Regular City Council Meeting

373 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MUNICIPAL MINUTES CITY OF TUPELO STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DECEMBER 05, 2023 Be it remembered that a regular meeting of the Tupelo City Council was held in the Church Street School auditorium on Tuesday, December 5, 2023, at 6:00 p.m. with the following in attendance: Council Members Chad Mims, Lynn Bryan, Travis Beard, Nettie Davis, Buddy Palmer, Janet Gaston and Rosie Jones; Ben Logan, City Attorney, and Missy Shelton, Clerk of the Council. Council Member Bryan led the invocation. Council Member Davis led the pledge of allegiance. CONFIRMATION OR AMENDMENT TO THE AGENDA AND AGENDA ORDER Council Member Davis moved, seconded by Council Member Palmer, to amend the agenda and agenda order as follows: DELETE # 13 IN THE MATTER OF TRA MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21, 2023 ADD # 16 IN THE MATTER OF APPROVAL OF SOLICITATIONS OF RFPs FOR DEPOSITORY BID The vote was unanimous in favor. EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION Mayor Todd Jordan recognized the following for their employment with the City of Tupelo: Michael Bowens - Police Department - 20 years Davis Manning - Police Department - 10 years PUBLIC RECOGNITION Council Member Nettie Davis thanked the Outreach Committee for the Thanksgiving service held at the Link Center. She also reminded everyone that the Reed's Christmas Parade is scheduled for December 8. Council Member Rosie Jones asked for all to keep the family of Lacey Elkins in their prayers. Council Member Janet Gaston invited everyone to attend the 10th anniversary of the Aqua-Thon Celebration on Saturday, December 9. The money raised will go towards the purchase of lighting upgrades to LEDs and upgrades to the sound system. Council Member Travis Beard thanked Alex and the Park and Recreation team for the outstanding event of the Lighting of the Park and the Oren Dunn Museum event with Mr. and Mrs. Clause.  374 MAYOR'S REMARKS Mayor Todd Jordan invited everyone to join in at the Christmas Parade on Friday night at 6:00 PM. He also shared that Council Member Janet Gaston will be swimming in the Aqua-Thon on Saturday. IN THE MATTER OF MINUTES OF NOVEBMER 21, 2023 MEETING Council Member Davis moved, seconded by Council Member Bryan, to approve the minutes of the November 21, 2023 regular Council meeting. The vote was unanimous in favor. IN THE MATTER OF BILL PAY Bills were reviewed at 4:30 p.m. by Council Members Beard, Gaston, Davis and Palmer. Council Member Jones moved, seconded by Council Member Mims, to approve the payment of the checks, bills, claims and utility adjustments. The vote was unanimous in favor. APPENDIX A IN THE MATTER OF ADVERTISING AND PROMOTIONAL ITEMS Council Member Palmer moved, seconded by Council Member Jones, to approve the advertising and promotional items, as follows: MS Radio Group $299.00 Christmas Greeting radio ads from City of Tupelo IN THE MATTER OF BUDGET AMENDMENT #3 FOR FY 2023-2024 Council Member Palmer moved, seconded by Council Member Jones, to approve budget amendment #3 for the 2023-2024 budget. The vote was unanimous in favor. APPENDIX B IN THE MATTER OF LICENSE COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 24, 2023 Council Member Davis moved, seconded by Council Member Jones, to approve the License Commission minutes of October 24, 2023. The vote was unanimous in favor. APPENDIX C IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 2, 2023 Council Member Gaston moved, seconded by Council Member Mims, to approve the Planning Committee minutes of October 2, 2023. The vote was unanimous in favor. APPENDIX D IN THE MATTER OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT – SIGNS (TABLED AT NOVEMBER 7, 2023 MEETING) This item was unanimously left on the table. IN THE MATTER OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT – MULTIFAMILY (TABLED AT NOVEMBER 7, 2023 MEETING)  375 This item was unanimously left on the table. IN THE MATTER OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT – CONGREGATE LIVING (TABLED AT NOVEMBER 7, 2023 MEETING) This item was unanimously left on the table. IN THE MATTER OF DISPOSAL OF PERSONAL PROPERTY (PARKING CURBS) BY AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF SALTILLO Council Member Palmer moved, seconded by Council Member Gaston, to find that 80 parking curbs from the Park and Recreation Department had ceased to be used for public purposes, and an agreement to dispose of them to the City of Saltillo would promote the best interest of the governing authority. The vote was unanimous in favor. APPENDIX E IN THE MATTER OF AWARD OF ROW LINE CLEARANCE CONTRACT (BID NO. 2023- 015WL) Council Member Gaston moved, seconded by Council Member Palmer, to approve a contract between the Tupelo Water and Light Department and R.O.W. Pro, LLC, for bid # 2023-051WL. The vote was unanimous in favor. APPENDIX F IN THE MATTER OF APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER # 1 & SUMMARY FOR THE NORTH GREEN STREET SUBSTATION (BID NO 2023-033WL) Council Member Davis moved, seconded by Council Member Bryan, to find as commercially reasonable and not made to circumvent the purchasing laws and to approve change order #1 and summary for Bid 2023-033WL - North Green Street Substation. This change order decreases the total amount by $39,484.65 based on final quantities. The vote was unanimous in favor. APPENDIX G IN THE MATTER OF APPROVAL OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THREE RIVERS SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY AND CITY OF TUPELO, MISSISSIPPI AND AUTHORIZATION OF MAYOR TO SIGN ON BEHALF OF THE CITY Council Member Bryan moved, seconded by Council Member Davis, to approve a Solid Waste Disposal Service Agreement Between Three Rivers Solid Waste Authority and City of Tupelo, Mississippi and Authorization of Mayor to Sign on Behalf of the City. The vote was unanimous in favor. APPENDIX H IN THE MATTER OF THE APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION MADE BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR CONDITIONAL AMNESTY OF LIENS ASSESSED AGAINST REAL PROPERTY LOCATED OWNED BY IT AT 1100 CHAPMAN DRIVE Council