[2:48:04] traversing that first proposed lot to
connect to that next proposed lot and
[2:48:09] then add a note to the plat stating each
lot will provide a 5- foot wide utility
[2:48:13] easement along each lot line. That
concludes presentation.
[2:48:18] » Thank you, Mr. Hacken Smith. Board, any
questions?
[2:48:22] » Does this mean we're not going to get
our anticipated Marriott Garden in
[2:48:26] hotel?
>> Um, if I may speak on it. Um,
[2:48:32] would that be okay?
>> I think we'd probably defer that till
[2:48:37] that actually comes up as an item.
>> Maybe Mr. Earhart could
[2:48:43] » question.
>> Y'all could speak. Y'all could speak
[2:48:45] offline. Question withdrawn.
>> I just don't want to put any business or
[2:48:50] any company in an awkward position.
Any other questions?
[2:49:05] Do we have the applicant here? Thank
Mr. Patel.
[2:49:13] » Yes, sir. And you may answer Mr. Hart's
question if you wish to, but uh
[2:49:18] any questions of the applicant?
>> Do you mind sharing this with sharing
[2:49:23] with us your intended usage of the two
lots?
[2:49:26] » Yes, sir. It's two hotels. We have one
Hilton uh and then one Element Weston.
[2:49:31] It's technically Weston Marriott.
Marriott purchased Weston.
[2:49:34] » Okay. Now, it's a proposed Hilton.
>> Yes, sir.
[2:49:37] » And and the other one
>> Oh, Marriott.
[2:49:39] » Marriott.
>> Marriott is
[2:49:41] » Marriott and Hilton. Okay.
>> Yes, sir. So now we get two for one.
[2:49:44] Correct.
>> Yes, sir. The secondary second property
[2:49:47] is uh it's actually be the first of his
kind in Mississippi. So it's uh we're
[2:49:51] really excited about the second one. But
first one we need to get the first one
[2:49:54] get started first and then we'll get the
second one. But yes, sir.
[2:49:58] » Well, if he was that bold, then I'm
going to ask is we're still getting our
[2:50:01] white tablecloth restaurants. [laughter]
>> Uh the second one has a chef on site.
[2:50:06] Let's just say that. Um it's boutique,
too. So it's pretty
[2:50:11] » great. Very good. Thank you for the good
news.
[2:50:13] » Yes, sir.
>> I
[2:50:16] » questions.
>> I do have a question if this is the time
[2:50:20] to ask.
>> We just I want to know if you needed to
[2:50:22] add anything else that wasn't covered by
the staff report.
[2:50:24] » Oh, no, sir.
>> If there's no questions from the board,
[2:50:27] then um Thank you. You may be seated.
>> All right. Thank you.
[2:50:34] » Any questions or motions?
>> That's easy. I'll make a motion to
[2:50:38] approve.
>> Motion to approve by Mr. Dear Hart, is
[2:50:41] there a second?
>> Second.
[2:50:43] » Second, Mr. Collins. All in favor?
>> All oppose? Motion carries.
[2:50:50] » Next item, consideration
[clears throat]
[2:50:53] of application for first revision of lot
three of the second revision of the GD
[2:50:58] Deckman subdivision submitted by Sha
Ski, Ski Engineering on behalf of Peggy
[2:51:04] Poff and Lisa Marie Riceinger, property
owners. The request is to divide the
[2:51:09] existing 5.45 plus or minus acre lot
three into two lots. The subject
[2:51:14] property is zone AR agricultural
residential district and is located on
[2:51:18] the northwest corner of College Road and
Maroy Farms Drive. Report, please.
[2:51:26] Thank you. Yes. The property proposed to
be subdivided is one AR lot as shown in
[2:51:32] the yellow dotted line on the north side
of College Road between Highway 305 and
[2:51:37] Alexander Road.
And so um here's a screenshot um of the
[2:51:44] proposed subdivision. Um the lot which
is being proposed for subdivision is
[2:51:49] listed as lot three and final plat of
first revision GD Deckman subdivision.
