Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

call the meeting of the Olive Branch Planning Commission to order. If we'll have the roll call to open the meeting. Pat here. Dion Jones here. Janice Lewis here. Mark Long here. Diane Singer here. Donnie Sing here. Steve Stratton here. Okay, we're all here tonight. Good to see y'all. Uh you've received in your in your uh packets the minutes of the November 12th meeting. Are there any corrections or additions that need to be uh to the minutes? If not, do we have a motion to approve the minutes? Motion to approve.

All right, we have a motion by Mr. Stratton to approve the minutes of the November 12th meeting. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second by Miss Singer. Any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? So, the minutes have been approved from from the last last meeting. Um, before we get into the old business, I'd like to just look out and I see a good crowd tonight. Just say thank you for being here because uh your your attendance and your input is very important to us. I ask it that you remain silent during our presentations and there will be a time for um public discussion and uh public hearing as we get to some of the applications. So, uh once again, thank you for being here tonight. All right. Our first order of of business is from old business and it's an application for a preliminary plat for Fox Paul Creek subdivision submitted by Chance Walker Smith Walker LLC on behalf of property owner Cynthia Fox trustee. The request is subdivide 108.0 acres into 262 lots and six common open spaces. The subject property has an accompanying application request to resone from AR to R2 Single Family Residential District and is located on the west side of Davidson Road approximately 0.25 miles south of Goodman Road and it was tabled at the November 12th meeting. So we'll have staff presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh some background on this application. Uh Chance Walker, as you said, uh on behalf of Cynthia Fox, trustee has submitted for consideration this preliminary plat for Fox Paw Creek subdivision. There is a application for resoning to R2 Single Family Residential that was submitted and recommended for approval by the planning commission on November

12th. and will be considered for approval by the board of alderman on December 16th. So this preliminary plant is for a 262 lot twophase subdivision with 22 acres of open space upon a plus or minus 108 acre track on the west side of Davidson Road approximately 0.25 miles south of Goodman Road. Phase one is proposed to be 121 lots as you see here. Phase two 141 lots. So here is the line between the phases. Phase one again is 121. Phase 2 141. The applicant has proposed an open space with a walking trail within a landscape buffer along Davidson Road right here. Uh, the Department of Engineering has made recommendations regarding improvements on Davidson Road and the applicant has proposed off-site improvements along Davidson Road and to Davidson Road north of the site. Amenities will include a walking trail along Davidson Road, which will also meander around a reshaped pond right here uh with a bilion and lit fountain. Traffic calming devices are proposed in phase two right here, here, and here. Uh all proposed lots do meet required R2 bulk regulations. So, the lots and the homes, the applicant has proposed two phases of development as previously stated. Uh, the phase one, 121 residential lots,

which would be greater than or equal to 9,000 square ft in size with four open spaces, which total 7.83 acres. Phase two is proposed to consist of 141 residential lots which would also be greater than or equal to 9,000 square ft in size. Common open spaces in phase 2 total plus or minus 20.8 acres and they're proposed from ex the existing stream buffers. The applicant is awaiting final approval of US Army Corps of Engineers delineation of the stream buffer areas to determine these areas final acreage which will affect lot sizes. Uh the applicant has submitted several floor plans of homes with different square footages homes that are proposed on the 262 lots uh from one uh 1,800 to 1999. uh roughly 20% of lots with a cap of 50 lots, 2,000 square feet to 22.99 heated square feet, approximately 35% of lots and that is approximately 92 plus or minus lots. 2300 to 2599 heated square feet, approximately 35% of lots. It's also 92% of lots plus or minus 92 lots. Uh, and 2600 plus or minus heated square feet and that would be 10% of lots which is plus or minus 26 lots. I've also included some building elevations here as you can see that the applicant has submitted. Here are some building elevations.

Uh, on to the infrastructure. Uh the developer shall construct new public water and sewer lines and extend all other utilities as necessary to service the proposed lots. Existing utilities in the vicinity are an 8 in gravity sewer line within the Davidson Road rideway and a 6-in water man on the east side of the Davidson Road rideway. No gas utility lines are in the vicinity of the proposed subdivision. transportation. Um, according to the comprehensive plan 20 240, the portion of Davidson Road between Goodman Road and Timber Oaks Drive is classified as a major collector right here. As you can see on the graphic, Davidson Road currently has a rideway of 90 ft. However, the existing pavement width of Davidson Road is approximately plus or minus 20 feet. So, that's what's existing. The long range vision plan for the Davidson Road segment from Timber Oaks Drive to Goodman Road right here is for it to be a two-lane road with potential for developable parcels to the parcels to the south of the subject road of the subject property notwithstanding continuing transportation. The city engineers recommendations for David Davidson Road improvements. Widen the west side right here of Davidson Road to accommodate a road width of 24 to 30 feet. Construct curbs, gutters, and sidewalks minimum five five feet along the entire western side of the Davidson Road street frontage of the property or provide open sweet swale rural street section. An option to

effectively handle the daily traffic increase and impact that the development would generate from Timber Oaks Drive to Goodman Road. The planning commission could recommend and the board of alderman could require that the 32 foot wide urban section of Davidson Road with sidewalks south of Highway 302 be extended south within the existing rideway. This would also allow for pedestrian access to the commercial areas along Highway 302. So as you can see right here on the map uh the applicant this is what the applicant has submitted would there would be curb gutter and sidewalk with a taper here. There would be a crosswalk at New Jeremiah Church here. I'm going move on to the next slide. I think it's a little clearer. Then there would be a westside taper here up to 30 feet which would continue to the first entrance. After the first entrance, uh the additional pavement would be added to bring the street to 24 ft in width all along here. So the next steps upon recommendation by the planning commission, this application would move forward to the board of alderman for a final decision. The recommended motion is that staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Fox Creek subdivision phases one and two subject to the following conditions. I'm not going to go through all of them, but number two, uh, the developer shall submit construction plans to the city engineer for approval widening the west side of Davidson Road and along the entire eastern street frontage of the

parcel to be developed to accommodate a road width of 24 to 30 ft. The Davidson Road improvements must be constructed before recordation of the final plat of phase one unless a letter of credit of sufficient amount plus a 25% contingency is provided to the city to cover any uncompleted public improvements. Uh there these are the first seven. I'll move on to the next uh five. Uh number 11, the developer and/or property owner shall secure completed delineation of the stream buffers by the United States Army Corps of Engineers before approval of the final plat of this phase one and should show the designated flood plane limits, floodway boundary, and base flood elevation of all all lots on the final subdivision plat. and 12. Should MDEQ determine that the western streams will not require 60 foot wide protection buffers, an additional eight lots are authorized to be added to phase two, increasing the total lots from 262 to 270. That concludes staff recommend uh staff presentation. Okay. Any questions of staff? No questions. I think Mr. Gambone's here. you wish to come come forward or whoever comes forward to represent the application. So,

uh, good evening, Chance Walker or Smith Walker Engineering, 11:02 Braymont Drive, Nesbbit, Mississippi. Uh, we're in agreeance with the recommended motion. Um, I believe item number four on the conditions. Uh if I can get some some clarity on that. I'm I'm not sure if uh I believe the city may have to grant a maintenance easement for us to take over the maintenance of the trail. Is that correct if it's in the city route of way? Yes.

Yes. That would need to be done at final plant. If Can you go back to the slide that has the trace, please? The one you just left. No, no, no. The next one. Yes. Yes. All there seem to be small sections of the tray that are outside of the ride ofway, like in this area around the pond, just a small section, but all other areas of the trail that are within the public right away. Basically, it will be like sidewalks, so to speak. Right. And so, you have to to have that maintenance ement. Yes. Okay. is I I'll take any questions if if there are any any any questions.

No questions and thank you. All right. Thank you. Okay. Uh we do not have have to have a uh public hearing since it's a plat preliminary plat and we had a lengthy discussion on this the last meeting. So, I will now uh direct this to the commissioners for any discussions or motions that you have on this on this item. I make a motion to approve the preliminary plan for Fox Paw Creek subdivisions phase one and two subject to the conditions made by city staff.

We have a motion by Mr. Jones to approve this application subject to all the staff conditions submitted. Do we have a second on the on the motion? Second. We have a second by Miss Lewis. Any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I.