Member Davis moved, seconded by Council Member Jones, to approve an Order Authorizing Conditional Amnesty of Liens Assessed Against Real Property Owned by the Neighborhood Development Corporation and Located at 1100 Chapman Drive in Accordance with MISS Code Ann. 376  377 CHECK INFORMATION FOR COUNCIL MEETING December 5, 2023 FUND CHECK NUMBERS POOL CASH ID-422209-422216;422217-422482 EFT 50002539-50002560 TWL ADJUSTMENTS 1-26 ELECTRONIC TRANSFERS AS SHOWN ON THE FACE OF DOCKET INVOICES AS SHOWN ON FACE OF DOCKET APPENDIX A  378 APPENDIX B  379 APPENDIX B  380 APPENDIX B  381 APPENDIX B  382 APPENDIX B  383 Tupelo License Commission Minutes Date: 10/24/2023 Time: 5:30 PM Call to Order: Tony Carroll Meeting Adjourned: 6:04 PM In Attendance LICENSE COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Tony Carroll, General Contractor Randy Hanlon, Plumber Matt Wiley, Mechanical Engineer Jay Scruggs, Residential Builder Thomas Walker, Fire Safety Code Richard Rhudy, Electrician LICENSE COMMISSION MEMBERS NOT PRESENT: None CITY OF TUPELO STAFF PRESENT: Patrick Reagan, Chief Building Inspector Jennifer Roberson, DDS Office Manager Kristian Skou, Fire Marshall Mark Nowell, Fire Marshal Tyler Scott, Fire Marshal OTHERS PRESENT: Kenneth Estes, Contractor (Estes Building & Remodeling, LLC) David Jones, Architect (DSJ Creative Designs, LLC) Approval of Minutes Chairman Tony Carroll asked the Committee to review and approve the minutes of the April 20, 2023 Tupelo License Commission meeting. Thomas Walker made a motion to approve the minutes. Richard Rhudy seconded the motion. The motion carried with all in favor. Old Business 1. ADOPTION OF 2021 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL (ICC) BUILDING CODE SERIES a. Tony Carroll opened the discussion and asked if anyone had any information or discussion regarding the code. i. The License Commission Members and others present discussed the difference between the 2021 Code Series and the 2024 Code Series. 1. Matt Wiley and Kenneth Estes agreed that the Energy Code is the biggest change in the 2021 Code Series.  384 2. A lot of States and Municipalities are forgoing the 2021 adoption because the 2024 Code Series is supposed to fix a lot of the issues in the 2021 Code Series. b. Tony Carroll asked the Tupelo License Commission members if the commission was ready to make a vote on the 2021 Code Series or if the commission needed more time. i. After discussing the issue, the commission members decided to revisit the adoption of the 2021 Code Series at a later date. 1. Date was set for January 23, 2024 @ 5:30 PM. New Business 1. GFCI’s FOR ISLAND COUNTERTOP SPACES a. Patrick Reagan opened the discussion with the Tupelo License Commission members and those present the issue of GFCI’s being mandatory for kitchen islands. Patrick said he would like to follow the 2023 electrical code, where it is an option and if you are going to have an outlet, it is the surface mount. b. After a brief discussion, Patrick said he will discuss this with the City Attorney, Ben Logan, and bring the topic back up at the next commission meeting. 2. ROOF INSPECTIONS & ROOF PERMITS a. Kenneth Estes opened the discussion of roof inspections and roof permits with the Tupelo License Commission and those present. i. Currently, the City of Tupelo does not require a roof inspection or permit. ii. If the city starts doing roof inspections, then the inspectors will have to climb in the attic and count vents, then climb on the roof to see if the same number of vents can be located. Otherwise, the applicant with have to provide before and after photos of the vents to make sure the vents are not getting covered up. iii. If the city starts doing roof inspections, then the city will become liable. iv. Jay Scruggs said issues like board rot under drip edges could be avoided if the city did roof inspections. v. After a brief discussion, Tony Carroll said he felt like the discussion should be continued at the next commission meeting. 3. EMERGENCY KEY BOX - KNOX RAPID ACCESS SYSTEM a. Kristian discussed the city ordinance amendment made in the 2018 code regarding the fire department approved access box (knox box). i. Currently all commercial businesses must install a fire department approved access box (knox box). No stipulations or exemptions. ii. The access box was not enforced until recently, so there is pushback. iii. Kristian would like to change the wording in the code to something along the lines of “you are required to have a knox box if you are electronically monitored, with the exception of businesses that are open 24/7.” 1. Occupancy requirement when a new occupant takes over a building  385 iv. Tony asked Kristian to make a motion on how he would like the update to the code to be worded. 1. Kristian said he would like to discuss this again at the next License Commission meeting in January and present the new wording then. Open Discussion 1. COMMERCIAL BUILDING APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS a. David Jones, Architect for DSJ Creative Designs, LLC, brought up the requirements for having an architect and the issues with not having an architect for projects under 5000 sq ft. Would like to propose that all commercial buildings or public buildings require an architect or engineer be involved. i. Anything under 5000 sq ft does not require an architect. ii. Patrick Reagan said there is a possible proposal at the state level to send the plans to the State of MS Board of Architect to decide if an architect should be involved before issuing any permits. iii. The Tupelo License Commission members and others present briefly discussed this topic and Tony Carroll said he would like to do some research on this topic. Announcements Kristian Skou, Fire Marshal, introduced himself and Mark Nowell, Deputy Chief of Administration, to the Tupelo License Commission members. Next Meeting DATE: 01/23/2024 TIME: 5:30 PM LOCATION: Development Department, 3rd Floor Conference Room, 71 East Troy St _____________________________ ______________________________ Chairman Tony Carroll Recorded by Jennifer Roberson Submitted by Tanner Newman  386 MINUTES OF THE TUPELO PLANNING COMMITTEE OCTOBER REGULAR MEETING Monday, October 2, 2023 