Board of Aldermen - Regular Meeting

Good evening. This March 17, 2026 board of alderman meeting is hereby called to order. I'm going to ask Alderwoman Pat Hamilton to lead us in an invocation followed by the pledge of allegiance which I'll lead. Please stand.

Please join me in prayer. Dear father in heaven, we thank you for this beautiful day. And Father, we especially thank you for the freedom that we have to meet here tonight and take care of the business of the city. Dear Father, we know that we hear a lot of gloom and doom with wars and we just pray, dear Father, that you will bless those that are making the decisions. Dear God, we especially ask you to bless those that are standing in our between us and the war. Dear father, that that gives us the freedom that we can come and worship with you. Dear God, we pray father that you will bless this meeting tonight. Guide us as we make the decisions that are beneficial for our city. This we ask in Christ's name. Amen.

Amen. Salute. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible and justice be seated. Thank you. Madame clerk, would you conduct roll call? Yes, sir. Aldridge here. Collins here. Dickerson here. your heart. Gamage here. Hamilton here. Wallace here.

All present. So obviously a quorum is established. For those of us who have microphones, please remember to have the microphone on green when you're speaking so the audience can hear what's taking place uh at this board meeting. Uh board, you have before you the minutes of our regular meeting of March the 3, March the 3rd, 2026. Any questions, comments, or motions for those minutes? Motion to approve. Motion to approve by Miss Hamilton. Second. Second by Mr. Gamage. All in favor?

All opposed. And I originally said all present. My apologies. So, Alman Earhart's not present, but we still have a quorum established. Minutes have been approved from the previous board meeting. Uh for public comments time, we have our Ali branch chapter of the demise. uh to address us or at least some to address us and we're pleased to have you back. You were here last year and certainly pleased to have you gentlemen back. Thank y'all. Uh yeah. So what to

Could we get your names and address so the clerk can have that for the record?

So my name's Will Francis. This is Hunter Bagot and Robert Johnson. So, uh, for the city of Ola Branch for the past year, they've done a lot to help us out and everything we've done. They've invited us to do like a touch a truck event for the Nerf gun, a cleanup day at the city of VA branch uh by also by the house over here. I can't uh and invited us to multiple city council meetings. Uh the mayor, Mr. Ken Adams, has also thanked us online. So, we're just uh we'd like to Can Mr. Ken Adams, can you come please come down?

Okay. Have Ken Adams and Mr. Jay Nichols. So for Mr. Ken for you, we have a medal of appreciation for you

for everything you've done. And we've heard that Jennifer Griffith is not here tonight. So, we have a medal of appreciation to give her. A hats off award to give her as well. If you can give that to her, please.

Yep. And I also have one for Mr. J. Nichols. Yep. So every service hours, it could be hours for last year. Thank you for being back with us. We appreciate it. Okay. Following the agenda board, you have uh your consent agenda items 1 through 34. Mostly are really pretty much all administrative items, but any questions, comments, or motions to approve these particular items? Motion to approve.

Mr. Collins. Motion to approve. Is there a second? Miss Aldridge. Second. Any discussion? All in favor?

All oppose? Motion carries. Under planning commission new business. This is consideration of an application for a revised preliminary, excuse me, preliminary plat for Carson Creek submitted by Greg Russell Civil Source on behalf of property owner Marian Threat Wy Road Group. The request is to create 25 single family residential lots from 38.6 plus or minus acres. The subject property is zone R1 single family residential district and is located on the east side of Davidson Road just over 400 ft north of Tranquil Drive. Staff report, please.

Thank you, Mayor Adman. Before you is a request to consider the a revised preliminary plat for Carson Creek. This is a subject piece of property we're looking at. This is Stone Crest subdivision to the west. Davidson Road extending north south and the property basically fronts on Davidson Road. This is Asbury Place subdivision. Villages of South Branch faces one 2 1 B 1 A1 B1 Currently under construction. It's at this location. If you go further west that would take you to Pleasant Hill Road. Yes, sir. Is it okay?

We just need to be louder. Kerbo Kerbo Lane is further to the south and Tranquil Drive is in this particular location. So this is a subject property under consideration. The property is currently zone R1 single family residential. This zoning district allows lots that are minimum 12,500 square ft. So the zoning ordinance for this particular property will allow lots that are minimum 12,500 square ft. Because of this zoning designation of the property in 2021, the board of adan approved a preliminary plat for over 78 lots on that piece of property. minimum lot size as it were approved then being that 12,500 square ft. So this is the existing preliminary plat that was approved in 2021. The project has however not moved forward. Today the applicant or the property owner is proposing to revise the plot to a different layout that significantly reduces the number of lots. The changes you're looking at, the main changes are as follows. The number of lots are proposed to be reduced from 78 to 25. To do that, the applicant has essentially increase the minimum lot size. So the current approved plat, the minimum lot size approved on the plat was 12,54 square ft. The current proposed is 43,560. In other words, one acre. So all the proposed lots are minimum 1 acre lots. The streets existing plat the streets were approved to be constructed with

curb gutter and sidewalks. That is required for any subdivision where the lots are less than one acre. If the lots are at least one acre, the zoning ordinance, the subdivision regulations permit that the developer can have open dishes kind of a row street section. So the developer is proposing to go from the urban section with curb gutter and sidewalk sidewalks to streets with open swale. There will be no curbs, no gutter and sidewalks because the lots are minimum one acre. The previous approver or the current approver has there was requirement for a 40ft landscape buffer to the south and to the east of the subdivision border creek subdivision to the south. That buffer perimeter buffer or fence is no longer needed. is not proposed anymore because the proposed lots are minimum 1 acre in size. They are basically the same as the lots in the adjoining subdivision. So the buffer fence is no longer necessary with regard to utilities, transportation and drainage. There is sewer shown here in green south end of the property and to the east it will be the responsibility of the developer to extend that sewer line to service the entire subdivision. Although these lots are minimum 1 acre in size city policy requires that where seawward is available no matter the size of the lots the applicant has to extend those public utilities to service those lots. So all of these lots will be serviced by public sewer. Also you have public water available along Davidson Road shown here in blue. The applicant will extend all those services to into each of the lots in this subdivision.

The streets as I did mention will be constructed open swell no curbs no ger no sidewalks. There are only 15 lots and as such the traffic on the roads will be very very low. It should be safe to walk on those streets. Davidson Road is proposed to be widened in front of the subdivision right up to where you have the caret. And that brings us to the element of drainage. I would let the city engineer on that.

If you will look, you see that we have going diagonally through the subdivision, you've got a fairly goodsized drainage ditch that's always been there that had to be kind of accommodated. Um the pipe that's crossing under Davidson Road is actually undersized from what the city would normally see. Uh I don't think we've had footing issues through there. Um but as part of the negotiations when they're widening it out, we're probably going to need some type of a larger covert. We're still working through this and we may end up um getting them to do part of the widening through there and we may end up talking to them about doing u like a money in lie of doing the improvements and part of the reason is across the street uh south branch is going on. They're moving moving ahead. They're still more on the western side but um and talking to them in the next year or so uh they're going to be a lot closer to this. And so we're working with their engineer to see uh what kind of impacts they may have with detention which may alter I guess what needs to be uh put as far as drainage goes under that road. So I just wanted y'all to be kind of aware of that issue if there's any concerns about the drainage. So I'll be glad to answer any questions you have about it. The planning commission reviewed this application at its meeting on ma on March 10 and unanimously recommended approval subject to 10 conditions. Condition number three touches on the drainage element and all other subdivision infrastructure improvements and requires that a letter of credit in an amount. This would happen at final plat. A letter of credit in an amount said by the city engineer must be filed prior to recording the plot. That will be the final plot to ensure the completion of all uncompleted public improvements prior to issuance of any building permit for any lot on the property. Uh

condition number five, the applicant proposes that the houses the houses will be minimum 2,000 square ft heated area. So all the houses in this subdivision will minimum 2,000 square ft heated area. Uh two brick on all sides. Uniform mailboxes and garages requirements that garage doors will not face the public street. So all garage will be side basically side s sideel loaded. There are no alleys. So it may be difficult to do rear loaded in this particular subdivision. Condition number 10 requires this condition is basically picked up from the existing approved plat for Carson Creek. The board of adamand requires a matter of transparency that in the construction of the Carson Creek subdivision, the developer should erect a sign at the end of the Bending M Street in Carson Creek subdivision stating clearly that this road shall be connected in future to the Bending M Street in Asbury subdivision to ensure that anybody buying a lot on that particular subdivision knows that this not a dead end street is going to extend in future. That concludes staff's presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Song. So, just for my memory, the one acre and above, we have normally exempt sidewalks and curbs and gutters if it's that large of a lot or above. And these are Okay.

Yes, sir. Board, any questions on the presentation? I just got a quick question. Maybe hopefully it's quick. Andy, on the that drainage ditch was there with the standing approval. What what's the difference in is there a difference in what they're required to do with that ditch now? If it's approved as opposed to what it was because the ditch is still there before or after. What would have been done if it was 70s something lots? Would the ditch just go away or would they build around it?

Um, it's no different from the way it was treated before with the with the denser development. It's just a fairly substantial ditch. if what what's under Davidson Road uh when when we started looking at the the amount of flow that comes through that ditch and the size pipe that we had it was far less than the 25 year storm which is what our standard design is wouldn't become a big issue but they're widening the road and so when they're widening the road and trying to meet that you can't you can't have a smaller pipe and go into a larger pipe. So, we're trying to work with them and possibly what may be going on with South Branch to to get the right size pipe and make sure that that that it's protected to um the roads protected, which is going to be our number one priority that there's not going to be over topping of the road when everything gets ultimately built out and and you have um development up north which should detain, but you still need the crossing underneath the road that's going to be able to handle that water. Does that make sense?

Yeah. Go to that same area as well.

Well, there um this subdivision is draining to the to the east and so it's not draining toward that cover. This subdivision is is draining away from it. Mr. Swims, has the creek or the ditch been a problem for South Branch on the west side other than just knowing where to build? Has it been a problem for that development?

No. So, the the area just to the to the east, I'm sorry, to the west is lowlying area. the developer is going to come in there and build it, but they haven't really presented anything to us that shows exactly how that's going to finish out, whether they're going to raise up the lots, but I know they're going to put detention. That's what required any in in any subdivision. And they have the um they have a possibility that they're going to have I know they're going to have some type of a lake over there. that lake could compensate for any growth uh or for the additional water that that may even exceed I guess what we've seen in the past which may allow for that pipe to stay where it's at if they detain enough that we could actually keep a a pipe that's actually smaller. So, um we're just kind of going to wait to see what what South Branch is going to bring to us. And I think they're working on that now. Well, the larger lots as proposed should be more pleasing to the people to the south on Tranquil. It's it matches or mirrors their lot size more now that they're larger instead of the smaller lots. Board, any questions? Does the applicant have anything else to add? Mr. Russell.

Greg Russell with Civil Source 2696 Dawnwood Circle North in South Haven. Uh, no sir, I don't have anything to add. If y'all have any questions, I'll be glad to answer those. Let me The ditch is basically going to be a no touch. Y'all just going to leave it as is? Yes, sir. And build. Okay. That's what I'm Except for where you crossing it. Okay. That's I just You're not going to touch a ditch. Okay. No, sir. And we've we've provided the required buffer along the top banks also. Okay. All right.

2,000 square foot minimum houses and two/3 brick. Yes, sir. And the in in the the previous layout, we would have had to clear the whole subdivision, the whole piece of property. This one, we're just going to clear out the roads and then the homeowners can clear out whatever they want to do. So, we're going to leave it wooded. Okay. Is the plan?

Anything for the applicant? Thank you, Mr. Russell. Thank you. I know when we first approved that the 78 lot or whatever it was, it was a reduction to what they originally proposed and we had a lot of opposition to that. I can imagine now that the people that were here in opposition are absolutely thrilled. They're going from 78 to 25 that this is beyond what they thought they would ever be able to get. So, yep. Good good outcome for them. That's right. That's right. questions, items of discussion or motions.

I'll make a motion to approve. Mr. Wallace motion to approve as presented. Is there a second? Mr. Dickerson second. Any discussion? All in favor? All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Second new business item, consideration of application for a second revision to lots 12 and 13 of the Craft Road Industrial Park subdivision submitted by Mike Davis, the Reeves firm, on behalf of property owner SM Lawrence. The request is to combine the existing lot 12 and 13 and create a single lot 12A of 1.3 plus or minus acres. The subject property is zoned C2 Highway commercial district and is located on the northwest side of Industrial Drive, approximately 840 ft of Old Craft Road, known as lot 12 and Craft Road Industrial Park, 8211 Industrial Drive. Report please. Mayor Adam, before you is a request to consider a replat for these two lots, lots 12 and lot 13 of this particular subdivision, Industrial Park subdivision. All the applicant is really proposing to do is to remove the lot line and combine those two lots into one which will be 1.38 acres in size. The reason this is not on the consent agenda requires clear action is the applicant proposes to relocate this sewer line to the northeast of the property. That will likely not be done before the plot is recorded. That's a public line. As such, they will have to provide a letter of credit to the city to reinsure that that that public line will be relocated. This is the plot as proposed. This the plot currently shows a 15 ft proposed easement. That easement may be sufficient. It may not be sufficient. The city engineer has required an actual survey to look at how deep that is going to be and as such determine how wide that easement is going to be before the plat is recorded.