[2:51:55] The proposed subdivision will not change
the existing perimeter of the existing
[2:51:59] lot 3. The proposal will only split the
property into a 2acre lot 3A and a 3.45
[2:52:05] acre lot 3B. A 50- foot wide ingress
egress easement will be provided to
[2:52:10] allow public road access to and from lot
3A and lot one. The proposed plat
[2:52:16] satisfies all other requirements in the
subdivi subdivision design standards and
[2:52:22] um the planning commission unanimously
recommended approval and that concludes
[2:52:26] the presentation.
>> Thank you Mr. Hacken Smith. Any
[2:52:30] questions board or motions?
Unless the applicant has something to
[2:52:37] add.
[2:52:42] » I make a motion. Make a motion to wake
him up. I'll make a motion to pass.
[2:52:47] Motion to pass by Mr. Collins. Is there
a second?
[2:52:50] » Second.
>> Second, Miss Hamilton. All in favor?
[2:52:54] » All opposed? Motion carries. Next item.
Consideration of application for a final
[2:53:01] plat of Shirley Homes subdivision
submitted by Greg Russell
[2:53:05] Civil Source LLC on behalf of property
owner Scott Lawhorn. The request is to
[2:53:11] create four commercial and industrial
lots totaling 10.96 plus or minus acres.
[2:53:17] The subject property is on C2 highway
commercial district and M1 light
[2:53:21] industrial district and is located on
the northwest corner of Frontage Road
[2:53:26] and Exchange Drive known as 8263
Frontage Road. Report please.
[2:53:34] » The parcel proposed to be subdivided is
currently unplatted. There are five
[2:53:39] addresses currently used on the parcel.
The applicant is requesting to create
[2:53:45] four lots while expanding a small
portion of the s southern boundary of
[2:53:50] the parcel in order to contain an
existing parking area. And if I get the
[2:53:55] pointer right, it's
right there.
[2:53:59] Um, so water, gas, and sewer access are
available to the current parcel. Uh,
[2:54:07] Exchange Drive is a private roadway and
will serve as access for 8279A
[2:54:14] and 8279B.
And so here I have a screenshot um
[2:54:21] zoomed into the proposed lot to be um
subdivided. So the proposed plat shows a
[2:54:27] 31 foot wide ingress egress easement
across Exchange Drive to allow access to
[2:54:34] lot three since lot four is drawn to
connect to frontage road. And so looking
[2:54:39] at all of the other subdivision
requirements, the proposed plat
[2:54:43] satisfies all reviewed requirements in
the subdivision design standards.
[2:54:49] And so with this one, the planning
commission also unanimously recommended
[2:54:53] approval. And that concludes the
presentation.
[2:54:57] » Thank you board. Any questions,
[2:55:04] » comments or motions?
[2:55:10] » Motion to approve by Mr. Wallace. Is
there a second?
[2:55:14] » Second by Mr. Dickerson. All in favor?
>> All oppose? Motion carries.
[2:55:19] Next item.
>> Oh, Mr. Russell.
[2:55:24] May I ask something on the last uh item,
please?
[2:55:28] The the reason that we're doing this
plot is because Frell has come in and uh
[2:55:34] uh taken over the Let me make sure Let
me make sure I understand. Are you
[2:55:39] asking about the one prior to this?
>> The one y'all just voted on?
[2:55:44] » Homes. The homes plat
>> the homes.
[2:55:47] » Yes. Okay.
>> So,
[2:55:50] » you voted on it before I before I could
ask you. So,
[2:55:53] It may be inappropriate for me to ask.
>> Well, I did call on you, but we didn't
[2:55:58] quite make a contact with each other.
>> My hear my herinades are in the shop, so
[2:56:02] I can't hear anything.
>> All right, I'm going to have to ask the
[2:56:05] legal advice on this one. What What
particular do you want that they have?
[2:56:08] They approved it, but you want something
else now or
[2:56:11] » maybe. All right, tell us what it is and
I'll let the attorney advise whether or
[2:56:16] not we can go down that path without
having to recall take a second.
[2:56:21] » Um, Fereral Grass is moving into the two
buildings on the north side. Uh, and
[2:56:27] they're using that for their uh
residential home fuel tanks.