6:00 PM Tupelo Convention & Visitors Bureau CALL TO ORDER The meeting was held at Tupelo Convention and Visitors Bureau, 399 East Main Street, due to ongoing renovations at City Hall. Chair Lindsey Leake called the meeting to order. Other committee members present included Mark Williams, Bentley Nolan, Leslie Mart, Patti Thompson, Victor Fleitas and Scott Davis. Committee members Pam Hadley and Gus Hildenbrand were not present. Staff members present included City Planner Jenny Savely and Zoning Administrator Russ Wilson. Chair Leake asked Bentley Nolan to open with a prayer and Scott Davis to lead the pledge. Chair Leake then presented an opening statement of the committee purpose and reviewed how the committee would conduct its business. The Staff and Committee were then asked to introduce themselves and did so. REVIEW OF MINUTES Scott Davis made a motion to approve with a second by Bentley Nolan. The motion carried unanimously. REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS City Planner Jenny Savely said there was nothing to report at this time. OLD BUSINESS Planner Savely mentioned old business TA-22-02, Billboards and Multi-Family Housing remains in review with changes expected to be presented to the committee at the November meeting. NEW BUSINESS Leake then explained the meeting procedures that would be followed for tonight’s meeting. Chair Leake then read a prepared statement. “We appreciate all of you that have shown up tonight to participate in helping make Tupelo a great place to live. We have one item on tonight’s agenda. We know that your presence here with us tonight is important to you and is equally important to those that serve on this committee. With as many of you that we anticipate that want to speak, we must adhere to the 3 minute limit and thank you in advance for your respect for this process and the respect that you will show to others that want to participate in tonight’s meeting. A few additional comments before we begin as it relates to FLEX23-07 Prevail Duplexes. Comments from the August meeting for those that were unable to attend tonight’s meeting will still be taken into consideration by this committee tonight. It’s also important to note that it is necessary for members of the planning department to work with developers in advance of an item that comes before this committee. It takes interaction with the developers and the City to properly address the requests and to try to insure that initiatives are properly vetted. With that said, some in the August public meeting during public comments inferred that these actions by the City and this committee that we were working in secret. That is incorrect. We request that your comments tonight pertain strictly to the merit of your thoughts on FLEX23-07, Prevail Duplexes. With that being said, our first and only item is FLEX23-07. Ms. Savely, does the Planning Department have an opinion on this?”  387 Savely then mentioned that the Planning Department will defer to the Planning Committee on this and will explain why in the staff analysis. This is in an LDR Zoning District. On 1.4 Acres, 6 duplexes, 12 dwelling units are proposed. There are three distinct items that must be considered by the Planning Committee tonight – 1. The Use of Duplexes 2. The Flexible Variance for density above 1 per .33 acres – the variance requested is a 64% variance 3. As multi-family this requires a site plan review and this plan provides all that information as well as compatibility with the surrounding area. Savely explained each of these items further as well consideration of this project’s conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, assessment of impact on property values and asked the Committee to be diligent in their review of these items. Israel Foster, 1401 Frances Square came forward as the developer and explained the application for the use and variance to add these units and opened with a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Foster explained his background, his development history with duplexes and apartments and showed photos of the quality of their projects, and the high standards they follow in all of their developments none of which are government subsidized or section 8. Lake Park Apartments has 210 units. Fiddlers’ Creek has 160 units, with another development with 240 units and yet another with 260 units. Foster detailed several improvements they had made and showed photos of typical units. Foster then detailed the project on Endville Road with examples of the actual planned units for the development, landscaping, parking, overall layout, sidewalks and drives. Foster also addressed the concerns about the impact on property values with photos of the site conditions he found before development. Foster explained why the density had to be at 12 dwelling units in order to make it feasible to provide affordable housing for this area and his desire to do so is why he has worked so diligently on this project. Chair Leake then opened the meeting for questions from the Committee. Leslie Mart asked if the developer had looked at any other areas and why he selected this with it not being zoned for duplexes. Foster said this property came to him, it just came up. He wanted to add to the area and make the area better, but no, he did not look for other area, it really just came to him and he thought it would be a good opportunity for the area. He thought about storage units, but that market is overloaded, and he thought helping other people fit his goals. Williams asked if there was other competition for his development. Foster stated that West Jackson was also an attractive area. Mart asked about landscaping and Foster stated that he had more planned than what was on screen. Mart asked if they could do just 4 buildings to which Foster said he would have to hike the rent to an unreasonable level that would make the project not feasible for these 2 bedroom 1 bath units. Leake asked if they could bump them up to 3 bedroom units that could rationalize the rent. Foster said that he was targeting those that could afford the 2 bedroom units. Chair Leake then opened the meeting to the public and requested that each applicant provide their name and address to Mr. Wilson before then state their comments and reminded them of the three minute time limit. The following attendees spoke against the development, with no one speaking in favor or support of the project. Their summary objections are listed below: Robert Parks, 4861 Endville Road – adjacent Property owner, concerned with property value impact Sammy Green, 3570/3820 Belden Pike – three variances is too much, 12 units or nothing – against it  388 Patty Parks, 4861 Endville Road – adjacent property owner, concerned with property value impact and negative traffic impact Alice Worthy, 4831 Endville Road – adjacent property owner, not compatible with neighborhood Enrico Amore, 3542 Abby Lane – concerned with traffic and density of development – follow the current standards William Hopper, 2780 Walsh Road – adjacent property owner – concerned with impact on property value of the new home he plans to build on his property next door. Celia Ward, 349 Revival Road – nearby property owner – concerned with impact on property value Aaron Hall, 379 Revival Road – nearby property owner – unkept promises from City about area Rita Roper, 182 Bramblewood Circle – Stated that she is opposed to the project Jeff Scott, 3676 Countrywood - Stated that he is opposed to the project Carol Martin, 5288 Timberland - Stated that she is opposed to the project Betty Scott, 3729 Countrywood - Stated that she is opposed to the project Jerry Page, 5997 Endville Road - Stated that he is opposed to the project Joe Scott, 3729 Countrywood - Stated that he is opposed to the project Julie Carruth, 6659 Endville Road - Stated that she is opposed to the project Lisa Rish, 3623 Countrywood - Stated that she is opposed to the project Larry Hall, 349 Revival Road - Stated that he is opposed to the project Jurleane Satterwhite, 5332 Timberlane - Stated that she is opposed to the project Hearing no further comments, Chair Leake closed the public portion of the application and opened the meeting for discussion between the committee members. Patti Thompson asked the developer about traffic issues. Foster said a traffic study could be done, but has not. Williams asked if a traffic study was required. Savely stated that it is only required if we anticipate at least 300 additional cars per peak hour. Thompson asked if there were any road improvement plans for that area. Savely stated that this was an annexed area and that this area was part of planned improvements, but none specific as of now. Fleitas asked if this was on the Major Thoroughfare list. Savely said they are working on next phases now. Mart asked if there was any rezoning on the horizon. Savely stated that a rezoning could be included in the new Comprehensive Plan which is in the works right now. Thompson asked how the developer felt after hearing all these comments tonight. Foster replied that he was aware of the opinions out there right now and did not see how he could change anyone’s mind right now. Savely mentioned that past rezoning of annexed areas has generally been zoning not for future land use, but to accommodate what is currently in an area. Scott Davis stated that for this area, as well as the entire City, this is zoned LDR for large lots. Duplexes are generally located in Medium Density zones. A variance of 64% in an LDR zone as opposed to a 10-20% variance, is a lot. If we allow this, someone could go to other neighborhoods and request to do that in areas that are supposed to be protected from that. I heard all of the comments, but duplexes could start popping up all over the place in neighborhoods where they were never meant to be. 64% is way out of line. The argument about rezoning may be true, but that’s not what is on the table. This area is LDR and a 64% variance is way too much for him. Bentley Nolan agreed, and said a buffer should be there but there is not. There is certainly a need for housing units, but the drastic change at this location is too severe. Mart said that she is opposed to the 64% variance for density. We would need to look at zoning and that this is not the right place at this time for this kind of density. Patti Thompson said in case anyone thinks she is immune from this kind of activity, someone just tried to put an RV Park in her backyard! Mart asked for clarification on how to  389 make the motion. Savely said you could do it any way, but three separate motions could be made. Davis stated that you could put them all together, but made a motion to deny the variance. Mart seconded the motion with six members present voting for the denial of the variance and one voting against the denial. Mart then made a motion to deny the Flexible Use for duplexes at this location. Six voted in favor of the denial with one voting against the denial. Mart made a motion to deny the Major Site Plan with six voting for the denial and one voting against the denial. Therefore the project was denied. Savely explained the appeal process. Mart applauded Mr. Foster for his efforts, the city needs affordable housing. Scott Davis reminded everyone present that you may not like the City, but without the annexation of their property in this area, the developer could have done whatever he wanted to, there would have been no zoning regulations, no code enforcement, nothing, just the Wild West. Because that was annexed, it allows this sort of discourse tonight, so there is some positive tonight that comes from being inside the City. Patty Parks told Mr. Israel Foster that the group is not opposed to him personally, but told the crowd what growing up next door to that property meant to her and her family and how emotional the changes and potential for this development has been to her and wished him good luck. Chairman Leake asked if there were any other applications for November. Savely mentioned that text amendments are on the next agenda. Leake then reminded the committee about the October 30th Work Session at City Hall and the November 6th regular monthly Planning Committee Meeting tentatively planned to be held at CVB. With there being no further business, Patti Thompson made a motion to adjourn which passed unanimously.  390 City of Tupelo Planning Committee Meeting October 2, 2023, 6:00 PM Project: Prevail Properties Duplex Development Project Proposal Summary: 6 duplex, 12 dwelling unit, development proposed on boundary of MUE zone on southern side of Endville Road. Planning Committee Action Required: Flexible Use review is required for duplex development in the Low Density Residential zoning district. 64% flexible variance required for 12 dwelling units in LDR. Major Site Plan review to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or denial to City Council. Staff Recommendation: Staff defers to Planning Committee Application Number: FLEX 23-07 Application Type: Flexible Use, Flexible Variance, Major Site Plan Parcel Numbers: 075S-16-002-00 Meeting Date: September 11, 2023 Applicant: Prevail Properties Owner Location: 4903 Endville Rd Purpose: Flexible Use Review; Major Site Plan Review Present Zoning: Low Density Residential (LDR) Existing Land Use: Vacant single family residential Size of Property: 1.4 Acres Surrounding Land Use West and East - Single family residential (LDR); North and Zoning: and South, vacant LDR with proposed duplex developments north, area near boundary of MUE zoning Future Land Use: N/A Applicable 12.12 – Flexible Use, Flexible Variance; 12.11.2.3 Major Regulations: Site Plans Driving Directions: From the intersection of Main and 1-45, travel north on 1-45 and continue west toward McCullough Blvd. Continue down McCullough to the intersection of Endville Road in the  391 Belden community. Turn west onto Endville Road and continue approximately 0.3 miles. Destination is on the south side of Endville Road. Special Information: Area annexed in 1989. Zoned Low Density Residential in 2013 alongside additional annexation of Endville Road going west toward Pontotoc County. LDR zoning at the time of City wide rezoning demonstrated the current use of parcels NOT the future land use intent of annexed properties. Continual changes in commercial development, housing, economic environment, and land use in the City of Tupelo requires that Low Density Residential zoning be strategically developed for the expansion of the City and continued growth of property values while retaining greenspace and limiting high intensity uses. Quality development and environmentally friendly design are prioritized while encouraging clustering of housing units, as per Section 4.7.2 of the Development Code. Flexibility options for LDR allow for a reduction in development standards with a higher percentage of open space and clustered dwelling unit design. The Development Code is currently in conflict related to multi-family developments and is incorrectly defined. Apartment development has been removed as a use in favor of residential categories of duplex, multi-family unit 3-6 dwellings, multi-family unit 9+ dwellings. Apartment development is not defined by code. For this reason, the proposed duplex development, which might rightly be considered a multi-family development (also not defined by Code) is being reviewed at the highest level of review, by flexibility according to LDR standards, for the locating of duplexes as well as for multi-family development use which requires site plan review. Vacant parcels on north side of Endville Road propose duplex developments on individual lots for rental. Previous rental unit was located on the property. The owner submitted proper MDEQ permitting and was issued a permit for demolition by the City of Tupelo in August 2022. Appeal received to tabled vote on 8/6/23, no action required without vote. STAFF ANALYSIS Development Code: Flexible Use (12.12.2) 12.11.2.3. Major Site Plans. (1) Criteria: Projects that meet one or more of the following standards shall be considered major site plans if: (a) They request modifications of a standard established in this Code that requires flexible use approval; (b) They involve the development of any use that requires the issuance of a flexible use permit; or (c) They include multi-family housing other than upper story residential units, or more than three commercial spaces.  392 (2) Approval: Major site plans shall be reviewed by all relevant city departments and the Planning Committee. The Planning Committee shall make a recommendation to the City Council on the project. The City Council shall be the approving authority. 12.11.3. Review. (1) Coordination with Compatible or Flexible Use Review: (a) Applications for compatible or flexible use permits may be submitted concurrently with a site plan. However, decisions shall be rendered with a separate motion. (b) Dimensional variance requests may be proposed with site plan applications or identified during the site plan review process. Such variances will be considered according to procedures for variances, Section 12.16. 12.11.4. Site Plan Review Criteria. (1) The following evaluations shall be made during the site plan review process. Site plans that meet the following criteria shall be approved by the approving authority: (a) The site plan complies with all applicable Code requirements, including design standards in Chapter 6; (b) The site plan complies with all previously approved applicable City plans, such as the comprehensive plan; (c) The site plan displays a site design and development intensity appropriate for and tailored to the unique natural characteristics of the site, which may include the location of significant wooded areas, specimen trees, wetlands, steep slopes, Natural Inventory sites, and floodplains; (d) For nonresidential and multifamily projects, the site plan displays the location of trash handling, recycling, grease bins, and other waste related facilities employed in the normal operation of the use, as applicable; (e) The site plan includes adequate and clearly marked parking areas and pedestrian and vehicular access points; (f) The site plan includes an adequate design of traffic patterns, traffic control measures and street pavement areas and has provisions for maintaining traffic flows and reducing negative impacts of traffic on nearby properties; (g) The site plan complies with site construction specifications, including a finished floor elevation for all new residential construction on lots not considered as infill under section 6.10.1; (h) The site plan includes adequate stormwater facilities, water supply, sanitary sewer service, fire protection, street signs, and street lighting, as applicable, as evidenced by compliance with department standards, specifications, and guidelines; (i) The site plan complies with requirements for easements or dedications; and (j) Where a TIA has been submitted, the site plan either accommodates the anticipated traffic generated by the development, or it proposes adequate traffic mitigation measures within the development project. (Ord. of 1-2-2019(1) , § 2) 12.16.2. Flexibility Variance. (1) The Planning Committee may grant variances of greater than 30 percent of any regulated dimension in the following circumstances: (a) If the request is found to be compatible with similar structures in the immediate vicinity,or (b) Where special conditions applicable to the property in question would make the strict enforcement of the regulations impractical or result in a hardship in making reasonable use of the property; or (c) Where necessary for reconstruction, rehabilitation, or restoration of structures that are individually listed or are contributing structures within an historic district; or  393 (2) Where other characteristics of the proposed use of property are found to support and advance the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, to a degree that exceeds the impact of the requested variance. (3) Flexibility variances may be considered as part of the site plan review process but must be separately approved. (4) The Planning Committee may waive certain requirements when authorized to do so by provisions adopted as a part of this Code. (5) No variance shall be granted that would have the effect of allowing a use not permitted in Table 4.2., Permitted Use Table. 12.12.2. [Flexible Use] Application Process. (7) Criteria for Approval of Compatible and Flexible Use Permits. Applications for compatible or flexible use permits shall be approved only if the approving authority finds that the use as proposed or the use as proposed with conditions: (a) Is in harmony with the area and is not substantially injurious to the value of properties in the general vicinity; (b) Conforms with all special requirements applicable to the use; and (c) Will not adversely affect the health or safety of the public. Allowable Variances and Administrative Adjustments: LDR density permits 3 dwelling units per acre, 1 per 0.33 acre maximum. At 12 total dwelling units on 1.4 acres, density is one unit per 0.12 acres (Medium Density Residential density permits on dwelling per 0.14 acres). 4.24 units permitted without variance. Proposal requires a 64% variance. Summary Analysis and Recommendations: Plan Review Team has reviewed the preliminary site plan which requires the following additional information: 1. Turn radius and length of circle drive 2. Revision of 12” drainage pipe to 15” Final Recommendation: Staff remains neutral with deference to Planning Committee consideration of both the developer’s efforts to adhere to all requests, consideration of opposition by adjacent property owners for density, and the significance of the variance request in a Low Density Residential zoning district. City Council reviews all major site plans. Council approval required prior to construction. Approval by the Planning Committee for the use of duplexes and variance for density may be appealed within 3 days of the date of decision. City Council may approve, approve with amendment or contingency, deny, or table approval of the Major Site Plan. City Council review scheduled for September 19, 2023 at 6:00 in Council Chambers.  394 AGENDA REQUEST TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Alex Farned, Director DATE November 30, 2023 SUBJECT: IN THE MATTER OF DONATION TO CITY OF SALTILLO PARKING CURBS Request: We would like the Mayor and City Council to approve the donation of parking curbs to the City of Saltillo. Note: Donating 80 parking curbs valued at $4,000  395 City of Tupelo Department of Parks and Recreation Alex Farned, Director Mayor Todd Jordan November 29, 2023 COUNCIL Mayor and City Council Chad Mims Ward One I am requesting to surplus and donate 80 parking curbs to the City of Saltillo. Lynn Bryan Currently we have over 125 of them that came mainly from the baseball three- Ward Two plex parking lot at Ballard Park. These curbs run around $40 per curb. Travis Beard If you have any questions or require further information, please don't hesitate to Ward Three contact me at 662-841-6440. Nettie Y. Davis Ward Four Sincerely yours, Buddy Palmer Ward Five Alex Farned Janet Gaston Director Ward Six Rosezlia (Rosie) Jones Ward Seven 396 397  398 AGENDA REQUEST TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Johnny Timmons, Manager TW&L DATE November 30, 2023 SUBJECT: IN THE MATTER OF AWARD OF ROW LINE CLEARANCE CONTRACT (BID NO. 2023-015WL) JT Request: Approval of the attached contract with ROW Pro, LLC. Please note that bid no. 2023-015WL was approved through your council meeting on November 21, 2023. 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432  433 AGENDA REQUEST TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Johnny Timmons, Manager TW&L DATE November 30, 2023 SUBJECT: IN THE MATTER OF APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER # 1 & SUMMARY FOR THE NORTH GREEN STREET SUBSTATION (BID NO 2023-033WL) JT Request: Approval of the attached change order: North Green Street Substation – Change Order # 1 & Summary – This change order shows a net decrease of $39,484.65 based on final quantities. This change order brings the revised contract amount to $599,450.27. 434  435 AGENDA REQUEST TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ben Logan, City Attorney DATE Month Day, 2023 SUBJECT: IN THE MATTER OF APPROVAL OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THREE RIVERS SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY AND CITY OF TUPELO, MISSISSIPPI AND AUTHORIZATION OF MAYOR TO SIGN ON BEHALF OF THE CITY Request: First renewal of contract between city and Three Rivers Solid Waste Authority to dispose of municipal solid waste, including authorization of mayor to sign on behalf of the city.  436 City of Tupelo Comprehensive Plan 2025-2040 Consultant RFQ Committee Review - BID # 2023-048DS Rubric/ Points Available Firm JS TN NM NOTES: A. Qualifications: Firm qualifications, GMC 18 20 20 Southeastern based firm, large staff, diverse client listing similar to represented by previous experience, Tupelo, 10 month projection, immediate start date proven sustainability of prior work, references supporting previous experience, and firm access and CZB 13 14 18 Smaller firm, Northeastern based offices, start date February 2024, 5 availability to engage with City of month projection, “boutique” client base, primarily Northeastern, Tupelo Administrative and Planning impressive data modeling staff: 0-20 points B. Experience: The firm's GMC 20 20 20 Subjective approach to project development and deliverables, experience in diverse areas of diverse deliverables across clients, variety of connectivity focused planning, including neighborhood projects developed, Team experience in infrastructure development, connectivity, tax abatement projects developed based on rural struggles and tax based approaches incentives, blight and abandoned property development, CZB 12 15 18 Data-centric approach to Comprehensive Plan development, some infrastructure improvements, area specific development/planning presented in submittal future land use planning, and beautification strategies: 0-20 points C. Technical Expertise: The firm's GMC 15 15 15 Wide array of expertise among staff and project technical expertise in data development/clientele. Project development produced in house analysis in ares of density, among 582 staff members, Storm water expert assigned to Tupelo drainage, connectivity concepts, project team zoning, and market feasibility of CZB 15 15 15 Impressive research and feasibility concept presentation; expertise at detailed technical legal document deliverables commercial development: 0-15 points D. Publication Experience: The GMC 8 9 10 Multiple comprehensive plans completed, detailed public firm's experience in producing information available online to document process, variety of legal data for publication in the form deliverables and analytical studies presented of maps, analytics, policies and CZB 10 9 9 Highly data based, market and community research and publication procedures, anticipated project materials consistent across clientele, detailed analytics outcomes, and municipal  437 comprehensive plan publications: 0-10 points E. Legal Documentation GMC 15 15 20 Code revisions, unified land development code production among Experience: The firm's clientele, documents reflect subjective needs of clientele, are experience in producing legal inviting and user friendly documents for implementation into governing processes such as CZB 15 15 20 Wide variety of detailed zoning, ordinance, and development code municipal Ordinances and documents produced for clientele, research-based modeling evident Development Code amendments: 0-20 points F. Public Engagement Experience: GMC 15 15 15 Online forms, forums, process updates, website development, The firm's ability to conduct public strategic neighborhood based public engagement meetings and forums, provide opportunities to feedback sessions, user friendly engagement processes, dynamic receive and analyze public feedback, presentation and to engage with citizen participation efforts and community CZB 10 12 13 Detailed community engagement across multiple deliverables for engagement and education of Greenville, SC, thorough data oriented processes for public planning processes and outcomes. information sharing 0-15 points. TOTAL POINTS GMC 91 94 100 CZB 75 80 93 438 439 440  441 5th Dec 23 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494  495 AGENDA REQUEST TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Stephen N. Reed, Assistant City Attorney DATE November 30, 2023 SUBJECT: IN THE MATTER OF THE APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION MADE BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR CONDITIONAL AMNESTY OF LIENS ASSESSED AGAINST REAL PROPERTY LOCATED OWNED BY IT AT 1100 CHAPMAN DRIVE SR Request: This conditional lien amnesty application is made by the Neighborhood Development Corporation pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 21-19-12. The terms of such amnesty are contained in the Order attached hereto. 496 497 498 Exhibit 499 "A" 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543  Williams Appraisal Service 544 FROM: INVOICE Paul INVOICE NUMBER WILLIAMS APPRAISAL SERVICE 910 Lynn Cir PW202311202373 DATE TUPELO, MS 38804 11/20/2023 Telephone Number: 662-397-1227 Fax Number: REFERENCE TO: Internal Order #: PW202311202373 Lender Case #: Neighborhood Development Corporation Client File #: Main File # on form: Other File # on form: Telephone Number: Fax Number: Federal Tax ID: Alternate Number: E-Mail: Employer ID: DESCRIPTION Lender: Client: Duke Loden Purchaser/Borrower: NONE Property Address: 1100 Chapman Dr City: Tupelo County: Lee State: MS Zip: 38804 Legal Description: PT 1 PT NE1/4 NE1/4 STR 36-09S-05E FEES AMOUNT LAND APPRAISAL REPORT 450.00 SUBTOTAL 450.00 PAYMENTS AMOUNT Check #: Date: Description: Check #: Date: Description: Check #: Date: Description: SUBTOTAL TOTAL DUE $ 450.00 Form NIV5 - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE Borrower NONE File No. Property Address 545 1100 Chapman Dr City Tupelo County Lee State MS Zip Code 38804 Lender/Client APPRAISAL AND REPORT IDENTIFICATION This Report is one of the following types: Appraisal Report (A written report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(a) , pursuant to the Scope of Work, as disclosed elsewhere in this report.) Restricted (A written report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(b) , pursuant to the Scope of Work, as disclosed elsewhere in this report, Appraisal Report restricted to the stated intended use only by the specified client and any other named intended user(s).) Comments on Standards Rule 2-3 I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: - The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. - The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. - Unless otherwise indicated, I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. - Unless otherwise indicated, I have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. - I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or the parties involved with this assignment. - My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. - My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. - My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were in effect at the time this report was prepared. - Unless otherwise indicated, I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. - Unless otherwise indicated, no one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person(s) signing this certification (if there are exceptions, the name of each individual providing significant real property appraisal assistance is stated elsewhere in this report). Reasonable Exposure Time (USPAP defines Exposure Time as the estimated length of time that the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal.) My Opinion of Reasonable Exposure Time for the subject property at the market value stated in this report is: 90-180 DAYS EXPOSURE TIME IS ALWAYS PRESUMED TO PRECEDE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE APPRAISAL. IT IS THE ESTIMATED LENGTH OF TIME THE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE BEEN OFFERED ON THE MARKET, PRIOR TO THE HYPOTHETICAL SALE, AT THE APPRAISED VALUE, ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE APPRAISAL. MARKET EXPOSURE TIME FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 90-180 DAYS. Comments on Appraisal and Report Identification Note any USPAP-related issues requiring disclosure and any state mandated requirements: I HAVE NOT PERFORMED ANY APPRAISAL SERVICES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN THE PREVIOUS 36 MONTHS. I HAVE NO INTEREST OF ANY KIND IN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. APPRAISER: SUPERVISORY or CO-APPRAISER (if applicable): Signature: Signature: Name: Paul Williams Name: State Certification #: RA-916 State Certification #: or State License #: or State License #: State: MS Expiration Date of Certification or License: 11/30/2024 State: Expiration Date of Certification or License: Date of Signature and Report: 11/21/2023 Date of Signature: Effective Date of Appraisal: 11/20/2023 Inspection of Subject: None Interior and Exterior Exterior-Only Inspection of Subject: None Interior and Exterior Exterior-Only Date of Inspection (if applicable): Date of Inspection (if applicable): Form ID20E - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  546 WILLIAMS APPRAISAL SERVICE PO BOX 1414 TUPELO, MS 38802 (662) 397-1227 11/21/2023 Duke Loden Re: Property: 1100 Chapman Dr Tupelo, MS 38804 Borrower: NONE File No.: PW202311202373 Opinion of Value: $ 16,800 Effective Date: 11/20/2023 In accordance with your request, we have appraised the above referenced property. The report of that appraisal is attached. The purpose of the appraisal is to develop an opinion of market value for the property described in this appraisal report, as improved, in unencumbered fee simple title of ownership. This report is based on a physical analysis of the site and improvements, a locational analysis of the neighborhood and city, and an economic analysis of the market for properties such as the subject. The appraisal was developed and the report was prepared in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. The opinion of value reported above is as of the stated effective date and is contingent upon the certification and limiting conditions attached. It has been a pleasure to assist you. Please do not hesitate to contact me or any of my staff if we can be of additional service to you. Sincerely, Paul Williams License or Certification #: RA-916 State: MS Expires: 11/30/2024 pwappraisal@gmail.com  547 Borrower NONE File No. Property Address 1100 Chapman Dr City Tupelo County Lee State MS Zip Code 38804 Lender/Client TABLE OF CONTENTS Invoice .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 USPAP Identification ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Letter of Transmittal ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 FIRREA/USPAP Addendum ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Land ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Comparable Photos 1-3 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Subject Photos ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Location Map .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Scanned Document ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 9 Scanned Document ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Form TOCP - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  Williams Appraisal Service FIRREA / USPAP ADDENDUM Borrower NONE 548 File No. Property Address 1100 Chapman Dr City Tupelo County Lee State MS Zip Code 38804 Lender/Client Purpose DETERMINE MARKET VALUE Scope of Work IDENTIFY THE SUBJECT THE PROPERTY, GATHER DATA AT THE SITE, RESEARCH MARKET DATA, AND FORM AN OPINION OF VALUE BASED ON THE MARKET ANALYSIS. REPORT IDENTIFICATION- APPRAISAL REPORT. Intended Use / Intended User Intended Use: DETERMINE MARKET VALUE Intended User(s): The city of Tupelo History of Property Current listing information: SEE URAR. Prior sale: SEE URAR. Exposure Time / Marketing Time SEE URAR. Personal (non-realty) Transfers NONE Additional Comments NONE Certification Supplement 1. This appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or an approval of a loan. 2. My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result or the occurrence of a subsequent event. Supervisory Appraiser: Paul Williams Appraiser: Signed Date: 11/21/2023 Signed Date: Certification or License #: RA-916 Certification or License #: Certification or License State: MS Expires: 11/30/2024 Certification or License State: Expires: Effective Date of Appraisal: 11/20/2023 Inspection of Subject: Did Not Exterior Only Interior and Exterior Form FUA_LG - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  Williams Appraisal Service LAND APPRAISAL REPORT File No. Borrower Census Tract 549 Map Reference NONE 9506.02 46180 Property Address 1100 Chapman Dr City Tupelo County Lee State MS Zip Code 38804 SUBJECT Legal Description PT 1 PT NE1/4 NE1/4 STR 36-09S-05E Sale Price $ Date of Sale Loan Term yrs. