Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

Thank you God for this day that you have given us as we come to be about the cannibis. We ask that you will bless us in all decision that we make. In your name we pray. We say together. Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Motion to approve uh meetings from May. So move move and properly second. All in favor have it. So it is site plan T. T table. Motion to table. Move the properly second. All in favor sign I. Eyes have it. Motion to open public hearing. So move second motion and properly second. All in favor? Eyes have it. Alicia Matthews. Good morning.

My name is Alicia Matthews and I'm the founder of Steps Academy Learning Center. I'm asking for zoning approval to bring a small child care program to Farm Haven. This program will support ages 5 through 10 with tutoring, homework help, and a mentorship in a safe, structured environment. This program is not just about academics, but it's also about community. I want to serve local families by giving their children a safe place to grow, learn, and be supported. I am committed to being a good neighbor, respectful of the noise, traffic, and safety. My goal is to strengthen the community of Farm Haven and not to disrupt it. Thank you for your time and consideration. Any questions? I have some questions. What age group did you say? 5 to 10. Um, on this what you're asking is conditional use for daycare center on this particular lot. Correct. And you're asking right now there are two houses on that lot. Correct. Are you going to use those houses? One is in use and the other one is just a storage. Well, I use it for storage. Storage. You're going to use it storage. What's the use of the house? The first one. I live in that first house. That's your house. Yes. Okay. All right. All right. And the you your intent is to build a child care facility to the side of that house. Correct. Okay. 480 square feet of 12 by 40. Correct. To accommodate about 10 to 15 students. Okay. Uh in that facility, will there be bathrooms and hallways, kitchen, whatever? Yes, it will be. Yes. All right. And then do you have any idea

of the outside play area? Yes. How big it it will be? Um about 500 square feet. Okay. And that can be adjusted if needed. So I can kind of go by the bylaws. All right. So you come under the health department rules for daycare center and for septic system. Yes. All right. Um, what type septic system do you have currently? The um the residential, not particularly sure. There's not public sewer water and sewer out there. You're probably on a water association number one. Correct. Secondly, your septic system. Is it a septic tank or septic treatment plant or right now it's a septic tank? A septic tank. Okay. Um, would you know if you have easement on the adjacent land for the fuel line of that septic tank. I'm not sure. All right. Reason I'm asking all these questions, your health department requires two acres for a septic system and this parcel is I think 93 less slightly less than one acre. Uh, have you talked to the health department about any of this? I have not. All right. I think you're going to need to do that. Um, I don't think they're going to allow you to do this. Okay. Um, I'm not sure about that, but I think you need to talk to them. Have you talked to them also about the requirements for a daycare center? Yes, ma'am. I have. All right. So, you have to have 35 square feet per child. Correct. And the play area has to be 75 square feet per child. All right. So,

what is your capacity? You're thinking about the other capacity? Uh, no more than 15. How many? No more than 15. No more than 15. Your 480 facility will only accommodate probably nine. Okay, I understand that. So, and then um your outdoor play area will accommodate maybe less than that if it's only 500 square feet. So, um I think you've got some questions that you need to get answered from the health department first. Okay. And for that reason, I would like to uh table this. So, I make a mo a mo motion that we table this until you get these answers and we'll be glad to help you with any of questions, anything you need to work on. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. You got a motion on the floor. Do you have room to expand? I definitely have room to expand. You do? Okay. Uh let me make another point that I we need to cl clarify. This is in an A1 district a A1 zoning district and you're asking for conditional use. All right. A1 also requires two acres. So now she's changing the use. Um and in A1 you cannot expand a non-conforming use. You can't add on expand. You can take away but you can't add on. So, she's also facing that. Um, Miss McCarti, the regulations in there do do allow it to go down to one acre and lots of record are up to the health department. This was a a prior deed

prior to our So, we could give her a zoning variance maybe to allow her to expand on a non-conforming lot. Well, it's going to be based on the the lot is conforming because the the lot we can go down to one acre in an A1 in an A1. Okay. But it's going to be based on the health department. If the health department does not approve it, then it it won't happen. Right. And the health department did say that I would have to go through you all first and then come to them and they would take this to them. Okay. and see and see what the you mean. Of course, I I think you have vacant land around you might could purchase if you needed to, but but anyway, I would go there first. Yes, ma'am. Okay. But they did say that I would have to go through zoning first. So, I'm just kind of following suit like trying to go step by step as So, they send you to us. Yes. Because they said the first step would be zoning. They said go through zoning and then come to us. Okay. So, you've got a motion on the floor that's been seconded right now. Um, assuming that you still want to move forward with tableabling this. Uh, but based on the representation that she's just made that the health department has told her to come here first. Uh, what you could do should you so be inclined would be now entertain a substitute motion to do whatever you want to do, which sounds like maybe there's some thinking that this would be approved condition on approval from the health department if if all of your other answers have been put. I'm not telling you how to vote. I'm not suggesting that. Just giving you your options

or you can move forward with a vote on your motion to take. So, you say we can go down to one acre, correct? Sounds like All right. I I'll You want to amend your motion to for condition approval conditions on health department approval? Exactly. Okay. So that's the substitute motion. Is there a second to that? Second. There's been motion and prop second with the substitute motion. All in favor? I have it. So it is. All right. Thank you, Miss Matthews. Uh you will still have to go through site plan approval if this gets through the health department. Okay. On the construction of the okay the building and come back here. Okay. All right. Thank you. Robert Lloyd. Uh good morning. I'm Bob Lloyd. Uh I'm purchasing Movie Town RV Park at the end of the month and uh additional 20 acres that adjoins it to the east and we're request requesting a uh conditional use to expand the RV park on that 20 acres. Are there any questions that I can answer? You already have an existing building there. approach. Yeah, this is the existing adjacent to it. Road is out here in the back

questions. Any opposition? I entertain a motion. I move that we would accept the petition request. Second. It's been moved and properly second. All in favor? Eyes have it. Thank you very much, Ty Carter. Uh my name is Brandon Johnson. I'm representing McMaster Associates who's hired by Todd uh Todd Carter. Um he's looking to reszone two uh parcels to build a 15 lot subdivision. You say 15 lots. Yes, 15. Yes, ma'am. What size houses? That would be a question for the developer. The number I've heard is around 3,000. Just to be clear, you I say Mr. Carter is on here twice for our items number five and six. Uh and you just said two parcels. We're going to need to take those one at a time. Okay. Yes, sir. Assuming that that's you've got assuming you're tracking with me. Yes, sir. Okay. So, right now we're on uh number five on your agenda.

Mr. President and commissioners, I did talk with Ron McMaster yesterday on this. He's the engineer involved and he said there was a 3,000 square foot minimum that would be on these properties. Questions? What are your utilities out there? Will it be a Do you have public utilities to that site? Yes, ma'am. We do. You do? Yes, ma'am. So, we're on set. We have se No, they they'll be twoacre lots. Is that correct? Or larger. So, they would I think they're going to be on septic system. You have questions? Any opposition? Step to the mic. My name is Terry Graiac and it's my wife Annie. Is this property off of Grey Hill Road or Dave Brown? It's going to be off both of them. Dave, and how many how many lots are they trying to put in there? We're opposed to a lot of houses. I mean, it's an area where they have like five acre lots, you know. some in the area there and we kind of prefer not to have 50 60 houses put in there in the whole total area. Okay. Or is

that like a phase one phase two deal where they add two where's the entrance off? Is the entrance going to come off of Dave Brown or is it going to come off of Grey Hill? Right now we're talking about the lot coming off Dave Brown. Is that correct? I believe that's correct. That's what it shows here. Dave Brown. How are you accessing the property? Will it be off Grey Hill or Dave Brown? Because Grey Hill is not going to handle two vehicles going up and down it without somebody running off the road because the road's not wide enough. I'm the only person that lives on the road and u it's just not you know if somebody meets a truck or something you you're unless you're in another truck you can't run off the road because it's going to drag the bottom of a car and that's what we're concerned too. the road will have to be widened or something like that if they're going to use Grey Hill. I believe that would be a choice with the county engineer and the board of supervisors would have to take that into consideration before a plat would be filed. Okay. All right, sir. Sir, I did not catch your last name. Graiac G R A V is in boy. I a K. And it appears that they might have the entrance coming right out in front of my place. I'm assuming according to the plat is two entrances. One on brown and one on grade. Yeah, because they they marked some spots. I'm

assuming that's what it is. That's where they're coming in and out of. The public notice was only on Grey Hill Road. We didn't see a public notice on Dave Brown and it only appeared what a week or two. Yeah, about a week. But it was also on somebody else's property. It's not There's another lot up there at the corner and that's where the reszoning is. They were doing all the surveying and everything on the bigger plot there. And that's what was kind of confusing us. We wasn't wasn't sure if it was the big area that's doing or if it was the uh the smaller plot where the sign was. But that's all that's what we're just we just didn't we hadn't heard anything about it. You know, all we heard was there was a subdivision coming in. We're opposed to a whole bunch of houses. We're not opposed to a few, but you know, we just don't want to see 50 60 houses come in there. Okay. It's a quiet area. A lot of wildlife out there, too. So, most of us have acorage, you know. I have five acres basically, and we'd like to keep it somewhere in that neighborhood. Okay. Like respond to that. Okay, ma'am. What What was your name? Annie Niac. Thank you. Anyone else? And most of the people that live with around us are elderly people and they're not, you know, able to to get out too well. Anyone else?

Thank you. Anything else you want to say? No. Any questions? I entertain a motion. I move that the southern portion of a 12.34 acre parcel that abuts Dave Dave Brown Road be reszone from A1 to R1. Second. It's been moved and properly second. All in favor? Eyes have it. All right. The other part, the other part is um a larger parcel uh that abuts Grey Hill Road just to the east of the one we just did the same subdivision. So the 15 homes total both of those. Yes, ma'am. So 15 is on combined combined. Entertain a motion. Second over the properly second. All in favor? Eyes have it. SNC Farms. Good morning. I'm Jeff Cox, uh, part owner SNC Farms and owner of Bird Zone Construction. This is Gloria Tatum. She works with us on these matters, uh, helping us get these through the county approvals and and DEQ as well. um kind of want to give you a little uh

some questions that I was asked to me and was sent through Scott Weekes that I just I made a list of stuff this morning. I kind of wanted to go through to give you a little background. The uh myself and another man named Jay Shackleford actually purchased this property. Uh so we actually own the property. Um, my company, Bird Zone Construction, would be the company that would be running the the surface mining operation. Uh, our long-term intended use of this property is to uh there's two existing lakes to enhance them to add two more lakes and then in the long run sell it out in, you know, 20 to 50 acre parcels, you know, for for home sites. That's our long-term use for it. Um, and we think it's going to be a, you know, maybe a 68 10 year project. So, it's not going to happen in a hurry. Um, the there is a county road that runs through the middle of the property. It's gravel road and u talked with supervisor Griffin and I've agreed to maintain the road to where the county has no problems with it. We actually have a house in there and have a tenant that lives on the property. So, we've got to keep him access uh him and his family in and out, you know, as well. So, you know, we um you know, we do a lot of, you know, earth work in Madison County and a lot of stuff going. So, the intended use would be obviously for all this growth that we have. Uh, and all our trucks would come out on the highway 51, head south to Highway 16 and go to I5. So, we'll be running on MDOT roads and not county roads. There's been some concern if they shut the bridge down on

Highway 51 below there. We're pretty much just shut down. Uh it's not feasible to go north. The the route would be too long. The trucking would be too expensive. And we're not allowed on Davis Crossing. And I don't want to put trucks on Davis Crossing. You know, it's just it wouldn't handle it. Wouldn't be good for the road or trucks or anything. Um the permit process, you know, if we can get a conditional use permit approved from from this and the board, you know, then we'll go to DEEQ and and I look for a six-month process. So, nothing would even happen on that property at all this year. I mean, the chances are slim of that happening and getting it approved. Um, during all this, some of the neighbors have reached out to us and concerned about, you know, what's going to happen their property and so we've met with the neighbors across the street, Browns, Sullivanss, uh, Jim Cruz, they're all in here today. We've talked and I provided this little drawing. I think each one of you has a copy of in front. And if you look at it, there's in yellow, there's two existing lakes on there that won't be disturbed. And we phased this out. Supervisor Griffin wanted us to phase this out to where we would do a section, finish it, move on to where if something happened or they could, you know, not renew our conditional use permit and so have a little bit of enforcement to make sure that, you know, we we did what we're supposed to. Um eventually I would like to add two more lakes in those in that farm ground on the east side of that ditch. You can see a a ditch running through there that's really wooded and then you know maybe parcel it out also. But I've also agreed that nothing will be done on the frontage and I call the frontage from the the ditch line towards Highway 51 to keep it preserved as is for for us the

neighbors you know potential buyers of this property or whoever so that still have the same view that we have now. Um, you know, this is the fourth project like this I've done in Madison County. Second one as the owner and we did the same thing on Oak Road about half a mile south of Highway 51. Um, and we actually put a little temporary road and actually somebody came in and bought the whole place and now they're parceling off for lot. So, it's our intended use from the long run to do nothing but improve this property, you know, especially for our values and our neighbors also. You know, the county has operating guidelines. Daylight, I think the dark, no Sundays. U so strictly follow county rules and regulations. We're very familiar with them and and this isn't our first time. So, we kind of know know what we're, you know, what we need to do. Um and the one thing I was going to add also in case somebody people don't know that when we go to the DEQ, we also have to provide a reclamation bond. Anybody that gets a surface mining permit from the DEQ has provided a reclamation bond. So that's just another security knowing that if something were to happen that there's a resource to, you know, fix it. But never had that happen. Not intending it to, but just want you to know that's another little safety net for the county and for the for the local neighbors. So that kind of just a little summary of what I wanted to kind of go over. A lot of the neighbors are here. visited with him, visit with Reverend Brown, kind of let him know what's going on. So, uh, any questions, we'd love to answer questions for commission. Any opposition?

entertain a motion. I move that we will uh accept the petition request for the result. Second. It's been moved properly. Second. All in favor? Eyes. Eyes have it. So it ends. Thank you, Randon. Morning. My name is Brandon Keel. I'm here um looking for reszoning on a piece of property off of North Old Canton Road for a residential development. Um with me is Andrew White, my attorney helping me. Did you say Andrew White? Yes, sir. May I approach? together. The parcel that we're looking to reszone is roughly 26 acres. That is all part of one plot of land. Most of it being already reszoned.

Um, with those 28 acres or 26 acres roughly, speaking to Mike, with those 26 acres roughly not being reszoned, I do have a question just for clarification. You your your request here is um that both of these parcels be reszoned to R1A. Yes, sir. That's correct. I think you've attached to your petition is a section of the ordinance that is actually R1B. So, just wanted to make the clarification that that's what you asking. It's from R1. That's right. Okay. I'm sorry. Yeah. On his what's attached to his petition. He attached a section of the ordinance. It's actually R1B in here. So, I just wanted to make a clarification that his request was in fact R1A. Yes, we're looking to get that section uh Yeah, it's simple error. Uh but his request is clear that he's going to R1 A is his request and that's what the previous was too. It's this is already R1. That's correct. So just trying to go uniform with Yeah, that's correct. What is the minimum lot size on the R1A? It is 30,500 square ft is the minimum lot. 3/4 acre.

What size houses? Um 2700 to 3,000. 3,000 square foot minimum. 2700. Yes, ma'am. To 3,000. All right. So in what 2016 you had it the southern part reszone to R1A. Yes ma'am. And part of that was a 10 acre buffer zone. And so part of your request is to remove the buffer zone. Yes ma'am. That was the next um number up in line. So I was just going to wait on that. And you've not decided on your entrance yet. So, you've got three alternatives that you're we're looking at for entrance into this property. No, ma'am. I believe that was from 2016. Um, in the packet that I turned in that had a preliminary lot layout with the entrance and exit, both of them being off North Old Canton.

This is your buffer zone right here. This is the buffer zone right here. There's still Andy, do we need to are we going backwards here? Do we need to address the buffer and then the reason um I guess I mean you can ask any questions that you want u but the way they're listed on the agenda just the way that we're going down through there I mean he's he's clearly made that a request in his petition or his application that he submitted. Um, so if you want to take those, you can talk about them any kind of way

that you want to, but I guess when we come down to a vote going to have to be separate, this I'm fine with discussing it all together. Right. Now, this buffer zone was in 2016 was basically an agreement between the developers and the homeowners. Tensson Farms is the neighborhood that joins, right? So that was an kind of an agreement. Correct. Um, from my understanding in 2016 when this first came up there, the proposed housing size was 15 to,700 square ft, which u compared to the houses in Densen Farms is much less. Um, so I think they were doing that to protect the property value and not have bunch of houses stacked on their property lines. Um, and we feel like what we're proposing to build is going to protect their property value and actually give them something comparables to um pull against that are going to be just as big if not bigger and as expensive, same price range. So, initially there was going to be a smaller square footage. That didn't happen. Correct. you're coming back. What is your setback on the the rear set set back on the R1A? 25. Yes. 25 ft. and the rear set back on an R1. You'd think I'd have all these memorized by now.

50 or 50? Uh, rear on R1 is 50. 50. Effectively what you've got, if I read the 2016 minutes correctly, they reszoned the large portion of that property to R1A, but with the uh the 10 acre buffer or restricted area that you're talking about they had a minimum lot size in there of two acres which is effectively R1 inside of an R1A but the restrictions really restricted to an R1. So that's that was I guess maybe the intentional or unintentional result but that's kind of the way it felt based on those minutes. So it'll go from what was potentially going to be two acres to 34. That's correct. Could y'all work with a 3000 member? I don't think that'll be a problem. Any other questions? Opposition to the podium surface area for uh ground surface area for uh groundwater drainage to run off and to go uh various places versus when you slam 3/4 acre lots uh

against us, you're going to have a significant impact. There's been no watershed hydrarology analysis done for this property. The property has three creeks running through it. It has a pond on it currently and there has been no soils done on the property to see if it is uh you know a fiscally responsible project to go and build 3/4 acre lots. When I built my home, I had to go 10 feet deep and put in 330 loads of soil to stabilize the clay that was in, you know, our county. Everybody's aware of Madison County has heavy clay deposits. Um, so our fear is that they're going to get this property reszoned all R1A after we've already fought this in 2016 and then realize the surface water just doesn't make sense. The soils just don't make sense. and you know to come in here and ask for 56 lots at approximately $120,000 a lot for $6 million and have done exclusively no studies on the traffic impact for approximately 150 cars coming out on North Old Canton. No studies on the watershed impact on the residents of Densen position. Thank you. Anyone else? Good morning. My name is Mike Ward. Uh I I live at 635 Cherry Rose Lane. Uh my property does not touch this property, but I'm within 5 or 600 ft. And our concern is uh the same. It was just stated. We agreed back in 2016 to an agreement to leave it this way. And now they come in and I don't I just got something from Mark Bounds. I guess was given to y'all. Mr. Bounds is not here to cross-examine or ask questions of. I don't even know if these men own this property. I think they have it under contract that they're going to come in and build these houses if they get their

way. Well, I moved to Madison County in 1987. I've seen a lot of change. We knew it was coming, but we moved up here because we like the two acre and larger size estates where we live. We all know about the congestion. We were here about five months ago. This board heard arguments about the schools, the roads. Uh there's just too much congestion in this area. And I don't believe requiring 3,000 square foot that just adds to the problem as far as the size of the houses, the water drainage. Uh we love where we live. We knew that there was going to be change, but we want change that does not affect our property values, our way of life. Uh it does not affect the children's ability to get a good education in schools. And right now there houses popping up everywhere. If you go out by Deerfield, uh it brings more trash on the roads. If you don't believe me, drive out past Deerfield at those new subdivisions. It looks like a garbage dump out there. Somebody recently cleaned it up. But again, when you start stacking houses in high density, you bring in these problems that we're trying to avoid. So there's been no showing of substantial change which is required by the law. Uh the zoning board I know is very well of the preamble in the zoning ordinance law. It's to prevent high density and congestion. And again, we believe that this, if it's changed, is going to enable more congestion, more crowded schools, more traffic, and in years. I know there's talk about widening Yandall, but that's 10 to 15 years away. So, I'm asking this board respectfully to consider. I think everybody here is in opposition to this. We're all neighbors, and we would like to keep it the same. and I'm asking y'all to respectfully deny their petition. Thank you.

Good morning. Everybody from our neighborhood in D Farm. Excuse me. Yes. I'm sorry. John Wilkey. I live at 113 Cherry Rose Trail. It backs up to the R1 section on the top of the page that y'all are looking at. Um, everybody's pretty much mentioned most of the issues that we have, traffic, storm drains, utilities, etc. It's really quantity and traffic. There's a lot of houses that everybody wants to come out there and and build. And it everything up and down Green Oak Lane, uh, part of North Old Canton, our neighborhood, which is 30 plus or minus houses, all are two acres or more. There, everything out there is estateized lots and it's a lifestyle. So, I agree with everybody here. Um, I'd like everybody from Vincent Barbs to raise their hand and we've got a lot of representation and we've done this with you guys before in 2016. We appreciate your help and your consideration and we're represented by our attorney, Mr. Jim Cruz. Thank y'all. My name is Mike Armstrong, board fellow petitioners. Mine's a little bit unique. If you look on page two of three, down in the far right corner is my location on 683 North Old Canton Road. And behind me is the proposed development. Everything that you've heard so far,

I agree with the people that proposed it. However, in my opinion, there is and is not to this day, there is not a access road available to get to this property. The developer wants to put in a road, which is wonderful, but there is an issue there with the high tension power lines that run through the property. that have a large right of way. He proposes to take a little small part of the watershed next to me to put in a road and then cross under the power lines at some point in time. The problem I have with it is I am in that whed that we talked about earlier with three different creeks running. It drains through part of my yard and I've been keeping it open for since 1991 where it will drain on go across the property that's next to me goes all the way to Clarkdale Road where it goes under the bridge. All of that is a large V-shaped to step off of Old Canton Road where he wants to put a road. You're going to be about 10 ft plus or minus below the level of Old Canton Road that fills with water every time we have a heavy rain and then it slowly drains off. No problem with that. If a proposed road is put in, they will have to cut down all the trees along my

property line more than likely, which will give me a wonderful view of high power lines going by. That kills the aesthetic value of my R1 place that I've been on since 1991. Many people come and it looks so beautiful out here. It's peaceful. It's treelined. And I'm going to have car after car. 87 houses. That's a 100 cars a day almost depending on who trying to get out on Old Canton Road. You heard that opposition. That's going to be right next door to me. And that's the reason I'm against it along with the majority of the room here. Thank you. Anyone else? Good morning. Morning. I'm Jim Cruz. I'm attorney an attorney here in Canton. Uh I was retained by Dr. Scott Simpson who is also a resident of Densson Farms. He is a pediatric cardiologist atmc and is busy helping save children's lives this morning. couldn't be here, but he asked me to speak on his behalf. You've heard very eloquent commentary from some of the residents of this subdivision and they've they say they've taken up a lot of what I was going to say this morning. I won't beat a dead horse with things that have already been said, but I also wanted to just touch on a couple of things. Yesterday I took a ride out to this area and as everybody in this room has pretty much said, these are two acre estate lots and there's thousands of acres according to the zoning map in this area

that are zoned that way. These people want to keep their quality of life. This board, as always, in considering a reasonzoning petition, is faced with whether or not there's been a change in the character of this area. And clearly, that's not been the case here. That's the benchmark y'all face. It's not enough that the developer wants it reszone so he can build and sell more houses, but whether or not that character of that neighborhood is has changed, it hadn't. It's been the same way for years. As my friend and colleague who is in civilian dress today, Mr. Mike Ward, he's an attorney here that I've known for a long time, said the preamble to the Madison County zoning ordinance states that zoning regulations shall, among other things, be designed to lessen congestion in the streets, prevent overcrowding of land, and to avoid the undue concentration of population. That's what y'all are charged to do. And I know it's a hard job, but we ask that this commission take these factors into account as it considers this petition and at the end of your deliberations deny this resoning request. Anyone else? I represent uh Brandon and the real estate side of the transaction here. Um in regards to watershed, uh I did consult with two professionals in that industry to uh that that can speak uh speak to that as far as water control goes. You know, a big part of why we were going the developer was going 75 acre lots was this was not a proposal to

put 35 acre lots with, you know, you're which is what what's most of what's happening just to the north of that is um 1,600 foot minimums and we're seeing more and more of that come from the north to the south and it is going um that was a big I I do understand quality of life. uh for 10 years I've backed up to an empty field that's being developed today. I do completely understand that. Um I think that the next people that approach on this development um may be stronger than than us and I think that they would push for a more desirable uh 200 lot development uh desirable from a developer standpoint. I think the 700 and $800,000 homes um which would be similar to Eastwood, Ironwood, which are mostly built out at this time. Uh there is a need in the area for inventory. Um the homes in in those 700,000 and $800,000 homes are still selling very fast. There is an obvious need from a real estate standpoint. Um we do completely understand as far as water control and all that goes. U we're sympathetic to that. Understand that. That is why we have the engineer and we also have a professional here that may speak on uh water control and u any guarantees of where that may go. I just wanted to speak on the fact that our goal is not we're not these are not going to be $300,000 houses and not 200 of them. speak a great job. Can't say where the water is going to go, but I can say where it's not going to go.

My name is David Stallings. I live at 103 Densing Farm Cove. I'm a resident at Densing Farms. and I heard everything that the gentleman just said. Wanted to make sure and I'm sure that you supervisors are aware that the establishment or the development that was approved by the board last year after you all have denied it. We are fighting that in court. And that is not something that's a done deal where we're going to have 800 new homes right north of us. Just wanted to remind you all of that. Uh, also everything else that's been said, I agree with it completely. I moved here in 2019. I picked where I'm at because I didn't want to walk out my back door and be looking at my neighbor's yard. So, please deny this. Questions for commission? You said currently you're expecting 153,000 56 56 question. I entertain a motion. To be clear, this is on uh number eight. is the reasoning R1 to R1A. So that would match the existing what is R1A. So we're just extending that on this. Correct. That's correct. Yes. Could we extend that and with the condition of extending that same buffer

that exists? That's a condition that you want to impose. They're fighting a a lawsuit with the proposed development north of them which is I think you said 800 houses or whatever and that's going to be your 15 to,700 square foot house. We believe this is a much different product that's needed in the area and they seem to have a problem with that as well. So, I don't know what we can do to I' I've met with Densson Farms. Um, let them know that I was coming up here to do this. They received the packets in the mail. Um, I don't know if there's a way we can come to some kind of consensus on maybe a no cut on the property line where, you know, for 25 ft or so there's no trees cut to let them keep the um the view that they desire. That's the obviously, right? So what's that? The 25. You said 25 foot no cut. Yes, ma'am. That would be something I would I think he's you're you're willing to discuss that or you're willing to agree to that? I would I would agree to that if that was something that would u be appealing to them. I mean, I understand that. I wouldn't want that in my backyard. So, I I respect their right to get up here and fight that. Um,

and I would make some concessions to do that. And I think a 25 ft no cut on a property line um that's fully wooded would help in that. 25 ft leaving the tree line. That's correct. 25 ft of uncut does not fix 3/4 acre lot shedding water. Our concern is it's twoacre lots. Like you said, ma'am, if you extend the buffer that is currently below it on the R1, if you extend that buffer to this parcel that's under subject right now, they'll walk away from they've already said two acer up into the That's R1. If you resone that R1A and extend the buffer up, they'll walk away from they just said. So that doesn't address wershed traffic. Just having trees is not our thing. I don't want to be emotional up here and say, you know, I don't want to see homes. I don't want to see cars. My focus is on infrastructure. I have a degree, an MCL degree from Mississippi State. You cannot ethically shed water to another homestead. That's why you guys have R1 is in place so that we don't get waterhed because this is a very low line area with multiple creeks. Keeping 25 ft of trees doesn't fix that for the water issue. It is being engineered and his concerns won't be an issue. Yeah. I thought someone said earlier you can tell us where the water is not going to go and that's to these res. That's correct. And how do you I mean the engine the county has to

approve the engineering in the watershed and that's not going to be approved if it's backing up in other people's property. May I ask a question? Did you did you all meet uh with any opposition before you come to this meeting? Yes sir. I met with them Sunday afternoon. How did meeting and go about like this is going wasn't good then was it? Um their concerns with water seemed to be the biggest um uh topic which I assured them this is being engineered. They're not going to allow the water to back up on them. I thought we had a really good meeting. We received the package that Randy talked about a week and a half ago and we got our neighborhood together and got talk about it and I do appreciate y'all coming by talking about it. One of our major concerns is traffic and number of rooftops 56 cars on that road and where their entrance is right close to the intersection north and green earlier. all size houses. And I'm not saying we can't figure out a way to make something work out, but 25 ft when it's already 51 under 50 under R1 seems like 50 ought to be the standard. And then we've already agreed in 2016 for the top parallel to be R1 with buffer. So your suggestion of extending the buffer, you know, if the neighborhood agreed to it might be an for the minimums that are already established. We could do a 50 foot no

cut. I entertain a motion. Uh I'm going to make a motion that we will table uh this decision on this date and give them the opportunity to meet again. Uh maybe they can come up with something to kind of resolve this situation. I mean, is there evidence that can be provided somehow that the water won't shed? I mean, I know you're I can get that from engineering to type up a report. Typically, got to keep in mind what they hear on day is simply the reasoning. Okay. Um, all of these issues that that have been raised are extremely valid. uh and are often raised here. Uh but those come into play and under review during the platting process um submission to county engineer with watershed issues um entrance locations. The only thing that they're here today on is resoning. Obviously, you don't want to spend a bunch of money on engineering, platting, and all that if you can't move forward with the property from a zoning standpoint. That's correct. So, that's just if that factors into your consideration at all. Just wanted to make that point. But we need to make if we're going to extend a buffer, it would need to be resoneed with that condition. Correct. That needs to be in your resing. um motion or whatever you want to make. Um if that's what you want to do, um there

seems to be indication that that may not be a consensus agreement amongst the parties at this point. But as Reverend Brown said, perhaps yeah, that that that may not solve the issue at the end of the day, but it soundss There's some more, I guess, compromise to be made because you're offering some things that Well, I mean, other than a two acre lot minimum, I opened for a 50 if if they wanted to keep it 50, which was what it's at with the R1 um zoning on the property lines to keep trees, greeneries, what whatever's growing. Um I would that's a concession I would make. Let me let me make a point there too. When you talk about a setback, you're talking about a setback from the property line to a house. And just make sure that you understand if you agree to an additional no cut buffer. I mean, you that's that's fine, but you're Well, no, I would agree with the 50 foot setback to be no cut. So, you're saying 25 and then the setback? Well, the setback doesn't have to be left. In fact, for R1A is 25 ft. 75. R1 would be well well we would keep it 50 instead of 25. You presumably want to have some yard and not a house directly adjoining no cut buffer. Getting a little bit out of motion table study. Second. It's been motioned and second. All in favor? I table with further that is likely going to be the same for number nine I would assume. Yes, sir. All right. Could we do

that formally with a motion in a second if that's what you so choose? Okay. I'll make another motion. Second motion prompted. Second favor. before we shut down. Excuse me, sir. I show you. We've already moved and carried on that. Those things are tap. Okay. I'm just going to show you where the water goes. That's it. You've heard a lot about it. I think that would probably be an appropriate discussion with these gentlemen. So, you have additional He's already kind of hard to visualize. McMillan Road LLC. Hello board. Uh my name is Blake Crest. Um we are here to uh discuss Oh, sorry. Diesel's back there behind you. You want to use and I don't know that we'll have to go through those, but just set them there. So, we're here again. We we met last month and tabled this petition um in order to discuss the possibility of a a buffer between the two the proposed development and Hathaway Lake

residents who many of those people are here today. Um the I stipulated at that time that I would I wanted Hathaway Lake Homeowners Association to accept or to take the buffer and maintain it. Well, between that meeting and this meeting, several of the members of Hathaway Lakes board resigned and there's not a functioning board. So no one there to accept or even make an a that could even vote on the possibility of accepting a buffer. So I made the decision to put the buffer a proposed buffer on my development and I went to the engineers and to my designers and we came up with 40 ft. That's what we could do reasonably that wouldn't drastically affect what I was proposing. Um, I I sent this in an email to the to 29 of the residents on Brisco and I did have conversations with several of them. I I don't think there's any appetite for the buffer. Uh, I do appreciate those that reached out even though they were opposed. I I understand their opposition. and I respect their opinions and you know this is a decision that is always difficult but I I think the proposal is not only reasonable but is in keeping with what is going on in Madison County in this area. So the and I can read you what was sent. Uh, dear Brisco Street residents, as most of you know, I'm in the process of trying to develop 60 acres 60 acre tract of land north of Hathway Lake. In the previous planning and zoning meeting, I

mentioned the possibility of a buffer between Hathaway and the proposed development. I've been able to determine that I can create a 40-foot buffer on the boundary between Hathaway and the proposed development. I would also be able to place the buffer inside the proposed development which would eliminate the need for Hathaway Lake Association to accept or maintain this area. I have no idea if anyone in this email chain is interested in this possibility, but I wanted to give each of you an opportunity to consider it and welcome each of you to reach out to me if you would like to discuss the possibility. Feel free to call me at the number below or email me with your contact. I'll be happy to reach out to you and several did reach out and again I do appreciate their willingness to do so but there was no no one was interested in the 40ft buffer and so I think we're in impass as far as discussions on the buffer unless there's a change in the the conversation as the the group gets up bigger to discuss. I think they're just opposed on just period on the resoning buffer or not. So, we are going to represent I guess or have I don't know if we have to do that. I'm going to turn this over to my attorney Neil Bryant for further discussion and then we'll obviously allow the the the opposition to have their discussion. Okay. This is with a party put buffer. Well, at this point there is no there's no consensus on a buffer. Um, you know, I'm always I'm willing to have that discussion, but no one wanted to have at least at 40 ft and I'm not willing to go beyond that. So, I don't the proposal that we have is

is simply to reszone the 60 acres from R1 to R1B. Now, I'm still willing to concede, but I don't think that's where you're going to find the majority of these people that their interests don't lie in in trying to create a buffer. I think this is going to be more of a we don't want this and we don't, you know, I'm going to let them speak. They're here and they're they're going to get up and tell you. Uh, and if there is general interest or I'm happy to concede that. I just don't think you're going to find that today. Um, so that being said, Neil Bryant, thank you. Neil Bryant. Neil Bryant for the applicant. Um, given that this is a table motion, uh, I think the best thing to do is take questions from the commission as to any followup from our uh, presentation on our application at the previous meeting. Um, any questions? maybe from the opposition. Okay. The opposition. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Uh, commissioners. My name is Tim Anzenberger. I live at 128 Brisco Street. I'm one of the houses that directly abuts where the development is going to be built. Uh, my wife, Leah Katherine, was here at our last meeting. Um, and she got up and spoke. She wishes she could be here, but she had to take care of our this morning. Um, as the commission knows, we submitted a formal protest to uh the development to the petition and we had 13 residents that also directly abut the proposed development on Brisco join in that petition. Um, most of them are here, but there are some that also are in the same position as my wife that they wish they could be here, but they've got work and they've got kids and and can't be here on a Thursday morning. But but there is

great sentiment on Brisco Road and even in the neighborhood across the street uh Camden Life that opposed this specific development. I think um because this is a tabled motion and I sort of gave a lengthy legal argument the last time we were here. I thought the best thing to do would be sort of address the buffer and some of the questions that I think were lingering uh between now and the last meeting. The first issue is the buffer and um to his credit uh Mr. Crest gave me a call and we had a long conversation about it. Um it was a very cordial conversation. I think we got along. I understand where he's coming from but he understands where we're coming from and a 40 foot buffer I think as Mr. Chris said is just is a non-starter. And I think the best um the best way to show you that is it is really difficult to sort of describe the property um without you actually having a picture of what this property line looks like and what a 40ft buffer might be. So let me um if you give me one moment let me show you a picture. Yeah. So, the picture I placed before you, this is a picture from our back porch when you walk out our back door uh on to the undeveloped area of R1 land where the proposed development is going to be. Our property line ends where the snow begins to turn into you can see more more weeds and grass. That's the

property line. And what you'll see is and the reason I chose this picture of the snow is it's it kind of shows the beauty, but also it gives you a direct line of sight to this old deer stand back there on one of the oak trees. And that deer stand is probably 80 feet or more away from our house. So if you put a 40 foot buffer, that's probably less than half the diff distance between that tree stand and where our property line ends. And 40 feet, that's less than the length of a pickle ball court. That's like a half of a tennis court. So we're talking about a 40 foot buffer. We were talking about a 25 foot buffer. 40 feet really does nothing um for our concerns. Um and with our house and with many of the houses on Brisco, the tree line doesn't even start until after 40 ft. You can see ours if if there was if you were to tear that forest down, put a 40 foot buffer in, you're probably going to have just a field of weeds and then the houses are going to start. Um, another thing that you can see from this picture is that most of the houses on Brisco sit up above this undeveloped land and look down onto it. So, if you put up a fence and you got a 40 foot buffer and then your new neighbor directly behind you puts up a fence, you're going to see right over it and you're still going to be standing on your back porch looking through their back window. Uh, which was which is our concern that we expressed at the last meeting is still our concern today. Um, and of course these cosmetic concerns still don't address traffic, schools, changing the character of this area of Madison County, which is from Hathaway Lake north, R1 and then a land. And this R1, which is what this is, is supposed to serve as the buffer between our neighborhood and all the

neighborhoods below it and the A land above Highway 22 above it. There was another concern that was discussed about, well, couldn't this property just be developed anyways? If it's not this development, it could be another. It could be, but it would have to be R1, which it is now. And there's a huge difference between having someone build an R1 home behind Hathway Lake, which is a minimum twoacre lot, and an R1B where we've got 10 to,400 square foot lots, one right behind every house, every neighbor looking directly through into somebody else's back porch window. Huge difference. I think most of the people that are in attendance that live on Brisco are going to say the same thing. They'd love to have a farm behind their house, forest farm. But what they don't want is somebody where they're looking and they can watch see what they're watching TV every every night. And that point I think is critical as we stand here because the Mississippi Supreme Court when it addresses the actual legal standard for what this commission has to decide, what the board of supervisors has to decide, and what a court would have to decide if this came before it. um is that zoning is meant to be permanent and residents can rely on that aspect. The Supreme Court has said, quote, "Changes must be made after careful consideration because investments in land and property are significant financial decisions and a land owner should be able to rely upon a zoning plan to maintain the use and value of his property. So, we are relying on the zoning being R1 and staying R1. Uh if it gets developed, that's fine. That's what we expected. But we expected farms. We expected estates. We didn't expect another cookie cutter neighborhood directly behind our own. That reliance is also in line with the county's land use plan. Chapter three,

which sets forth the objectives, says that R1 tracks should remain residential estate to serve as the buffer between all of the development that's going on in Gluxat and the AG land north of Highway 22. all of these concerns. Um, the cosmetics, the reliance, it's still is one issue, but the legal standard to actually legally reszone it is still the burden being on the developer to show a substantial change in the character of the area to be reszoned and a public need for the resoning. So, we discussed that at the last meeting and I'll briefly just touch on it again. There is no public need for resoning here. Just this week, Fox Business reported that housing supply rose 16.7% year-over-year, reaching its highest level in five years. Business Insider reported that there is 700 billion with a B of unsold housing stock, the highest dollar amount ever with inventory at a 5-year high. And half of that's been on the market for over 60 days, the highest since 2020. That data nationwide tracks with Madison County and the MLS data I was able to pull from May that shows that we are in a buyer market in Madison County. Let me ask you a question. Uh, where the tree line began, is that your property line? So, my property line, it's a

little hard to tell, but do you see where the snow is white and then it sort of all of a sudden turns where you can see weeds popping up everywhere, right? Uh, that's where the property line is. And you said from there to that uh de sand is 80 feet. It's about 80 feet. Would you What? My directly next door neighbor is standing in the back corner. Reggie, would you say that that's about 80 feet to that deer stand? So clearly the data shows that there's no public need for reszoning in this specific area. And there's also been no change in the nature of this area. Sure, Glut said it's booming. Uh there's neighborhoods going up all over the place south of Stribbling Road, but it's already zoned to be that way. So the fact that Gluxet's growing and we have neighborhoods popping up left and right there, well, that's in line with the county's land use plan. The area from Hathaway Lake north, that has not changed. There's been no substantial change there. The proposed development would start a change there, but there hasn't been a change yet. So, unless there are any questions, I I think I would leave the commission with this. The proposed buffer, although I appreciate the efforts, when you actually get a look at it, it really does nothing. Um, it's going to deteriorate property values. It's going to change the character of our neighborhood, of our street, but also of this swath of R1 and uh A1 land. Um there is no public need for another neighborhood in this area and even if there were the county's land use map has large swats of low and moderate density housing already planned for in the Gluckstat area. So

build there where it's desirable instead of encroaching into the R1 getting closer to that a land above uh Brisco Street. um the legal standard just hasn't been met and it's not our burden on that. That's the developers and I just don't think the legal standard has been met. And I think for practical purposes, this 40 foot buffer uh and these overtures, it just it doesn't really make a difference in the long run despite me appreciating uh my wife and I, Mr. Crest's efforts to engage with with us. Thank you. I have a question. What is the zoning of Hathaway Lake? I think Pathway Lake is R12 R2. Okay. R2. Thank you. Yes. To Mr. Andrew Berger's last point. Um, go build on the property that's already zoned for this necessitates that that property be for sale. uh we can't just go build on property because it's properly zoned. Um he brought up the issue of reliance, relying on what property is zoned. This was brought up in the prior meeting and many property owners um in Haway Lake said that they relied on the fact that this property was zoned R1 when they bought their property and that it should stay the same. That's not exactly the case. this property in in for 15 out of the 20 owners on Brisco Street, that property was zoned A1 when they bought their houses prior to when the zoning map was amended November the 18th, 2019, where A1 properties in growth patterns in the county were taken from A1 and put

in R1 to get around and to deal with a statute that the legislature passed that said that counties and municipalities could not go in and regulate activities that were done on agriculturally zoned property. It is in the minutes. Mr. Weeks makes the comments. The board same thing. Even CMPDD when the when the uh zoning map was proposed, they're clear. That's what they were doing. Trying to keep a hand on the wheel so you didn't get a pig farm next to Haway Lake. That's why it's R1, not because it was intended to forever be a state lots. Um, so as far as the buffer goes, I agree it does not satisfy anyone and it's frankly it costs my client like $100,000 $100,000 to put that buffer in. Uh, Andy, what is the the minimum buffer between residential subdivisions under the zoning ordinance in uh an R1? Well, just a minimum buffer, a buffer zone. What would it be between, for instance, between R1B and R2? There is not there's not one. This is something that we were willing to do to appease neighbors because we want to get along, but if they're not happy with it, my client would like to put that $100,000 into the development of this subdivision if that's possible. So, I'm not sure what else to do. I understand they don't want this resone to go through. That's very common. Um, I just don't see that property can be tied up. There's not a legally cognizable right to protect here in this property. You don't have a visual easement over your neighbor's property. You don't have the right to rely that your neighbor's property will always be zoned a certain way. That is why this body exists to

look at and appropriately reszone properties. So u anyway any other questions from from based on his comments our prior presentation last month I'm happy to address Mr. Crest is happy to address it seemed that last time we were tableling it because they were going to see if the pathway would take on that buffer and that's not an option right at this point. Well, I don't believe that it is right. So I don't and from what I understand they don't really care about. That is my understanding as well. So that's why we are asking that our original application that does not include a buffer be considered by the commission. I have a question. Scott, was Hathaway Lake did they have to have a resoning before they built or develop Lake? It was A1. It went from A1 to R2. Mr. Crest was the developer of Hathway Lake. So, the last time we were here, you wanted to meet with the the uh homeowners board. As Mr. Press Abley pointed out, the homeowners resigned. We're having a meeting in 12 days to elect a board. Now, he runs our HOA. He's the only member of the HOA property on the LLC. So, he does take money from our neighborhood. I think he agrees with that. Yeah, he does.

Crest manages our neighborhood and now wants to build one behind us, which is fine, but he ought to give a little bit of time to elect a board because yes, he did email us. And why? Because he runs our HOA. He had our email addresses, but he made no attempt to meet with the affected residents. He could have called us. He could have said, "Hey, come to my office. let's talk about a barrier. But he did not do that. He emailed us and said, "Give me a call if you have a problem." I think everybody in Bristo would say 40 ft is not a pro is is a problem, but he could have he could have met with us. He could have attempted to do something besides an email. And none of the people on this board do y'all go out to the properties that you that you're changing? I think it's necessary for y'all to look at what you're doing. It's It's necessary to see it affects We We pay taxes, too. We pay taxes on our property, and all we're asking for is to give us time to get a board in place. They're going to say that's not necessary. He's giving us a 40 foot bake border or whatever it's called. And and he doesn't have to do that, but He made no attempt to meet with us other than email and he could have said, "Let's get together and come up with a reasonable proposal." But he didn't do it. What was the original buffer that you wanted have a way to take? What was that? He said 25 ft. 40 ft's just not going to do it. But I'm just going to turn it over to somebody else. I think Shay wants to say something.

Hey, my name is Shay Landry. I live at 122 Brisco Street. I just wanted to address a a number of points. The last one maybe being the most important. Uh but number one, what wasn't brought up in the first meeting is that in fact, Mr. Chris is in charge of our HOA management company. Um, and I think one thing that the an HOA management company is intended to do is number one enforce the bylaws, but also to ensure that ensure the property values stay at minimum the same, if not increase, but in effect by building a neighborhood behind ours. Um, I think it's a conflict of interest because he's He's supposed to keep our property values the same or increase, but this is effectively going to drop our property values. Every one of my neighbors will tell you that the reason we moved into those houses was because of the aesthetics behind the house. If you remove those aesthetics, you remove the the the value of my home. Um, number two, going to the buffer. Um, that is correct. We we weren't given the opportunity. he doesn't have to give us that opportunity and I understand that and I respect that. Um but 40 feet is just not enough in in a row of pines where the foliage is 100 feet in the air. 40 feet means nothing. Um and I I'll be happy to show you a picture of 40 feet with my daughter standing 40 feet away from my property to show you exactly what 40t looks like. I mean, and I used my my um rangefinder to assure that I was standing at 40t from her. So, that'll show you. Um and I'm happy to do that. Um if you would like, we've got a visual. Oh, okay. Okay. I

was just going to show you that is that's you know, again, that's 13 yards. Um, lastly, uh, it was just brought to my attention, and I did not realize this, um, that there's a bald eagle that has, we think may have a nest in that property. And I've got pictures of the bald eagle in those trees. Um, as you know, that's our lake. As you know, federal wildlife prohibits disturbing of any there's it in the trees. That's the trees that we're proposing building on. Federal wildlife prevents you from disturbing any bald eagle's nest. And I'm happy to show y'all all more. This is the picture of the eagle at our lake. That's at our lake. And this is in our trees. This is in the trees. For the record, I have a federal wildlife guide from the federal government coming out there and there's more of them on the power line which abuts the land that he's proposing going on. Um, so I, you know, I did not know that until literally today. Um, and I think that in and of itself precludes someone from building back there if there is an eagle's nest back there. Um, I I think that's all I need to say today and I appreciate the audience. Uh, thank y'all very much. I just I'm going to point out that this board is not bound by the fact that the feds may come in and tell us we can't develop the property because there may be a bald eagle or wetlands or any other type of federally regulated problem with the property. That that that should not

be a picture on cell phone should not be a reason to be determinative. You said that you're going to have a with right soon but that was going to agree to take 25. We don't need their board to be in place. It is absolutely hor. So, we don't have to He's right. We don't He doesn't have to have a board, but I think. Am I right in saying that's because you're offering a 40 foot, not asking you to take the 25? Hang on. Hey guys, let's not talk over each other. Exactly. Sorry. So, we don't need a a 40ft buffer. He's right about that. But Haway Lake deserves a chance to have a board to negotiate properly. And further than that, he's right about that bald eagle. And we have a right to look at that regardless of this attorney saying that it doesn't give you the right. It does give you the opportunity to table that until the federal wildlife inspector can come out there. Whether he believes it is or not, but that's something past resoning, right? Um, correct. It may be past resoning, but I'm going to tell you, I think you have a duty, a very big duty to uh allow Hathaway Lake. He hasn't negotiated with us on anything. He emailed us. He emailed us. There's nothing to negotiate. I'm not I'm not talking to you. Hey guys, there's nothing to He has not tried to negotiate. He could meet with us. He could absolutely meet with the neighbors and come up with a reasonable a reasonable buffer. Nobody back here is

unreasonable. None. But to email us and say, "Hey, this is what I'm going to do." Not fair, not appropriate. And all we're asking for is a meeting with him. And I think that's reasonable. To answer your question, Amanda, you're you're correct. Once again, as I stated previously in the meeting today, the only thing that we're here about today is reszoning. Your decision today has no bearing what one way or the other, approval or denial, uh has no bearing on their ability to move dirt or take down trees or that's a separate permitting issue. So, if that's responsive to your If you all have other answers or other questions rather um there's been so much talk I just kind of wanted to bring us back to the question which I think Mr. Clark um just articulated. The question is resoning. that's what's before the commission and to reszone there has to be a public need and a change in the area. So those are what the two questions are. We haven't heard any of that today from the developer but I I put the data in front of you that there is no public need. The area hasn't changed. Um the reliance and everything like that those are discussions to have but the legal question the standard is public need and change which there hasn't been. And I would also say that the reliance issue that wasn't just coming from me, that was coming from the Mississippi Supreme Court that said citizens have a right to rely because they put an investment in property. So that's not just me. That's the highest court in this state. Thank you.

I'm I'm not disputing the reliance. I'm saying that it was not R1 when 15 of the 20 homeowners bought their property. It was A1. Um, as far as evidence of of need and a change in the character of the neighborhood, that's because we're back for a table motion. We did that in the prior meeting. That's all in the record. I'm happy to go through it again if I need to, but that was covered extensively at the last meeting and everything is in the record. At this time, I entertain a motion. Actually, the reszoning request maintains the existing character of the neighborhood. It not only maintains the existing character, it upgrades it on lot size. And the path of growth of Madison County is that way. I looked at um new houses in MLS to see what was for sale on new construction. There are only 55 houses in that area east of west of I-55. 55 houses of new construction. They range from 1725 square feet to 4205 square feet. The median cost is 511,000. And I believe that the median size is 2400 square feet.

We have a lot of development. We have a lot of industrial development coming, a lot of jobs. So you can't convince me that there's not a need for housing. And for that reason and for these reasons, I move that their zoning request be accepted be approved with their proposed 40ft buffer. It's been moved and properly second that the request be granted. All in favor? Eyes have it. Motion to close public hearing. Second. All in favor? So it is motion to set the date for July July 10th. All in favor? Motion to adjourn. No move. All right, Miss Scott.