[2:56:32] » Okay. Um and and what created the need
for this plat is the fact that they want
[2:56:40] they Feral Gas wants to build a dock out
in the back of the yard, a concrete dock
[2:56:46] that's raised 4 feet and has uh what I
call a metal carport over the top of it.
[2:56:54] And that's for their uh employees safety
and and keep them out of the weather and
[2:56:59] so forth while they fill these trucks.
Um, Frell is actually anxious to get
[2:57:06] started on this even though we're just a
little bit of ways from recording it.
[2:57:12] Um, I was going to ask that they be
allowed to go ahead and start
[2:57:15] construction before the plat's recorded.
>> That is really a process question that
[2:57:21] ever since Dr. Song has been in position
has been coming up. So, I don't want to
[2:57:26] overrule his consistency. I mean, that's
really administrative. It's not
[2:57:31] something the board would approve, but I
would say won't we take that up with Dr.
[2:57:35] Song and see I don't want to upsurp his
authority when he has gone down the path
[2:57:41] of they got to be recorded before the
starts and I know not all cities operate
[2:57:45] the same. I understand that but that's
the way you're operating now if I'm
[2:57:50] understanding right. Am I missing the
point? Is that
[2:57:53] » Yeah, you're correct, mayor. And I think
I had responded to his email on this
[2:57:58] particular request. So that's something
that we can discuss and handle
[2:58:01] administratively. It does not really
affect the plot.
[2:58:04] » It wouldn't be a board decision. It' be
an operational item, procedural item. So
[2:58:10] the board wouldn't make that decision.
You and Dr. You and Dr. Song would try
[2:58:15] to work that out.
>> Okay.
[2:58:16] » Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
[2:58:18] » Huh.
[2:58:22] Number five, consideration of
application for the third revision of
[2:58:26] Ross Road Plaza subdivision submitted by
Sha Skine Ski Engineering on behalf of
[2:58:32] property owner Marvin Bolan. The request
is to divide the existing 4.80 80 plus
[2:58:37] or minus acre lot one into three lots
subject property zone C2 Commercial
[2:58:42] Highway District and is located at the
southeast corner of Ross Road in West
[2:58:46] Sandage Road known as 5950 Ross Road.
Staff report please. Mr. Hawkins Smith.
[2:58:54] » The parcel being proposed for
subdivision is outlined in yellow and
[2:58:59] has frontage on West Sandage Road and
Ross Road. This lot is currently platted
[2:59:04] as lot one in the one lot second
revision Ross Road Plaza subdivision and
[2:59:10] as you can see there are multiple
addresses on that singular lot. Um the
[2:59:14] current parcel has access to water,
sewer and gas. The current parcel has
[2:59:19] five addresses assigned to different
structures on site with three different
[2:59:24] um sorry with three driveways accessing
Ross Road and two driveways accessing
[2:59:30] West Standage Road.
And so here I have the detail of the
[2:59:35] proposed plat. The proposed plat shows
the single lot being split into a plus
[2:59:40] or minus.87
acre lot one and a plus or minus 1.39
[2:59:45] acre lot 2 and a plus or minus 2.53 acre
lot 3. The required utility easements
[2:59:51] are drawn. The front building setback
lines are drawn with all existing
[2:59:56] buildings shown to exist behind the
50oot setback. Each new lot will have
[3:00:00] direct access to a public road with one
with lot one adjoining West Sandage Road
[3:00:06] and lots two and three adjoining Ross
Road. This proposed plat meets all
[3:00:11] requirements listed in the subdivision
design standards.
[3:00:16] And so uh planning commission um also
unanimously recommended approval of this
[3:00:22] proposal. And that concludes the
presentation.
[3:00:27] » Thank you Andrew. Any questions board or
any comments?
[3:00:31] » This is u new to me when you take a
contiguous piece of property with
[3:00:36] several buildings on it subdivide and
this is more of a question for Mr. D I
[3:00:41] guess in planning if if this were to
pass and the owner wants to demolish a
[3:00:47] building and build something else it
does not preclude them from meeting the
[3:00:51] permitted use by rights and those
things. Correct.
[3:00:54] » That that's correct. I mean, the
permitted uses are set by the ordinance
[3:00:57] that if they demolish existing
structures and build something that's a
[3:01:00] permitted use within the zone, then
that's allowed.
[3:01:03] » Okay.
>> I've just never seen people divide their
[3:01:07] property like this that's already
existing.
[3:01:09] » But the prior application was was
similar. It had existing structures on
[3:01:13] it and was previously unplatted and they
were
[3:01:16] » um adding interior lot lines to
separate. Sometimes you see that if
[3:01:20] somebody's just wanting to convey a
portion of a of a parcel that's
[3:01:23] unplatted, they can plat it and that way
they can sell lot one rather than
[3:01:27] selling a meets and bounds description,
something of that nature.
[3:01:31] » Okay. Just
>> so there it's basically like several
[3:01:33] businesses on the corner of Ross and
Sandage right behind the old TJ's Market
[3:01:39] and uh they just kept putting build
businesses on the man's land and he rent
[3:01:44] him a spot basically and
I think comes to the point that they
[3:01:49] just want to split them up.
>> Okay.
[3:01:52] » But typically we don't include building
footprints on the plat anyway. The plat
[3:01:57] just is setting forth the dimensions of
the lot, not the structures that may be
[3:02:00] on it.
>> It it doesn't address setbacks or
[3:02:05] anything.
>> No, the the plat should address setbacks
[3:02:07] and they should be shown plus the zoning
ordinance. Uh so you have a 50-foot
[3:02:12] building setback shown on the Ross Road
frontage.
[3:02:15] » Okay.
uh 50 foot building setback shown on the
[3:02:18] west sandage frontage. So
>> look like they're all real close
[3:02:20] together
>> right
[3:02:22] » now. You would have some pre-existing
structures, not I'm not commenting on
[3:02:26] this one, but hypothetically you could
have a plat that gets recorded and you
[3:02:30] could have some old structures that
would be legal non-conforming uses
[3:02:35] because they pre-existed. They might
have been in the
[3:02:37] » I understand that, but I didn't know
what he redrawing them knew where they
[3:02:42] would have to
conform or not conform.
[3:02:47] » Typically, they would
>> I guess we don't let them.
[3:02:50] » Well, typically we would allow the
grandfather that in.
[3:02:53] » Okay.
>> Particularly if you had a house for
[3:02:55] example, there probably some setback
issues here in Oldtown for example or
[3:03:00] Maywood for example where you could have
setback issues.
[3:03:03] » I understand that
didn't know about redrawing it.
[3:03:08] » Okay.
>> Thank you.
[3:03:09] » Any other questions or motion?
>> Make a motion to approve. Wallace.
[3:03:14] Motion to approve.
>> Second
[3:03:18] to second. Collins. All in favor?
>> I.
[3:03:21] » All opposed. Motion carries. Next item.
Consideration of application for the
[3:03:27] final plat for Redeemer Baptist Church.
Submitted by Rusty Norville Civil
[3:03:32] Engineering Solutions LLC on behalf of
property owner Redeemer Baptist Church.
[3:03:37] The request is to create a single lot of
2.35 plus or minus acres. The subject
[3:03:43] property is zoned R2 single family
residential district and is located on
[3:03:47] the south side of Katherine Drive
approximately 300 ft southwest of the
[3:03:51] intersection of Katherine Drive and
Highway 178 known as 50/50 Katherine
[3:03:56] Drive. Report please.
>> Thank you. Mayor Adam before you is a
[3:04:01] request to consider platting this. So an
existing parasel that's Baptist church
[3:04:06] on that piece of property and all
they're requesting to do is essentially
[3:04:11] just to plot it as one lot. It has
buildings on it. Water lines, seaw wall
[3:04:16] lines, gas line, gas lines are available
to the property and I think the church
[3:04:22] has the intent in future to do some
expansion on that particular site and to
[3:04:27] be able to do that they need to obtain a
building permit. To obtain a building
[3:04:30] permit, you have to plat the the
property based on city regulations. This
[3:04:35] is the plat as proposed. There are no
sidewalks along Katherine Drive and as
[3:04:39] said the applicant is requesting a
waiver of sidewalk requirements. The
[3:04:43] planning commission review this
application at its August 11 meeting
[3:04:47] unanimously recommended approval subject
to these conditions 1 to five. Condition
[3:04:52] number four being that the requirement
for the property owner to construct
[3:04:55] sidewalks along the Katherine Drive
street frontage of the proposed lot is
[3:04:59] waved. That concludes staff's
presentation. Thank you.
[3:05:03] » Thank you, Dr. Song. Any questions
forward?
[3:05:07] » Is this the old Fair Baptist Church?
>> Yes. Yes, ma'am.
[3:05:12] » And the applicant is here. Mr.
Norville's here. Come forward, please.
[3:05:20] I know you hate that we didn't put this
before the data center, but I'm sure you
[3:05:24] wanted to hang out with us for a while,
didn't you?
[3:05:26] » Part of the game. Rusty Norville Civil
Engineering Solutions 317 West Market in
[3:05:31] Dyresburg, Tennessee.
>> And the question was, is it the previous
[3:05:35] church of
>> Old Fair Haven Baptist? All I know
[3:05:39] that's
>> as Redeemer Baptist. I mean, that's all
[3:05:41] I know it is
>> on Katherine Drive. So
[3:05:46] » I guess it changes a lot though,
>> right? I think it used to
[3:05:53] » maybe. So I don't know that it's um it's
it's never been platted before.
[3:05:58] » It's never been Okay.
>> It's never been platted. So
[3:06:01] » Okay.
>> Well, I'll let Mr. Nor speak to what
[3:06:05] their plans may be, but
>> Do you know the plans? I don't.
[3:06:09] » They just want it all platted as one.
>> Yeah. just they need it planned and in
[3:06:13] case they want to move forward with some
building additions or revisions.
[3:06:17] » Okay.
[3:06:20] » No more, no less. It's already there.
>> Yep.
[3:06:23] » Okay.
>> Is there a motion on this one or
[3:06:27] question?
>> Motion to approve.
[3:06:30] » Dickerson. Motion to approve. Second,
please. Is there a second? Rather,
[3:06:34] » Miss Hamilton second. All in favor?
>> All opposed? Motion carries. Dismissed.
[3:06:39] Thank you.
Item seven, consideration of application
[3:06:43] for final plant for DInnesota County
Schools Career Technical Center East
[3:06:47] Subdivision submitted by Jay Kaufman,
Allen, and Hostel Incorporated on behalf
[3:06:52] of property owner of DInnesota County
Schools. The request is to create a
[3:06:55] single lot of 42.50 plus or minus acres
to be used for the career technical
[3:07:01] center. Subject property is zoned AR
agriculture residential and is located
[3:07:06] on the east side of Craft Road in the
southeast corner of the future expansion
[3:07:11] of West Sandage Road and Craft Road. Dr.
Song,
[3:07:15] » Mayor Adam, before you is a request to
consider a single lot subdivision for
[3:07:21] the Duro County Schools Kari Tech
Center. This will be lot one 42.5 acres
[3:07:28] as you did mention. couple of I think
just two months ago, one or two months
[3:07:32] ago, you approved the reszoning of this
property to a Arizona arming district
[3:07:37] from PUB to a Arizona district to allow
for this career center to move forward.
[3:07:42] Gas lines are available in the area.
Water lines would need to be provided to
[3:07:47] the property in order for it to move
forward. This is the plan as proposed.
[3:07:51] It meets the zoning regulations for the
AR zoning district. It meets subdivision
[3:07:56] regulations.
The planning commission did review this
[3:08:00] application at its August 11 meeting. It
approved it subject to a number of
[3:08:05] conditions one to five. There is a
change that I wish to make on condition
[3:08:10] number one. Please. Condition number one
as recommended by the planning
[3:08:14] commission stipulated that except for
the extension of public water to the
[3:08:17] property which shall be the
responsibility of the city of Olive
[3:08:20] Branch all other improvements shall be
the responsibility of the developer. We
[3:08:24] propose to change that or to revise that
condition to rather read all
[3:08:30] improvements shall be the responsibility
of the developer except to the extent
[3:08:35] that the city of Olive Branch satisfies
its commitment up to uh $500,000 for
[3:08:42] infrastructure improvements. I think
that is the nature of the commitment
[3:08:46] that the city has made to this
particular development as opposed to
[3:08:49] tying it down to just water.
