[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.

Board of Aldermen Meeting 8/18/2026 @cityofob

Transcript