Any opposed? So, the motion is carried and and will be forward on to the U board of alderman meeting in December. All right. The second item on old business is an application for a zoning map amendment submitted by Bob Farley. Farley surveying on behalf of Vish Prasad Vance Realy LLC property owner. The request is to reszone 2.06 plus or minus acres from M2 heavy industrial district to C2 highway commercial district for the purpose of establishing a medical clinic at this location. The subject property is at the northeast corner of Hackscross Road and Airport Road known as 8274 Hackscross Road. And this was tabled in at the meeting of November 12th, 2025. So we now have the staff presentation. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Bring you up to where we are. This would be north on Hack Crossroad. Airport Road is here. So you've gotten numerous businesses. Snap-on tools uh in this vicinity here, a Chevron gas station south of the subject property uh below Airport Road uh where the pointer is at. Again, this application is to reszone 2.6 acres. This was previously a bank. It has a drive-thru. We'll talk about that a little bit. staff does recommend approval based on the finding that over the years the character of the area has changed and evolved from agricultural to a mix of commercial and industrial uses. So again, if you're driving up the road Hacks Cross and Airport Road, currently the applicant intends to use this property for a medical office. The site may be suitable for and at an intensity that a site can support. Uh some other uses just to mention a few banking,

retail, grocery, medical offices, hotels, restaurants get a go on here if this is reszone to C2. So conditional uses in this district may also be permitted if approved by the board of zoning. As you'll notice here, this structure was built in 1980 and was most recently used as Cadence Bank as we talked about. surrounding zoning and uses. This is from a Google map. Uh didn't come out as large as I wanted it to. However, you can see here there are several businesses up and down Hacks Crossroads going from storage units to uh Pinsky Truck Repair to Chevron Gas Stations, Jack in the Box. Uh there's numerous gas stations uh further north. The map shows the property and its surroundings. Uh this right here is its current zone M2. Closest C2 is approximately 500 ft away. Uh given the overall character of the hacks crossroad corridor where commercial uses are intermingled with primary light industrial activities, reszoning properties um such as this property of C2 considering its surroundings may not be regarded as spot zoning. take you through the analysis here that I looked at the uh one through three is what we'll start with original zoning classification for the property was a mistake so applicant did submit that the original zoning was not incorrect staff did find that the original zoning classification uh was a mistake uh that would imply that the property should have been zoned differently so the property's been zoned since M2 or been zoned M2 since 199 90 when it was annexed in the city. We did not find a mistake either. This number

two is about the character of the neighborhood has changed to an extent to justify proposed reszoning. This is a map from 1996 to 2025. As you can see, some agricultural uses were predominantly in the area surrounding it. You've got a couple hay fields here. This is a bean field. Uh this was a hay field and then some forestry over here. If you notice on looking at the map here in 2025 and of course you've drove up and down hacks crossroads you can see various buildings built here along the bean patch. You can see your storage units, your office buildings and then your C2 zoned area. So the applicant uh found that the character of the neighborhood has changed over the past decades and this request would more closely match and complement the zoning of properties along Hacks Crossroad. Our finding as staff is that over the years the character of Hacks Crossroad corridor from Goodman Road to state line has changed from agricultural to a mix of commercial industrial uses. So this is a picture that I got again from Google. What I thought I would point out on here is Methodist Hospital is here up all the way through Hacks Crossroad to State Line Road. We have numerous businesses as we just talked about. Um, if there was something odd to happen, there is no medical personnel on this side of uh 302. And I just thought that was interesting and I thought it may be worth pointing out. And it does sort of go along with number three for their public need uh question. They say that there's been an increase for need for medical support services within the medical within the method Methodist Hospital at Hacks and Interstate 22. Uh our our uh staff finding again development patterns and areas suggest

there's a demand uh for uh uses such as commercial uses within the city. So, the property is designated industrial distribution in the future land map. Uh, there's several comprehensive plan goals that support economic development, and this would be one of those, repurposing this building for a use now instead of it sitting vacant, and a use such as a medical clinic would align with a public need. So our recommended motion as you can see here is based on the aforementioned findings that the resoning criteria have been met. Namely the character of hacks crossroad corridor has changed in the last three decades from agricultural to a mixture of commercial and light industrial uses and reszoning the property to C2 would serve the public need and services uh along with the corridor approved the application recommend the board of alderman to reszone the 2.06 06 acres at 8274 Hacks Crossroads from its current zoning designation of M2, that's heavy industrial to C2 highway commercial district. That concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you. Any questions of staff? There are no questions. I believe Mr. Farley's here to represent the application. Bob Farley, 235 West Avenue, Holly Springs, Mississippi.

Any questions? There's no questions then. Thank you. Thank you. Uh we'll now open this for a public hearing. If there's anyone here that wishes to speak in favor or against this application, uh you can come forward now. Does anyone here wish to speak in favor against the application? If not, then the public discussion is closed and I will now enter entertain any comments, discussion or motions from the commissioners.

I make a motion to approve this. Um, subject to the conditions that were stated, we have a a motion by Miss Lewis to to approve this application to reszone 2.06 acres from M2 heavy industrial C2 highway commercial district subject to any staff conditions. Do we have a second on this? Second. We have a second by Mr. Stratton. Any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? None opposed. The motion is carried. The application is approved. And the third one is the application for a final plant for Prasad Rheumatology subdivision submitted by Bob Farley Farley Surveying on behalf of Vish Prasad Vance Realy LLC property owner. The request to subdivide 2.06 plus or minus acres into a single lot. The subject property is at the northeast corner of Hackscross Road and Airport Road known as 8274 Hackscross Road. And this was tabled at the meeting of November 12th, 2025. Want to have the staff presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, we are back at Hack Crossroad and Airport Road. As you did mention, the subject property is located in yellow. Uh, this subdivision plat would create one lot from 2.06 acres. The plat meets the regulatory and zoning requirements. Any needed utility extension shall be the responsibility of the developer. Staff recommends approval of the final plat subject to multiple conditions. Walk through the analysis here just a little bit. Again, we've talked about it's already zoned M2. Uh, I did just state that the any necessary utility extensions shall be the responsibility of the developer. On this map, you've got the blue line is your water, green is your sewer, and yellow is the gas. Of course, as you saw in the previous pictures, this building is not a brand new building, but it's not a building that does not have running water and sewer. So, the utilities are there. Any future extensions would need to be done by the developer. You can see by the uh picture, and I'm sure that u the other pictures also illustrated, there's paved driveways. Again, we've got curb. They've got a awning in the back for a drive-thru. Uh financial guarantee, we did not define that they would need any uh variances and deviations for the plat are not needed. And the only waiver that would be uh required and it's one of the um conditions I yeah condition number two you'll see the requirement for sidewalk construction would be waved due to the lack of sidewalks along hacks and airport road. So our plat uh the next step what it would do is upon recommendation by the planning commission it'd be forwarded to the mayor and board of utterman for consideration. If approved by the board, the plat would need to be recorded before any building permit could be issued for any

development on the lot. Staff does recommend, as I stated, that planning commission approved the final plat and recommend the same to board of alderman. I'll bring to your attention number two that we talked about a waiver. Uh the requirement for the property owner to construct a 5-ft sidewalk along Hacks Cross would be waved. The rest of the five conditions, six conditions total are listed in front of you. That is the extent of my presentation. Thank you. Any questions to staff and then there are no questions. And you have a question. Go ahead.

On that sidewalk um waiver, Jeremiah is um are any of the properties around there, do they all have sidewalks or anything across the street have sidewalks? I didn't see anything within the PCI. You can see from this picture here that has sidewalks and this is even newer uh landscaping right here. I did not find any sidewalks in that area. Okay, cool. That's all I needed to see. Any other questions?

No further questions. And Mr. Farley, if you'll come forward once again, please if we anyone have any questions? Gosh, no questions for you today. You're doing good tonight. That's the tie in it. Thank you, sir. All right, we'll now uh we're we're not required to have a public hearing on a final plat. So, we'll now entertain any comments, discussions, or motions from the commissioners on this application. I'll make a motion to approve based on staff's recommendations.

All right, we have a motion by Mr. Singh to approve the final plat subject to the staff recommendations. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second by Mr. Jones. Any other discussion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? Then the motion's carried. Application is approved. Now we're to the new business tonight. We have an application to amend preliminary plat approval condition number six of Rosewood subdivision submitted by Chance Walker Smith Walker Engineering on behalf of property owner John Reeves. The request is to reduce the minimum heated area of houses in the agricultural residential district AR zone areas in the north of the subdivision from 3,000 square ft to 2800 square ft and to decrease the minimum heated area of houses in all other areas of the subdivision from 3,000 square ft and 2800 square ft to 2400 square ft. The 82.37 plus or minus acre subject property is on AR and R1 single family residential district and is located on the east side of Craft Road and north of College Road known as 7200 College Road. We'll now have the staff presentation. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. on a different side of town here. We've got 305 running north and south, College Road running east and west. We're on the west side of 305 east side of Craft. This 82 acres, as you'll remember, the preliminary plat of Rosewood subdivision was approved in January of 2025. So almost a year ago we were meeting the conditions of this preliminary plaid approval set forth the design density and placement of the 118 lots. This application proposes to amend condition number six. As you read this application seeks to reduce the minimum hair minimum

heated square footage of future houses. This application submits that the relatively smaller house sizes would meet better market demand, thus fulfilling a public need. There the current application does not propose any changes in lot sizes. The general layout of the subdivision buffers and/or accessibility, which would be your transportation. the proposed minimum heated square area of the houses would generally in line with the properties surrounding um the preliminary plant for Rosewood. So these are the properties surrounding you've got Montro to the north, Payne Park, Payne Flynn to the east and directly beside of Rosewood is Oakwood Park. So, as we just talked about on 1525, the board of altman approved this preliminary plat for 82 acres. Larger lots of at least one acre adjoin Montro subdivision to the north and college road to the south. As you'll see, there's common open spaces that there's a creek uh that runs from the northwestern line to the south end of the property. and they're proposed for storm water retention. So in the middle of the portion of the property, 46.8 acres are are abouts were reszoned from AR to R1. In the R1 zoning district, uh the lot sizes are around 12,500 square ft. Uh in this green area, as you know, in the AR district, they're around 43,000 square ft. We just talked about it. the properties bordered to the north by Montrose which would be considered rule state lots and Oakwood and Pain

Pain Flynn subdivisions uh on the east side. These adjoining lots are zoned R20 and R30 respectively. So this is just a map. You saw it also within your packet uh showing you where the 3,00 to 2800 and where the 3,00 to 2,400 and where the 2,800 to 2400 square foot homes are at. So you've got 3,2800 joining Montrose. You've got 2800 to 2400 adjoining Oakwood Park. and you've got the 3,00 to 2400 also butdding up against Oakwood Park and College Road. So, what we did is we uh looked at a 500 ft area. Uh city policy and historical practices define properties within 500 ft of a concerned parcel of land as affected area as noted here on your map. This table shows the heated area base area of existing homes in Montro subdivision. We'll also see some in Oak Park, Oakwood Park, and we also see some in Payne Flynn. Um there these are within 500 ft of Rosewood. Uh these are close enough uh that were uh again called affected and these are the areas in which the developer proposes to reduce the minimum heated square area of houses from 3,00 to 2800 square ft. I think it's interesting that if you notice considering the average base area is 23.99 uh which is less than the proposed 2800 in Rosewood it may be may be asserted or considered that the proposed minimum hair heated square foot reduction would not ne negatively affect the character of the area.