And then lastly,
[3:08:54] uh,
with the fate of the do innovation
[3:08:59] district kind of hanging in the air, the
board pushed table application to
[3:09:03] September 1st that may affect how
sidewalks or the trail system is
[3:09:09] constructed in front in the street
frontage of this particular piece of
[3:09:13] property. This condition number four
basically says if the Dudo Innovation
[3:09:18] District project were approved then the
trail network would not come right up to
[3:09:23] the frontage of this property because it
will basically cross craft in what will
[3:09:27] be the new nail uh road before this
particular lot and so the trail will not
[3:09:34] need to be constructed. If the Dutto
Innovation District were not approved,
[3:09:38] then the applicant would basically need
to extend that trail up in front of this
[3:09:43] property and that will basically be like
the trail head. The parking lot will
[3:09:46] kind of save as a trail head to to close
the loop as far as that particular tray
[3:09:51] system is concerned. That's what
condition number 462 address. That
[3:09:56] concludes staff's presentation. Thank
you.
[3:09:59] » Thank you. Is anyone here on behalf of
the application anything to add, sir?
[3:10:09] No, nothing more to add. Thank you.
>> Okay. Any any questions, board of the
[3:10:13] applicant? I know we're glad to see it
get started.
[3:10:16] » Absolutely.
>> No questions. Thank you.
[3:10:20] » Thank you.
[3:10:24] » Mr. Wallace, motion to approve as
presented. Is there a second?
[3:10:28] » Second, Miss Alder. All in favor?
>> All oppose? Motion carries. staff has
[3:10:33] asked that board uh continue weedy lots
to the first meeting in September. Um
[3:10:39] what the date is?
>> September 1st.
[3:10:42] » Oh, September one. If there's a motion
to continue it to motion second to
[3:10:47] continue to September the 1st. There's
some things staff needs to work out with
[3:10:51] these lots and they've just asked to
continue it.
[3:10:55] » Motion to Wallace. Motion to September
one. Is there a second?
[3:11:00] » Second.
>> Second, Mr. Hart. All in favor? I.
[3:11:03] » All oppose. Motion carries.
Consideration of bids received August
[3:11:09] the 10th, 2026 for the public works
supplies for FY27.
[3:11:15] » Request the table September.
>> Okay.
[3:11:18] » Request to table this one to September
one as well. If the motion is second to
[3:11:23] do that.
>> So move.
[3:11:26] » Gamage Wallace. All in favor? I.
>> All opposed. Motion carries.
[3:11:32] public hearing date for the budget
hearing to provide the general public
[3:11:35] with an opportunity to comment on the
taxing and spending plan incorporated in
[3:11:40] the proposed budget for the city of
Olive Branch for fiscal year beginning
[3:11:43] October the 1st, 2026 and ended
September the 30th, 2027. This public
[3:11:49] hearing date was set for August the 4th.
Any public comments regarding the city's
[3:11:57] budget and proposed notice? I guess it
was not proposed but noticed in the
[3:12:02] paper.
[3:12:06] Okay, we don't need to give a high level
overview. This just for comments only,
[3:12:10] right? Okay,
>> if you wanted to. It's mainly the
[3:12:13] public's opportunity.
>> If the public's has any concerns about
[3:12:17] the city's budget,
I'm open for your comments or questions
[3:12:22] or input. It's
49 million. I don't I know you don't
[3:12:29] want me to go line by outline, but it's
149 million for next year.
[3:12:38] Okay. Over 52% for public safety and the
expense side uh for police, fire, and
[3:12:43] EMS and just a lot of other various
costs. But uh if there's no public
[3:12:49] comments, I won't belittle it and keep
you here all night talking about that
[3:12:54] budget. I know Jason, Mr. May is ready
to get it passed. He's only been working
[3:12:58] on it two months. Our CFO.
Okay.
[3:13:04] And public comments is hereby public
comment section is hereby closed.
[3:13:11] » Nothing required. I want to make sure
we're not missing somebody. You know,
[3:13:16] crumper crumpers were here for the
award, I think. But are we missing
[3:13:19] anybody else that needed to speak with
the board tonight? I just want to make
[3:13:23] sure that our guests that have been here
all night. Have I missed anybody?
[3:13:26] Anything that we need to talk about?
Okay.
[3:13:32] Okay. If there's anything I'm missing,
let me know. If not, we're getting ready
[3:13:35] to go in executive session and then
we'll go in private session after that.
[3:13:39] » We got new business.
>> Oh, we got another business.
[3:13:41] » All right. I'm ready to go. Let's do the
new business. [laughter]
[3:13:46] » You got six.
>> Okay. I got you. Very good. I got you.
[3:13:50] Very good. They're for new business. My
bad. Let's let's go to the uh new
[3:13:54] business consideration recommendation to
approve change order CO226
[3:13:59] on a contract with Leman Roberts Company
in the additive amount of 108,894
[3:14:05] increasing the contract from 2,14868250
to2,257,576.50
[3:14:13] 50 cents for the project referred to as
the term bid contract for the annual
[3:14:18] full depth reclamation and asphalt
overlay. Mr. Swims.
[3:14:23] » Yes, sir. We had um some cost savings on
the state line portion of the overlay
[3:14:27] projects that we've been doing this year
uh in excess of $300,000. And so we've
[3:14:33] got term bids with this first um new
business. Item number one um is for the
[3:14:38] asphalt portion that we're trying to
take and utilize some of that money for
[3:14:42] some of the oldtown area. Um and so this
one particular um change order here for
[3:14:48] um 108,894
will basically take care of the asphalt
[3:14:53] overlay for Kerr Road in the Oldtown
area. So we are recommending we move
[3:14:57] forward with that.
[3:15:02] » Questions or comments or motions? Make a
motion to approve.
[3:15:07] » Ear heart motion. Is there a second?
>> Second.
[3:15:11] » Second. Collins. All in favor?
>> All opposed? Eyes have it. Consider item
[3:15:15] two. Consideration of recommendation to
approve change order number CO326
[3:15:21] on contract with Leman Roberts Company
in the additive amount of $76,500.
[3:15:27] increasing the contract from 1,7557,442
[3:15:32] to1,833,942
[3:15:36] for the project referred to as the term
bid contract for annual surface
[3:15:41] treatment.
So this [clears throat] one is basically
[3:15:44] part of this part B of the of the
overlay. So this is the patching part.
[3:15:49] So the the four roads that we're looking
at that are going to be affected by the
[3:15:53] patching is going to be um Kerr Kerr
Street I guess um depot and Pigeon Roost
[3:16:00] and then Parkwood. So those will all
have patching that'll be associated with
[3:16:04] this. So we are asking that we approve
this to uh and the term contract term
[3:16:08] contract with layman Roberts.
[3:16:13] » Questions or motions?
>> Motion to approve.
[3:16:16] » Hamilton motion. Wallace second. All in
favor? I.
[3:16:18] » All oppose. Eyes have it. Consideration
of recommendation to approve change
[3:16:22] order number one on the contract with
Vance Brothers Incorporated in the
[3:16:26] additive amount of $103,930
983.60
[3:16:32] increasing the contract from $811,738.60
[3:16:38] to95,722.20
[3:16:42] for the project referred to as pavement
preservation. Mr. plans.
[3:16:46] » This would be a second um contract. This
is Vance Brothers, not Lingland Roberts.
[3:16:51] This is where we're doing our pavement
preservation. So on Parkwood, we're
[3:16:55] actually going to be doing the patching
and then we'll be coming back with a
[3:16:57] double micro on that road. So this is
just uh the cost associated with
[3:17:02] increasing contract change order number
one for a contract with Vance Brothers.
[3:17:09] » Any qu motion by Mr. Dixon to approve?
Is there a second?
[3:17:14] » Second, Miss Alders. All in favor?
>> I.
[3:17:16] » All oppose. Eyes have it. Consideration
of recommendation to approve
[3:17:20] construction engineering and inspection
services contract with Civil Link
[3:17:24] Incorporated in the amount of $228,47463
[3:17:30] for the project referred to as a state
line at Davidson intersection
[3:17:33] improvements.
>> Yes, sir. Y'all recall this is the um
[3:17:37] installation of a signal and the improve
and actually the lane widening at
[3:17:41] Davidson and Stateline Road. Uh we're
getting fairly close. This is going to
[3:17:44] be the construction engineering and
inspection portion of the contract
[3:17:48] that's required by MDOT for us to have
that in place before we move forward
[3:17:52] with um um the next phase going into
construction. So, we have reviewed it
[3:17:57] and we agree that uh uh this is a
reasonable amount. MD dots been in
[3:18:03] agreement with it as well. So, we're
asking for approval tonight.
[3:18:07] » Mr. Swims, one question on that. Did we
ask for or approve a traffic signal or
[3:18:13] is it going to be four stop signs with
the flashing?
[3:18:16] » It's going to be a traffic signal.
>> The actual signal. Okay.
[3:18:21] » Thank you, sir. I'll make a motion to
approve.
[3:18:23] » Motion by your heart. Is there a second?
>> Second.
[3:18:26] » Second. Hamilton. All in favor?
>> All oppose? Motion carries. And now I
[3:18:30] recognize why the other two guests are
here with us. So, I'm slowly connecting.
[3:18:35] It's just been a long day. Consideration
of recommendation to accept Sigma Health
[3:18:39] dental and vision insurance proposals
received for fiscal year 2627.
[3:18:47] Mr. May, anything to add to that?
No sir, I would just say that
[3:18:55] we've got quotes from Sigma basically
same provided now be no decrease in
[3:19:04] benefits
were also solicited from Blue Cross Blue
[3:19:10] Shield United.
[3:19:14] We use those quotes to negotiate with
them.
[3:19:25] » Thank you.
>> Motion to approve by Mr. Wallace. Is
[3:19:30] there a second?
>> Second.
[3:19:33] » Second. Mr. Earhart. All in favor?
>> All opposed? Eyes have it.
[3:19:37] » And I just want to commend those two for
the work they did. That's a lot of
[3:19:41] wrangling and wrestling and I know what
it takes. So, thank you for your efforts
[3:19:44] there working with Jason, too.
>> You've had some You've had some
[3:19:49] experience doing that, Mr. Hart. A
little bit experience.
[3:19:52] » Understood. With Yes. Thank you very
much.
[3:19:56] » That's not a one-day process, is it?
That does take a while. So, thank you.
[3:20:01] Consideration of recommendation to
approve change order number two on the
[3:20:05] contract with Phillips Contracting
Company Incorporated in additive amount
[3:20:09] of $35,146
increasing the contract amount from
[3:20:14] 2,859,945
[3:20:17] to $2,895,91
[3:20:21] for the project referred to as apron
rehabilitation phase 2. Mr. swims.
[3:20:27] » As y'all may recall, um, last month we
actually did a change order that was
[3:20:31] affecting a different area. So, this is
some of the same type of work where they
[3:20:35] did apron rehabilitation work and damage
some of the electrical affecting
[3:20:39] different hangers. So, uh, moving to a
different area of the airport. We are
[3:20:42] requesting that uh that uh y'all approve
this uh this change order for this um
[3:20:48] electrical issue to be resolved.
>> Thank you.
[3:20:55] Questions or motions?
>> Motion to approve.
[3:20:58] » Mr. Gamage. Motion to approve. Is there
a second?
[3:21:03] » Second, Mr. Dickerson. All in favor?
>> I.
[3:21:07] » All oppose. Eyes have it. Is there a
motion to leave regular session with the
[3:21:11] intention of going into executive
session?
[3:21:14] » Mr. Wallace. Motion. Is there a second?
>> Second. Miss Aldidge. All in favor?
[3:21:20] » I.
>> All oppose. We are out of regular
[3:21:22] session. Is there a motion to go into
executive session to discuss executive
[3:21:26] session items as listed 1 through 7?
>> So move.
[3:21:31] » Motion for Mr. Earhart.
>> Second.
[3:21:33] » Second, Mr. Wallace. All in favor?
>> All oppose. We are in executive session.