The reason this is before you is the applicant intends. This is an intended development concept. This went to the board of zoning adjustment for the conditional use permit. This is lot 12, lot 13, the applicant intends to add another building to the south. And then on lot 13, current lot 13, they'll put up a parking lot. This area, the rear of the property, this particular area will be used for material storage. This went through the board of zoning adjustment was approved for the conditional use permit. All of this is going to be fenced in with vinyl fence. So there will be a 6 ft high vinyl fence from the road. You will not be able to see the fence in area. Uh because of this development that's why the applicant is proposing to eliminate this lot line and so that they don't have any encumbrances or any hindrances when developing the site. They will then be relocating this sewer line to the north of the property. The planning commission reviewed this application at its meeting on March 10 and unanimously recommended approval subject to eight conditions. Condition number two being that the easement along the rear and side of the property must be adequate as shall be determined by the city engineer to incorporate both the force main and the proposed sewer main with room to do any repair work. So the city engineer will make that determination. There is a manhole located near the rear of the property line that shall be established by survey prior to recordation of the plant to confirm the adequacy of the seaw easement. Condition number eight, this was added after the planning commission meeting and establish recommendation that the board approves these subject to all of these conditions one to eight. Condition number eight being that the property owner shall submit construction plans for the relocation of the public sewer line along the northwest property line for approval by the city engineer. This

new line shall be constructed and the as build approved by the city engineer before recordation of this plan. Alternatively, the property owner may provide a letter of credit of sufficient amount plus a 25% contingency as shall be said by the city engineer to ensure completion of this civil line before the plan is recorded. This will protect the city's interest. That concludes staff's presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Saw. Any questions board on the staff report? Is the applicant here? Anything else to add, sir?

Okay. Any questions of the applicant board? Okay. Thank you. Any discussion or motion to for approval? approved Mr. Collins motion. Is there a second? Second. Second, Mr. Dickerson. Any discussion? All in favor?

All opposed? Motion carries. Board, this is consideration of bids for the Oldtown Olive Branch sanitation sewer rehabilitation project. We ask for your indulgence for a motion second vote to table this until April the 7th. we uh there's some rhyme and reason of what we're doing, looking at the bids and making sure that the successful bidder is prepared to do the work. And we think we'll be ready by April the 7th to make a final recommendation. Motion to table by Mr. Wallace. Is there a second? Second, Mr. Collins. All in favor?

All opposed? Motion carries. New business consideration of recommendation to approve change order number one on the contract with Enscore LLC for change in scope of work for the project referred to as OLV terminal drive utility quarter. Mr. SWS. Um, this was just simply that they had actually found that the sewer pipe to be an 8 in I mean a 10 inch instead of an an 8 inch that just kind of u built into affecting a lot of different things but it did not actually end up costing additional funds because of some areas were reduced in work and some were increased and there was no additional time. So this just a change in scope just to make the board of alderman aware of the change. Thank you. And that's $31,800.

Or my nets out to zero. Okay. Nets out to zero. Gotcha. Any questions or motions to the change order? Basically found out that there could be a smaller pipe size than we required first. Okay. So move. Mr. Gamage motion. Second. Miss Hamilton. Any discussion? All in favor? All oppose? Motion carries. Is there a motion to leave regular session with the intention of going into executive session for items one through eight? So move. Got a got that. Hamilton Wallace. All in favor? I.

All opposed. Motion carries. Is there a motion to go into executive session to discuss a personnel matter in the building department, personnel matters in the airport department, personnel matter in the park department, personnel matter in the engineering department, personnel matters in the fire department, personnel matter in the police department, and personnel matters in the gas building department and acquisition of property discussion with city attorney. Is there a motion to go in executive session for those items? Move. Mr. Collins motion. Is there a second? Second, Mr. Gamage. Second. All in favor? All oppose? We are in executive session.