So table two here again it shows us the base area of existing homes within Oak Park. These are these are a little bit smaller. Uh even if you drive through Oak Park they they appear smaller than what's in Montrose. But as you can see table two shows the heated area. That's the base area of existing homes that are within 500 ft. that's noted here on the affected area that the developer proposes to reduce the heated area from 3,2800 to 2400. Considering that the affected area has an average base area of 2200 square ft, which is less than 2400 square ft, it may be asserted that the suggested minimum area reduction would not negatively affect the character of the area. Uh this is a an aerial took from Google. I took this map to show you the development within along College Road and sort of the development pattern. You've got this here. This is a a newer subdivision going in. You've got Gwyn Farms, Dawan Farms, all these Southern Trace and Bmore. um you've got these housing units moving uh that way, moving west to join up uh here with Craft Road. So, the applicant provided a new home comparison worksheet showing market data for homes of similar sizes. All of homes sold in Dotto County from January to October 2025. uh 20% were houses with a medium minimum heated square area of 2800 to 3,000 square ft in Olive Branch. Within 2400 to 2600 square foot range, 87 homes in 2025 January through October were sold. 14 sold in Olive Branch in the same time

period. So, uh, this year between January and October, 14 homes ranging from 24 to 2600 square foot sold, uh, in Olive Branch. Uh, generally homes in Olive Branch uh, sized 2,800 to 3,000 square ft sold for an average of $500,000. Uh, those sized from 24 to 2600 square ft average $427,000. So from a public need perspective, the proposed reduction would broaden housing options and promote housing attainability in the city. Our recommended motion is finding based on a finding that the proposed amendment would not be misaligned with the house sizes or the character of the area. Amend Rosewood subdivision preliminary plat condition six as follows. And so you can see we've uh provided this in a strike through and underline ease of use uh type of way here. Number six, we'll go to the second one where the pointers at number six. Uh we would uh recommend that it be read as for final plat submitt. The declaration of covenants and conditions and restrictions will need to be submitted and customized for the Rosewood subdivision. The declaration language should include the intent for the minimum heated area of houses in the AR area north of the R1 district to be 2800 square foot and the minimum heated area in the rest of the subdivision to be 2400 square foot. That goes along with the 70% brick content on all sides address garage orientation uh by requiring side entry. That is the extent of my presentation, sir.

Thank you. Any questions to staff? If there are no questions, do we have someone here to represent the application?

Chance Walker, Smith Walker Engineering. Uh, we agree with recommended motion. I'll take any questions. Any any questions? No questions then. Thank you. Since this is a preliminary plat, we do not require a public hearing. So, at this time, I'll entertain any comments, discussion, emotions from the commissioners. I make a motion to approve. All right. We have a motion by Miss Singer to approve the application to um have the minimum heated area of homes to 2800 square feet and also 2400 square ft. Do we have a second? I'll second that.

We have a second by Mr. Singh. Any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? And the motion is carried and application is approved. Item number two is an application for a final plat for Ansley Point Subdivision submitted by Andy Richardson RNH Engineering and Surveying LLC on behalf of Sunset Creek Farms LLC Kevin Binham property owner. The request is to create two residential lots totaling. 82 plus or minus acres. The subject property is on R1 single family residential district. The property is located at the northeast corner of Hamilton Circle North and Hamilton Circle West, known as 662 Hamilton Circle North. We now have the staff presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, a little background on this application. Uh, as you stated, Andy Richardson on behalf of Sunseet Sunset Creek Farms has submitted this application for the final plat for Ansley Point subdivision. This final plat is for a two lot subdivision of plus or minus.82 acres at the corner of Hamilton Circle North and Hamilton Circle West. Lot one and lot two will be 20,248 and 15,594 square ft respectively. This plat does include dedication of rightaway for an extension of Hummingbird Lane at a future T intersection with Hamilton Circle North and Hamilton Hamilton Circle West. As

you can see here on the proposed plat right here, uh public utilities are available for available for both proposed lots. The plat meets zoning and subdivision regulation requirements, albeit with a waiver of sidewalks. The current zoning is R1. Existing land use is vacant. Both lots do meet the minimum bulk regulations. The future land use designation is suburban neighborhood. Uh brief discussion of the utilities. As you can see, there's a 12-in and 3in water man uh located in the Hamilton Circle Rideway right here. Uh there are 2-in gas manes located in the Hamilton Circle Rideway right here, the yellow line. uh 8 inch water manes with a hydrant located to the northwest of the site within the Hummingbird Drive rightway right here. Uh and there are sewer lines uh in the area in the vicinity. There's one here 8 in and then there's one to the north 8 in right here. Uh, as far as transportation goes, according to the comprehensive plan 20 240, Hamilton Circle and Hummingbird Drive connection right here, as you can see, would serve as a minor route between Goodman Road and Bluebird Lane. This would create a north south alternate to reach Goodman Road and Bluebird Kerbo Lane, which are east west section line roads. Uh waivers. The applicant has requested a waiver to extend Hummingbird Drive and to widen and straighten Hamilton Circle West in front of the property. The property owner does

propose to dedicate the rideway on Hamilton Circle West. As you saw in the previous slide, the requirement for sidewalks on the future east side of the proposed Hummingbird Drive extension and the future north side of the Hamilton Circle West extension is requested to be waved due to the rural street section of this portion of the roadway. So the next steps would be upon recommendation by the planning commission the plat will be forwarded to the board of mayor and alderman for consideration. So the recommended motion as you see here is that the staff recommends approval of the final plat of an Ansley Point subdivision lots one and two subject to the following conditions. I will highlight condition three and condition four. Condition three is the requirement for the property owner to construct sidewalks along the Hamilton Circle West and along the future Hummingbird Drive extension is waved and the property owner is required to dedicate rightaway on Hummingbird Drive in Hamilton Circle West as shown on the plat but not required to construct extend andor realign these roads. That's was in consultation with the department of engineering. That concludes staff presentation.

Okay. Any questions to staff? One question. It may sound strange, but uh are any of the trees that are currently on the lot larger than 2 and 1/2 to 3 and 12 inches in caliber? The reason I asked that is if they already have because we're asking it the tree to be planted to be specifically between two and a half and three and a half. If they have a five and a half inch caliber tree, they will be out of they would have to plant another tree. Can we do um change number five to at least 2 and 1 half to three and a half inches in caliber? At least at least

at least one tree which shall be at least at least one tree shall be planted. Yes. Which shall be at least 2 and 1/2 to three and a half inches of That's what the ordinance requires. Yes. Okay. So we'll add shall be at least two and a half to three and a half inches. Yeah. On this. Not specifically if it's larger than that. Okay. Well, it can be larger because if it's larger than three three and a half inches in caliber. Okay. That is all. That is all. Any other questions to staff?

No further questions then. Do we have someone here to represent the application? Andy Richardson with R&H Engineering, 231 West Center Street, Hernando. And uh we agree with the recommendation of the staff and I'll be happy to answer any questions y'all may have. Okay. Any questions? No questions in. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. The final plat does not require public hearing. So, at this time, I'll entertain any comments, discussion, or motions from the commissioners. Let me reass this to to staff because I don't want to beat this. Is there is there a specific reason that it has to be between two and a half and three and a half inch inches in caliber? The reason I asked is it about the age of the tree and how long it's going to last? I mean, I know it sounds petty. I It really does sound petty, but if they've got five and a half inch caliber trees out there, are we going to make them put a brand new tree? Or is it has to do with age?

I think the the condition as written addresses trees to be planted, not trees that are existing already on the property. So if there is an existing 5 in caliber tree for example that condition number five is not addressing that. It's talking about the trees to be planted on the side. We've actually gone on the side. Everything has been cleared down. You don't have any existing trees that have been pres preserved in the front of the property. So and sometimes the larger the tree is at the time of planting if you are not careful rather die right

because the root system and all of that that is in place most that will survive are within that 2 and 1 half to three and a half inch caliber uh Kevin is more licensed on this he can speak better

that's correct uh director uh most of the time when you plant trees you want about that size between two and a half to three and a half size uh caliber er um you have your m mortality rates increase the larger your tree is particularly if you have a B&B a bald and burlap tree uh it's usually best in my experience to plant container grown stock but there is the option but usually within that size that is the uh highest livability rate if that's what you want to call Copy that.

And the ordinance also, that's what the ordinance does require. Yes, sir. Any other discussion of that? If not, then we I'll entertain any motions that you have. I make a motion to approve the final plan of Ansley Point subdivisions lot one and two with the following conditions 1 through eight, unedited. Okay. We have a a motion by Commissioner Jones to approve the application subject to the staff uh conditions unedited. So, do we have a second on that? I'll second that.

Okay, we have a second by Mr. Long. Any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? And the motion is carried. Application is approved. And item number three is an application for final plaque for Malco Island branch subdivision phase three submitted by Caleb Yale Civil Link on behalf of property owner Mike Bailey. The request is to create a single commercial lot of 3.22 plus or minus acres. The subject property is on C4 planned commercial district and is located at the south end of Grand Flora Drive. I hope I pronounced that right. and north of Goodman Road. And we're going to have staff presentation. Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh to give you a brief uh orientation, Goodman Road is down here to the south. Uh this is Malco Olive Branch Cinema right here. Uh Mugshots is here. Corkies is right here. Um, so that should get you some orientation. Uh, Ivy Trail subdivision is right here to the north and this is the, uh, stub of Grand Flora Drive. So, uh, to summarize really quick, Caleb Gil on behalf of owner Mike Bailey has submitted this application for a final plat for Malco Olive Branch subdivision phase three, lot four. Final plat is for a 3.22 acre commercial one lot subdivision right here uh within a vacant and unplatted 21.82 acre parent track located right here located west of the Malco Olive Branch Cinema and south of Grand Flora Drive right here. Uh public utilities are available. The plat meets both zoning and subdivision regulation requirements. The current zoning is C4 planned commercial district. The future land use designation is commercial corridor. The lot meets uh as I said the lot meets all applicable B bulk regulations. Surrounding land uses include single family residential. That's to the north here. A cinema which is Malco Olive Branch Cinema. a restaurant which is mug shots right here to the south of the proposed lot and then vacant property to the west. And here is a copy of the uh

proposed lot for 3.22 acres. There is a 75 ft landscape easement to the north on the north end of the uh proposed lot. Uh utilities in the area are adequate. Uh there is 8 in water and gravity sewer lines located to the north in the Grand Flora right here. Uh drive rightway within Ivy Trail subdivision. Uh there is also an 8 in gravity line here. Sew gravity sewer line here. There's a 10-in water man right here with a stub that goes here uh with a hydrant. uh an 8 in sewer line with a manhole is right here. And uh there is also a storm water detention easement located down here for storm water detention. Uh, as far as transportation goes, according to the comprehensive plan 20 240, Goodman Road serves as the principal arterial route running east west further south of the proposed lot. There are existing sidewalks that run along both the north and east property lines of lot three. So, right here, you've got uh sidewalks that run along the north side right here. And then right here, so sidewalks should be added and extended along the north and west side of the access easement. So here's the access easement right here. So along the west side of the access easement, this would connect up right here. And then this would be along the north side of this access easement right here. So

extend this sidewalk and extend this sidewalk. Uh as far as variances go, the applicant does not request a variance and staff does not find a variance is necessary. And the next steps would be upon recommendation by the planning commission, this plot will be forwarded to the board of mayor and alderman for consideration. And once the plot has been recorded, building permits may be issued. So, the recommended motion uh staff recommends approval of the final plat for Malco Olive Branch subdivision phase three lot four subject to the following conditions. As you can see, there are six conditions here. Uh number three and number four of our particular interest. All storm water improvements must be approved by the city engineer and MDEQ. And number four, the developer shall extend and/or construct sidewalks along the east and south property lines of the proposed lot four. That concludes staff presentation.

Okay. Any questions to staff? I had one question. Um, can you pull up the slide that shows a 75 ft uh landscape easement across the back of that property? I I beg your pardon. Can you pull up the slide that shows a 75 foot landscape ement across the back of that property? So I see right there that the um that Glenn Grandandy Flora uh kind of connects but it's stubbed out there but it runs right into the easement. So I mean I don't they would never be able to connect that right because they can't pave a road through the landscape easement.

That's correct. We uh we discussed it as staff and that is a public rightaway which would go into private uh private easements and and roads and so uh in the past that's not been a really great idea. Plus we also looked at Ivy Trails. Ivy Trails does have three existing ingress and egress points. Uh, so we didn't feel another one was necessary. Gotcha. Okay. So that'll forever be just like a dead end right there. That Okay, cool. Any other questions?

If no questions, I see we have someone here to represent the application. Yes, sir. Good evening. Chase Dabs with Civil Link 5779 Get Well Road. We agree with the staff's uh recommended motion. Just here to answer any questions y'all may have. Any questions? Gosh, no questions tonight. Thank you. Okay, since this is a final plat, it does not require a public hearing. So, I will now entertain any comments, discussion, or motions from the commissioners. Motion to approve subject to staff conditions.

All right, we have a motion by Mr. Stratton to approve the final plat for Angela Point lots one and two. Uh, subject to the staff conditions. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second by Miss Lewis. Any other discussion? Then all those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? Then the motion is carried and the application is approved. So now we're at application number four. which is an application to amend the project text for the Oaks and Park View Heights PUB submitted by David Baker, Fisher Arnold, Inc. on behalf of property only Trey Hart, mainland MCA Olive Branch LLC. The request is to change the permitted uses from memory care and assisted living facility to detach single family residential in area 3B and to approve the associated pre preliminary development plan. The subject property is on PUD plan unit development. Uh the 6.99 plus or minus acre uh area 3B is located on the west side of Park View Boulevard and south of Goodman Road known as 6755 and 6785 Park View Boulevard when I have the staff presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh a brief summary of this application. Uh, as you stated, David Baker with Fiser Arnold on behalf of the property owner, Trey Hart, request an amendment of the Park View Heights planned unit development project text. The portion of the PUD under consideration is a plus or minus 6.99 acre area 3B. I'll direct your attention to the original approval which was approved in 2008. Uh you can see that there were various retail. There's a funeral home here. Um this is single family housing right here. Uh this is condominium. This area right here was uh dedicated to um uh city park. And then here is area 3B right here. This is the area that is under consideration. Uh I've blown that up as you can see right here. Here is a uh cutout of the uh preliminary development plan. You can see access would come from Park View Oaks right here with a called well I call I would call it a culde-sac but there is a kiosk and a uh parking here. I'll give you some more background on the next slide. Uh the Parkview Heights plan development as a whole was originally approved in 2007 with area three designated for condominium uses and subsequently area 3

has been divided into areas 3A and 3B. In December of 2018, the permitted uses in area 3B were amended for development of a memory care and assisted living facility. The current proposed text amendment is to allow single family residential with 28 lots upon area 3B with a centrallylo common open space containing an arbor and mail kiosk. Existing utilities in the area include gas, water, and gravity sewer mains. There are existing utilities on site which must be removed or relocated. Surrounding zoning districts districts are R3, C3, and R2 single family residential. Land uses are detached single family residential, town homes, a funeral home, bed and breakfast, and park open space. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the original PUD housing provision intent and the comprehensive plan 2040. Homes within the development are proposed to be twostory with a minimum total finished heated area of 1,800 square ft. The developer also imposes a minimum heated floor area of 1,600 square ft for the first floor for multi-story residences excluses exclusive of porches and garages. And I've included some building elevations here for you to look at. On to the next slide. Uh the text amendment sum summary. Uh a PUD project text serves as unique

development code for a project by setting forth permissible uses, bulk regulations, and other standards such as architectural to coincide with the PUD master plan. The proposed single family residences would be accessed accessed to the rear by 18 foot private alleys. As you can see right here, you come in. Here's the private alleys right here. Here's the rear access right here. Uh, a homeowners association will own and maintain roads, alleys, buffers, and common open spaces. Lot ownership will be limited to two units. Uh, the bulk regulations, the minimum lot size is 4,000 square ft. Street A, which is this street right here. The setbacks would be 10 ft and 15 feet along the front. Street B, which is right here. These uh setbacks will be 10 feet on here, the front setback. The rear setbacks for all lots would be 15 ft minimum and the maximum building height will be 35 ft. There is a gated proposed gated entrance right here along Park View Boulevard. There is no access to Park View Oaks Circle which is right here. Okay. Uh landscape buffers and street plannings are proposed along the south property line right here along Park View Oak Circle right here. the north property line right here where

the funeral home is and Park View Boulevard which is right here. So the next steps uh would be this application will move forward to the board of alderman for a final decision on the text amendment. So the recommend recommended motion is based on the finding that the amendment to the project text for area 3B of the oaks at Parkview Heights planned unit development meets the original PUD intent to create residential use areas does not adversely affect the character of the area and conforms to policy 1.1.3 of the city's 2040 comprehensive plan by providing a diversity of housing types in the area. It is recommended by staff that the planning commission recommend approval of the project text amendment with 28 lots upon area 3B of the oaks at Park View Heights subject to the following conditions. And I'll highlight these two, number three and number four in particular. Uh, all storm water improvements must be approved by the city engineer and MDEQ. And number four, the developer shall extend and/or construct sidewalks along Park View Boulevard and Park View Oaks Circle. That concludes staff presentation.

Thank you. Any questions to staff? Question for staff. Um the original con uh the original text had 3B as condominiums. Is that correct? When it was approved originally, it was slated for condominiums. Okay. Then it was then it was then it was changed to memory care which is what is has remained since then. Now the request is to move it back to single family residential. Thank you. Any other questions to staff? I see Mr. Baker is here to represent the application.

Yes. Good evening. I'm David Baker with Fischer and Arnold. Uh with me tonight, Mr. Trey Hart with Mainland Capital. Uh my address for the record is 9180 Crest Winds Drive, Memphis. Appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight and work with you all staff. Uh but also a special thanks to the uh uh residents of the Oaks at Park View uh and their board. We've met with them several times and uh hopefully worked out to their satisfaction our proposal. One thing would like to mention, yes, this was originally part of the Oaks and it was going to be a you know the forplex condominium just like the Oaks and it was approved for uh 34 units at this at that time and then it went to the memory care and our proposal was for 28 lots. So it is actually less than the original approval uh the the town home condominium concept. So having said that we agree with all the conditions and the staff report and be glad to answer any questions and look forward to continuing to work with the city and staff on this application.

Thank you. Any any questions? There are no questions at this time. So we will now open the public hearing and uh I do have some signin cards. I will call out the names and you have the opportunity to come forward and uh state uh either voice your opinion in favor or against this application. We do ask that you keep your comments to three minutes or less and you try not to repeat what has been previously stated for the essence of time and you only get one trip to the podium. And also if you have a question if you will ask the question we will hold the answering of the questions to all the pres everyone has come forward and we'll try to answer the questions at one time. Uh the first name I've have on the list is Joan Hicks. Miss Hicks here.

No questions. Okay. U Joan Lanny. Do you wish to come forward? If not, Marsha Price.

Okay. And then Beverly Wink. Hold on a minute. Wicciniser. Did I I know I'm not the only one that's not pronounced that correctly. So, you're okay with that? Anyone else wish to come forward? If not then the public discussion is is public hearing is closed. Um I will I will now uh address it to any comments, discussion or motions from the commissioners.

Mr. If I may from staff please. Condition number seven where it speaks of the minimum the conditions governance and restrictions of the subdivision shall require that all houses be minimum one and a half stories. We would like to change that to minimum two stories. The submission of the applicant is for minimum two stories.

Two stories. So item number seven rather than require that all houses be a minimum of one and a half stories. It says change that to two stories. So that's the one correction on the uh recommendation. Okay. Any comments, discussion, or motions? I make a motion based on the findings that the amendment of the project text for area 3B of the oaks at Parkview Heights plan unit development meets the original PUD intent to create residential use area areas does not adversely affect the character of the area and conforms to policy 1.1.3 of the city's 2040 comprehensive plan. I recommend by staff that the that we recommend this to uh the alderman to amend the project text.

Okay. according to the one through eight amending or editing number seven to read a minimum two stories. Okay. We have a motion by Mr. Jones to approve the project text amendment with 28 lots upon area 3B of the oaks at Park View Heights subject to the staff conditions. Do we have a second on that? I'll second it. All right, we have a second by Mr. Singh. Any other discussion? If there's no further discussion, all those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? Then the motion is carried and the application is approved and it will go forward to the mayor and board of aldermen for final approval. Thank you. Thank you very much.

All right. Application number five is an application for a preliminary plat for the crossings at Olive Branch subdivision submitted by Mike Davis the reef firm on behalf of Cooper Realy Investments Inc. property owner. The request is to subdivide 41.5 plus or minus acres into seven lots. The subject property is zone C2, Highway Commercial District, and is located at the southwest corner of Highway 302 and Hacks Crossroads. And if if you wish, we'll wait just a few seconds and let it let let everyone clear out. Okay, we're going to have the staff presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before you is a request to consider a preliminary subdivision plot for this over 42 acres piece of property located south of Highway 302 or Goodman Road and west of Hack Cross Road. East of the branch subdivision in this general vicinity area. The property or the passes shown here marked in yellow. Uh old Gurman Road right ofway bifocates these property into two creating an area to the north and an area to the south. All of these two areas are subject properties constitute a subject property of this application. The property is currently zone C2, Highway commercial district. No reasonzoning action is involved in this preliminary plat approval. All the applicant seeks to do

is to preliminarily divide these over 42 acres into lots and lay out the subdivision in terms of where you will have streets uh and how the lots themselves will be laid out. In 2006, it's important to to kind of go behind go back to history as far as the division of this piece of property is concerned. In 2006, precisely 17 May, the board of adamant did approve the shops at Hacks Cross, creating a preliminary plot in which you had these basically like a five lane road that would connect or would have connected Hack Cross Road to Old Gurman Road with improvements around here where you have the branch subdivision. So if this had gone ahead, this is what we would have had out there already today. That particular subdivision pl included the addition of traffic lights at this particular location from the new street onto Hackscross Road and another traffic light at the intersection of Old Goodman and Highway 302. The proposal before you today is not much difference in terms of rightway connection. The applicant still proposes to have a new road that will link Hack Cross Road, but then we'll have a roundabout beautifully designed with landscaping futures um at this particular location. And this will extend to the old Goodman Road right ofway and then onto the branch subdivision. So there will still be the connection kind of that you had back in 2006. That interconnectivity is still being provided. The caption for this subdivision read seven lots. Actually, there are eight. There is there is the eighth lot to the north of uh the old good manual ride of way.

The development is proposed to be constructed really in two phases. Lot one will be phase one and all the other lots are going to be phase two with a common opening spaces mainly or future developments mainly common open space number eight here, number nine and number 10 to the south. This is the development intent, the master plan. This is a conventional subdivision. It's not a PD uh text. The uses are as they are already permitted in the C2 zone industry which includes things like offices, doctors offices, grocery, retail, restaurants, all of those are permitted. The development concept includes lot one would be developed for the 40,000 square ft grocery. That is really the focus of the developer at this time is to put a grocery store on that piece of property. The rest are prospective. Uh you can have you could have a 62,000 over 62,000 commercial retail building further to the south, shops and services, restaurants in the east outpos uh to the rear. This is reserved for future developments all in the C2 zoning district as currently permitted. With regard to utilities, there is an 8 in sewer line which the city engineer has evaluated will be sufficient for development in this particular area. Uh you have 6 in gas line. There is also 10in water line to the north that will be sufficient for extension and development on this particular piece of property. With respect to transportation, they would be only permitted a right in right out only onto lot one on Hacks Cross Road. So right in, right out only going into lot one on Hacks Crossroad where you have the grocery

store. The purpose being to avoid left turns going up into this intersection. That's a hight traffic area. Left turns are the cause of over 22% of accidents on this kind of roads. So it's important to limit that. Anybody intending to do a left turn will have to come down on these ingress egress easemen to this roundabout. And this is where you have your full access further away from the highway 302 intersection and where you have also have maximum site visibility. Secondly, with respect to transportation, one of the conditions of approval is that at this point the developer is only allowed to proceed with a development on lot one before you can have developments on lot 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. A traffic study must be completed and submitted to the city for review. That traffic study should address such issues as signal warrants. For example, will you need a traffic light at this intersection? Will we need a traffic light at the old Goodman uh and Goodman Road intersection? Kind of what you had back in 2006. That needs to be addressed from after any development on lot one. It is not necessary to do that at this time because this is a riding ride out only uh driveway. So you really don't need a traffic light at that particular intersection. Staff recommends approval for the creation of these eight lots subject to conditions and three common open spaces subject to condition one to five. Condition number five being that highway 302 sidewalks are waved. There are no um sidewalks within the vicinity of this property. The board wants to require it. They're actually sidewalks to the north.

In this area, you've got sidewalks. You don't have sidewalks directly crossing. And further to the south, the BCA began requiring sidewalks. The board may want to maintain the requirement for sidewalks in front of this property. Um and the branch wrote all other internal streets would need to have the sidewalks constructed. The northernmost access for proposed lot one is limited to ride in ride out only for passenger vehicles and no additional driveways along hacks cross road are permitted for lots two and three that applies to these. This is lot two and this is lot three. So these two lots will not have additional driveways going out on cross road. If you want to access this lot onto Hacks Crossroad, you can come up going in through that right in right out only. If you want to make a left turn, you come down on that ingress egress, get on the public street and you make a left turn there. If you if you have a restaurant here, for example, your driveway will be on this internal street, not onto Hacks Cross Road. So that's what our condition is intended to control. That concludes staff's presentation. Thank you. Any questions to staff?

Um, yeah. Um, first question. Um, there's a there's a if I'm coming south on Axross and I come across 302, once I start to make that curve, there's a sign on the right hand side of the road that says dangerous curve. Am I right? It's

Yes, sir. So, it's identified as a dangerous curve and I can't really tell the distance between the intersection and where that first cut in the road would be. Um, are we will there be a deceleration lane? Is because I drive that a lot and it's wet and when it's dark if if we've got even because right now we've got nobody stopping there. If if we add the first car, first vehicle that's going to be stopping at that intersection without some in improvement in lighting, some you know something that deceleration lane so they can get out of the way. Um what's So first question would be what's the distance distance between crossing that intersection or the center of that intersection and where that first cut would be? I can't really tell. Um at this point this is conceptual but I will I don't know if Mike may may have those details but in terms of the the the second element which you had a deceleration lane. Yes, there will be a deceleration lane.

Okay. and and and I I I we I get I sit up here and and people tell us a lot that you know this is dangerous and if you approve this somebody's going to get killed and I don't want to go that go that far. Um because you know most times it's because people are speeding and people but if I'm driving the speed limit on this just driving the speed limit coming across that intersection. So first question would be would there be any assistance or support in improving the lighting at least on on this this side of of the road that could help with traffic? The second one is, would you be interested in doing a a a traffic study before we start? Um, I guess those are my two questions. I think I took Donny's question.

Okay. Okay. So, those first two questions. If you will represent the application then, please.

I am. Uh, Mike Davis with Reeves Farms, 6800 Papa Avenue, Memphis. We'll certainly work with city engineering on that. Uh obviously when the development is constructed, there will be more lighting because you're we got to light our parking lot. And this is not one of those situations where you have an out parcel in front of the main development. So you're going to have plenty of kind of shared excess lighting right there. Um, in terms of the right in right out, uh, just to give you some reference point, the full movement intersection is about 1,000 ft from the intersection of Hacks and Goodman. So, the right in right out is probably 400 feet or so. Um, it's not an ideal situation. Unfortunately, the property doesn't have great access. property has no access to Highway 302. That's a

I'm a huge fan of a grocery store being on that side of town. Huge. Right. But so I I' I've got some and I typically don't have hesitancy. You know, I either like something or I don't. Right. Um but this one sort of it's man that that that intersection is close. Thank you. Uh my only question for so if we approve this they can go ahead and develop lot one and the only ingress and egress they're going to have to lot one is that right in and right out. No,

no. They will develop, if you approve this, they will develop lot one and they will develop this inress egress eastmen and develop this street right up to this point in order to be able to provide those left turns. Okay. Otherwise, you know, if somebody was heading wanted to head north, you came and you shopped in a grocery store and then you wanted to head north, you would have nowhere to go.

Yeah. Yeah. That that would be the benefit. Um and then uh if you can pull up the other slide where it shows the uh uh the um the street Old Goodman and Goodman. They're on the other side on that one. Now when we green lit that development on the corner there, they had no requirements to put a red light there. Right. The gas station that's that that that was just developed there. They didn't have to put Yes. There's no there's no traffic. Yeah. Signal. Yeah, there's no idea. Yes.

So, it's that's already a nightmare there. So, I think making it was there a specific reason why we didn't require them to do a traffic signal there or is it just that wasn't required at the time? Traffic signals. Sometimes it's very common to see people say one traffic light, one traffic light, one traffic light. Traffic lights themselves can be significant cause of accidents. M

so you really need to do a study to determine whether they are warranted or not before you proceed mainly because these gas station did not have access on Goodman road you know it uses more of the old Goodman road internal street access and you look at how much traffic really generated it's not significant enough to warrant a traffic light at this particular intersection but the moment you go in and you construct talk eight commercial lots here. Yeah. And you start having folks maybe from you know this subdivision to the north like Peeken View

coming down and making this entrance to come and shop here then we may need that signal at this at this particular intersection. So that's why that is coming in after the development of lot one.

Gotcha. the the the sort of infrastructure you need to have that L one function and just that grocery store really does not need traffic study for us to know for example that we're going to need a ride in ride out you don't need a traffic study to tell us that that we're going to need a deceleration lane we don't need a traffic study to tell us that so the kind of things you need now to have that lot one going we don't need a traffic study but once you leave that lot one and you start developing you start extending the three eastward such that you now have access onto old Gurman the branch subdivision and and possibly to this location then that is a time when we need we need all that traffic study to tell us uh various issues regarding to regarding the signal warrants

okay so I it was basically like a as it grows it the need will be there the need will grow for traffic signal and then yes most likely from this if you recall this was a property that racetrack looked some time ago and I'm kind of looking at a racetrack traffic study that they had. Um the the although the numbers will be different because the uses are different. You may do that traffic study because you don't have specific uses on each of the lots clearly identified. You may have a use to the lot two for example. Yeah. Or let's just take lot four.

You know may you may project that to be a restaurant but it ends up being retail. So most likely what what they'll do is they'll project the most intensive uses. In that way you cover up the least intensive at the same time. And it may be the case that the traffic study says your signal warrant is going to be necessary. Your signals are going to be necessary once you hit the third lot or the fourth lot. That would come back before you as far as the final plaz approval for those lots are concerned. So we will even after today we will still get an opportunity to require those tra those traffic signals before the final plan.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Before they can go in and build on any of those lots after lot one they must have they must record the final plat for those lots. And to record the final plat for those lots they must bring it before you at that time you will have the traffic study. Okay. Gotcha. Perfect. Awesome. Yeah. Any other questions? No further questions and thank you. Okay, we're not required to have a public hearing on this. So, I'll now entertain any comments, discussion, or motions from the commissioners.

I'll make a motion to approve based on staff's recommendations. Okay, we have a motion by Mr. saying to approve the the preliminary plat subject to the staff recommendations. Do we have a second? Second. Which one? Second. We have a second by Mr. Stratton. Any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? Then the motion is carried and the application is approved. And now item number six is the application to amend the project text for Robinson Crossing PUB and preliminary development plan for area 9 submitted by Shane King, Houston Engineering on behalf of property owners Mary Bridgefor and Pleasant Hill Land and Development Company. The request includes preliminary development plan and stipulation for permitted convenient store with fuel pumps and layout plan for car wash and standalone use. The 5.72 plus or minus acre subject area 9 is on PUD plan unit development and is located at the southeast corner of Church Road and Malone Road. We now have the staff presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before you is your request to consider amendments to the project text for Robinson Crossing specifically area 9. These over 5 to 6 acre area 9 is currently divided or subdivided into two lots lot and lot two. It is zone PUD plan unit development and PUD's the uses design specifications are controlled by the project text and the preliminary development plan. The request before you concerns this area 9 located at the souththeast corner of the intersection of Malon Road and Church Road. This is the area under consideration. The revisions or the requested amendments have to do with two main permitted uses in area 9. So this is the project text as it currently reads. It says uses shall be permitted and regulated in the C4 plan commercial district as modified hearing. The following uses shall be permitted. convenience store and car wash as an accessory to convenience store. Those are the two uses that are under discussion this evening. Those two are already permitted. So that is a starting point. Uh the planning commission is not being asked to introduce a use that does not exist already in the project. It's already permitted. So what then? If you recall back in December of 2024, the board of admin amended project texts, various project texts for these PUDs. And one of them that was addressed was a Robinson 5.72 acre area 9 of the

Robinson Crossing plan unit development, formerly Annabel, located at the southeast corner of Malone Road and Church Road and a 15.2 2 acre area 9 of Robinson Crossing plan development located at the southwest corner of Pleasant Hill and Church to remove convenience store from the list of permitted uses and add convenience store with four pumps as a conditional use. That was done back in 2024. So that was already done. That also included that amendment at the time also included vested right provisions for what were basically called projects or various devel developments that were already going through an approval process with the city before these new regulations came into effect. One of them was that the preliminary plat approval had to take place before June 30th 2025 and final plan recorded by September 30th 2025. The final plot for this particular site was recorded before September 30th. So the vested provisions remain in place on this particular piece of property. They are not subject therefore to the conditional use permit uh requirement because they they are vested. The amendments before you touch mainly on three things. One, the current project text reads that the car wash has to be an accessory to the convenience store with four pumps. The amendment before you is to decouple the car wash from the convenience store. So let one not be an accessory. Let the car wash no longer be accessory to the convenience store to make them basically standalone uses. That's the first. The second is upon making them standalone uses, we want to introduce certain conditions to the

convenience store to bring them as close as possible to the current regulations that were adopted in 2024. They are not subject to those regulations, but from a city's perspective, we want to bring them as close as possible to to those particular conditions. The first is the city of Oi branch shall not issue a building permit for the construction of the convenience store with four palms prior to January 20th 2036. So there's a 10 years waiting period and not all and traffic light signalization of the Malon road and church road intersection. In other word, that intersection must be signalized before you can have a convenience store with four palms at that location. If it is signalized in the next 5 years, the convenience store cannot be constructed because it's not yet January 20th, 2036. If after January 20th, if it gets to January 20th, 2036, and is not yet signalized, you still cannot have a convenience store out there. If it is only signalized in 2050, then that is will be in 2050 before you can have a convenience store. So those two conditions have to be met before you can have a convenience store with four pumps on that particular piece of property at that intersection. Secondly, the number of palms will be limited to four. Our current regulations actually permit six. So we are kind of limiting this even restricting this even further more. Three, the F canopy shall have a maximum clearance of 15.5 ft from the finished grade to the underside of the canopy. Current regulations are basically the same 15 ft. The site is permitted one

freestanding sign only which shall be monument style not more than 8 ft high and located within 40 ft from the driveway of the convenience store with four palms on Church Road. What this means is this is the preliminary development plan. This is Church Road. This is the convenience store with four palms. It has that sign will have to be within 40 ft from the from the functional point of this particular driveway which basically will be from route here. You go 40 ft. You have to locate it above this particular point not at the intersection of Malone Road and Church Road. Move the sign away for that inside. The reason for this is following discussions with the property owner and a couple of other residents in the area. There is a possibility when we get to the final plat which this is approved that the applicant in terms property owner will be doing splitting this into three lots and dedicating the intent will be to dedicate a a an area at this intersection where the city of Olive Branch in future can put up a monument welcome to Olive Branch sign. So you don't want to have a gas station sign at that location that will be conflicting with the city's welcome to Olivan sign. That is the reason and that's also the reason why we're limiting the sign to only 8 ft high. Current regulations will permit them to go up to 12 ft. So you want to make it comparable to what that city sign will will be in future. So that's that's the reason for that. And it will just be one monument sign. Right now they will be permitted basically a sign on Milan and a sign on church but we're limiting it to just one sign. The fifth at least one electrical vehicle charging station shall be provided right now that is optional. The

preliminary layout plan for the convenience store with four pumps and adjoining car wash provided here at exhibit Q shall be binding. Basically this preliminary um layout plan and we should call attention specifically to the car wash. We had different layout iterations for this car wash. At one point we had to look at laying it horizontal or putting it this way. So essentially the cars would come in and then they wash this way and you know you have the vacuum here they clean out there and then they can exit the side you know back to to to church road when this building was rotated as currently laid out. This is where you get all the the noise basically when you from the vacuum is right in front here which is about 350 ft from the nearest residential area to the south. When we rotated this in the rotated design and made this horizontal that distance was reduced to about 306 ft. So basically the noise became it brought the noise closer to residential area. We we therefore had to go with this particular design that will keep the noise furthest away. Condition number G. The foil palms canopy design included herein as exhibit R shall be binding except however that the columns may be constructed completely of brick material. Roofing material for canopy may be shingle or dark colored metal material. These will be binding. So it will not be your traditional gas station canopy that you generally see on highways. The reason for this is to as much as possible give this a residential feel and blend it with the Robinson Crossing residential developments. So this is what you will have. The building design is also binding in terms of the roof geometry

you know pitch roof and all of that. It would not be your traditional um gas station design that you see in many places in the city. Architecturally condition number eight. Architecturally the convenience store with four palms shall be constructed of a minimum 80% brick on all sides and shall have pitch roof of shingles or that colored metal material. Exhibit S is a prototypical design regarding the roof geometry. That is precisely what I just provided here. So this is basically what the convenience store with pumps building itself is going to look like and that will be binding. We talked about 80% brick. This is basically 100% brick. Lastly, a conditional use permit is not required for the convenience store with four palms which is hereby permitted in area 9 only on the corner lot at the intersection of Malon Road and Church Road. This lot may be used for any other permitted use in area 9 subject to administrative review and approval of construction plans by city staff. What this means is in this area 9 there are other uses like bakery, banks, doctor's office that are permitted by right on this piece of property. If in future some other developer showed up and instead of doing a convenience store they wanted to construct a bank, they can move forward to construct a bank there. It must not be a convenience store with four pumps. That is really what that condition number uh condition I is saying. And a a conditional use permit will not be required because the reason for this is conditional use permits can be appealed to the board of adamant and the board of adaman will be the final authority that will be approving this. So it will be redundant to still require a conditional use permit when the board of adaman is the same entity approving uh this project tax amendment. That concludes TAV's presentation in

terms of the car wash. This is what a car wash is going to look like. Sim crossing car wash with those awnings. Uh one thing that I I should have mentioned with the landscape plan. There's a landscape plan with trees along church along Goodman at the rear of this property. The designer currently have those shown as maple trees. Those will need to be changed. The project text for Robinson crossing requires 20 ft wide buffer and plate 4 they have to be evergreens planted staggered on each other. So those will have to be changed from maples to evergreens. The project text also specifies that this has to be wooden fence with brick columns every 50 ft. So that is what the project text currently has and that is what the applicant has proposed. So this is the elevation for the car wash. Essentially staff recommends that based on the finding that the proposed project text amendments and associated preliminary development plans will incorporate traffic considerations in the timing of construction of a convenience store with F pumps in area 9 of the Robinson Crossing plan development and mandate design futures that will align the currently permitted convenience store with four pumps and the car wash in the said area with the character of surrounding developments. approved the set suggested amendments and preliminary development plans and recommends him to the mayor and board of adamant for approval. That concludes staff's presentation. Thank you.

Any questions of staff?

I have a question as as um for the um for the car wash there. There's no image or no depiction of the awnings um over the vacuums where you would or the vacuum detailing. Um everything else has been very specifically laid out so that we can we can address or we can we can take a look at it and make a make a determination except for that. And that's that's a big piece because they could do a car wash tomorrow and if the drawing is binding, there's no awnings, but obviously you're going to have to put awnings above the above where you're vacuuming. So, how how do we address that before we stick them with not having awnings, but also so we can look at what's it going to look like with the awnings? Are they going to be bright orange, bright pink, or are they going to mel, you know, blend in with the with the area? the the the the planning commission can require or recommend that the awning be designed basically the same as you have it for the canopy of the of the uh convenience store with pumps

in terms of in terms of material because this is intended to get that blending with a residential area. the planning commission can't require that. And that's the tough part because the awning with the gas station is going to be a more rugged material. Typically, the awnings for the for the car washes are more flexible and and lightweight. So, I I don't want to I don't want to make a determination from a builder's perspective what type of material they should use. Um, and I I just wanted to know if if you guys had if they had already shown you something that was not included in the presentation, but if you hasn't, I can ask when they come up. I think the designer is here and they can throw light on that. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions to staff?

If not, if someone who represents the application, please come forward.

Good evening. I'm Shane King, uh 1207 Office Park Drive in Oxford, Mississippi. And uh we've been working hand in hand with director over here to get this plan text uh sorted out and uh we agree with all of his recommendations. Do you want to ask your question?

No sir. And honestly, um I might have to defer to our our client on that because we're uh mostly handled all the site design aspects of it. So that's out of my scope. That's more of architectural. Uh that's a great question though. I do I do appreciate that. Yeah, that's a great point. Yes, sir.

Barry Bridgefor Jr. 5293 getwell on behalf of the applicant. At the present time, we don't have any plans for covering those. Uh but we we'd agreed to that that the color scheme would be compatible with the remainder of the building. Earth tones. Well, I'm just if we do if we do elect to do a cover, we're fine with it being an earth tone or similar to the building because the building is going to be the same brick that we have in Robinson Cross and on the entrances.

So, just to clarify, at this point, you're not planning on having any awnings over the vacuuming area. Is that correct? No, ma'am. Okay, thanks.

Okay, any other questions? No further questions, then thank you. I will now open the public hearing. Um, I do have uh one sign in card, Susan Johnson. And Susan, if you wish to come forward and limit your time to three minutes or less. Thank you. Susan Johnson, 4766 Malone Road, Olive Branch, Mississippi. Um, originally myself and every homeowner out there, we bought brought bought in into a master plan that showed on area 9 two small lots, one large lot with a nice retail building to be placed on it. Of course, that's not happening anymore, but um we invested into Robinson Crossing based on this master plan, and our investments range from 500,000 up to 1.5 million plus on a lot of the humps. Uh with the approval by the board, they allowed the the lots to be reconfigured and they made larger lots, more C2 style lots, not C4. Okay. So with that and with the larger lots, the developer has proceeded with the standalone car wash. Um clearly it called for the convenience store with an accessory car wash. Now we all know what that is. We all know that nobody's using those anymore. So is that the fault of the homeowner? No, absolutely not. So now we have a standalone car wash that's being accepted. Um, all we ask for is a little more protection to our neighborhood and to our investments. Uh, we we have some questions and if I'm

allowed to ask questions to the staff um or they may not even know this question on that exhibit showing the plat the preliminary plat. What's the parking area in lot two and why why is that on this area right here? Yeah. What is that? Do we knowbody?

Shane, when she's done. Yeah. Okay. All right. Very well. Just call your questions and we'll answer them at one time.

Uh the next one is currently there's 22 vacuum stations. Okay. 22. Um, we just asked, can that number be reduced by any chance? I have a video I'd like to play. Now, this I know that uh a song has said that from the edge of the car wash back it's 350 something feet to the homeowners. This is um this is at a little over 150. So that's what we're going to hear for a long long time. Okay. Next. So I I asked, can the vacuums be just cut down in number? And I guess if they're not covered, people probably won't be there long anyway, but they're going to be covered, I'm sure. Um, we also and we covered the crepe myrtles. They had crepe myrtles as a buffer. We'd like evergreen or magnolia. Either one that stays green year round. I don't think that's going to be a problem because it's in the master text, although the master text is known to be changed. Um, the other conditions, we'd like these to become conditions if possible. Uh, there will be awnings over those vacuums. I we don't want cloth. We don't want any bright colors. We'd like them to be designed just like what's shown on the convenience store. Uh, also they typically have a very bright neon light under those awnings and if we could require them to be low lights. Uh, we do know that they open at 7:00 a.m. in the morning. I don't know what their hours of operation are going to be. That's a concern because because of the noise and the and it is going to create traffic on, you know, off of church. The only other thing and back to this exhibit here, uh, one condition we really want

is we want no ingress egress onto Malone Road until that convenience store is built. Uh the next main condition, and this is strictly for the protection of our neighborhood, the protection from noise, crime, anything else is going to create, and it's going to create a lot, and everybody knows it. It is not an accessory car wash. It is a commercialized full-blown car wash in our neighborhood. We would like to a condition to be not the um wood fence, but we'd like a brick wall fence along the south uh property line along all the homes. And the last thing I'm going to and that's that's our only conditions. So, the awnings be like the awnings of the gas station, a brick wall uh on the rear south line. And if there's any possible way to reduce the vacuum stations down from 22, that would be nice. Um, all else I can tell you is we've invested a lot into this subdivision and everybody enjoys it out there. We like being out there. It's a lovely, lovely neighborhood. But now we're going to be subject to noise, of course, crime, the con circumstances that we're going to be faced with, and the consequences as far as the value of our homes. Um, I know you hear this every time on every project, but this one's a little bit more different than normally what you might see. Um, so we just ask that you'll take these into consideration for, you know, just for the protection of our for our neighborhood. That's all we ask. Thank you. Thank you, Susan. Before we answer the questions, is anyone else wish to come forward to speak in favor against the application?

If not, then public discussion is closed and we'll now answer the questions that were brought forward. Tried to jot them down as quick as I could. Uh the the parking that you see on that future lot on the right is to be determined upon future development. The original idea was to show the circulation through the site. And if there was to be whatever development they want to put over there, if there was going to be any overflow parking, that area right there that has the storm water detention easement going underneath it could be used for potential parking if if needed. Um, as far as access from Malone, uh, and director, you might want to clarify me here, but I do believe the original plan text was shown access points to Malone as well as Church Road. Uh, so I don't believe um, limiting access to just Church alone would be uh, beneficial for uh, access to the property. And uh the fencing solution on that southern boundary the as the pud the plant text requires only the wooden fence with 50 foot spacing on a masonry column and the evergreen trees. So, we're we're following all the buffers that were, you know, designated by the original plan text as far as sound and, you know, putting a good barrier between the existing residential area and this commercial zone. Um, so I feel like we have a a very good site layout plan that's beneficial for everyone here.

Thank you. Could I ask a a clarifying question on on the vacuums? Typically, you have one big vacuum that hooks with hoses and runs through all of the the different stations. Um, do you have a plan to put that on the I hope that's north on the north end. Okay. All right. And that Thank you. That was my question. Any other questions?

I don't know if this should go to you or to Mr. bridge forth, but um is there a way that you could feasibly reduce the number of vacuum sections from 22 to a lesser number? That is awfully loud. I don't know if that's something that needs to be addressed by the developer again. Um the the vacuums are designed well first of all the vacuums are designed where we have one big unit and it's up next to Church Road just like the exit of the car wash where the blowers are where the noise are are up next to Church Road. And the number of vacuums is determined by the person that designed the car wash for us. That's the number that we need to service the car wash as it is. And we've taken the effect of putting the large vacuum unit up there. This isn't like the old timey car washes where you would go and you put in your quarters and they're 120 machines that are al that are standalone. These are designed to have one central unit and so the uh that unit is located up closer to Church Road to minimize that effect. But the number of vacuums is dictated by the design of the car wash.

Okay. And since I'm not not real expert in this, so what you're saying is that the noise will be generated from the one large unit, not necessarily from the individual station hoses. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thanks. Uh I had one question on that unit, the vacuum unit. Um is it's gonna I'm assuming it's going to be insulated with via landscaping or some sort of masonry or something like that. uh the the the the main the central vacuum unit. I'm assuming it's going to have some sort of landscaping or some sort of buffer around it. Um or is it going to be inside or it's a contain? Okay. Gotcha. And and there will be screening around it. Yes, sir.

And and the fence that we're using is the same fence that's all throughout Robinson Crossing. It's a 4x4 uh excuse me, a 6x6 post fence that's built all throughout Robinson Crossing. And actually, it's been it's they've stood up very well. I was surprised um that the fact that they've lasted and held up. It's a they have 6x6 post. They're cedar. They have a cap on them and they've uh since we've been building them since 2005, they they held up pretty well. Any other questions?

Well, I'd like to um just address the awnings that Miss Johnson raised. Um, you said that you had not planned for any covering over those sections for the vacuum at the present time, but if they if if when we operate the car wash, if they elect to it, we'll agree to the same color scheme as the remainder of the building.

Okay. And is that something that we need to specify in our Okay. In our recommendations. Okay. Um and then would um the ingress egress that Miss Johnson address u asked about on Malone until the convenience store is built would that be something that needs to be addressed now or is that something that is on down the line as po as a possibility that that would be uh no ingress egress to Malo own from the con um from that property until the convenience store is under construction.

We need Malone Road access to have the circuit. Otherwise, you'll only have one way in, one way out, which is something the city engineers not want. Okay, good. Thank you. Okay, we can discuss we can discuss that as Okay, thank you. Any any other questions?

I'm sorry. Public hearing is closed now. So no no further discussion. U any other questions? Thank you. Uh does staff wish to make any comments? So I think Mr. Bridge for Shane have effectively basically responded to the questions that you have. A key thing to call attention is to this is you're dealing with uses that are already permitted. So it's not like new uses are being introduced into this project tech. These uses are already permitted. What the board is really doing is seeing how you can put in certain conditions to mitigate any effects that may come from those uses. Secondly, even if you had the developer can still do this car wash as accessory to a convenience store without going through this process. They can still do on this big lot that they have. They can do all of that. If you follow the definition of an accessory use in the zoning ordinance, all it really says is they have to be on one lot on the same lot. That's a that's really the key criteria. It's not about size. It's not about right. It's really just have to be on the same lot. So he can do all of this that that he wants to do and just put it all on the same lot without going through all these process without having any of these conditions imposed. The beauty of going through this process is it allows the city to be able to you know to get into these design elements. I think the awning issue over the the vacuum area is an important element. The planning commission may want to recommend that if the developer eventually decides to put the awning

over those vacuum areas, then it has to be, you know, the same material and color scheme as the one provided for the convenience store with fuel pumps. basically this same scheme. You want to have you want to have that kind of continuous uh in terms of that color. You don't you don't want to have those bright yellow. It would not really match bright blue. It would not really match with with the brick.

Yeah. And and the only re the only reason I cringed is because if the the the market is actually got different color awnings than the car wash itself. The car wash is a darker a darker awning. See? Yes. We you may just basically go with this this color. Yeah. For the awning and on the car wash. And that I think that that that will take care of Yeah.

that take care of. So my question is we've um in the motion it just says proposed project tax amendments associated with development plans. Um where how do how do we insert that that

subject to subject to the condition that any awnings over okay the vacuum area should match you know the awnings on the on the building itself on the principal structure and the planning commission may even add that before the board of adamant considers this as public hearing which will be about a month from Today, January 20, I think, uh, Urban A may actually go ahead and design it just as an option to have it there in the plan. If they eventually decide to do it, then it's there in the plan.

Mhm. Um, one thing I want to reiterate, uh, like you just mentioned that, um, basically everything that's in the original PUD, you know, I know we were talking about the number of vacuums and and and where they are and how the main unit is insulated and stuff, an accessory used to the car wash, car washes use, like back in the day, they used to be a little tiny tunnel and we used to put a couple couple of um vacuums out there, but um, as it's written right now in the current project, the developer didn't want to do anything. He could build an accessory car wash to a gas station next door to it and put a 100 vacuum units out there and nobody could say anything about it, right? And so I feel given especially given the concession that the 2036 um by then who knows maybe a bank might go in the corner or something like and that's still an option right like before 2036 if a bank was to come in or if somebody else some other type of use was to come in and say hey we don't mind being next to a car wash that's fine we we want to purchase the corner lot they can still do that and they wouldn't have to go through any other process. Okay. Any any other questions? Go ahead. Okay. I will now entertain any comments, discussion or motions from the commissioners. Um the the only thing I would would would ask is or the question about the the other the the driveway off of Malone Road.

Do you see that as a as an as an issue? If the board permits me to comment on that, yeah, the recorded plat for this subdivision actually provides already this as a transportation easement. Yeah. which means the developer really has a right already. It's already platted. Yeah. You know, to use it. So, yeah. I just Okay, good.

No, you're good. Um, so based on the findings that the proposed project tech text amendments and associated preliminary development plans would incorporate traffic considerations in the timing of construction of a convenience store with fuel pumps in area 9 of Robinson Crossing plan development and mandate design features that would align with the current permitted convenience stores with fuel pumps and car wash in addition to or subject to um any um coverings or awnings used over the vacuum um over the vacuum section be similar materials and colors of the design of the of the car wash itself. Um and said area with the character surrounding developments approve the set suggested amendments and preliminary development plans and recommend same to the mayor and board of aldermen. That's my motion.

Motion. We have a motion by Mr. Jones. Um, I'll second that to approve. We have a second by Mr. Singh. And I think we added that the canopies would be the same quality and color. Any other any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Then the motion is carried. The application's approved. Any other business we need to discuss tonight? No, sir. No, sir. No upcoming Christmas cards. Get a Christmas card.

Wish y'all all a merry Christmas and a happy new year then. And need a motion to adjurnn. All right. I make a motion to adjurnn. You got a motion and a second to adjurnn. All in favor say I. I. All right. Everybody, I Leon.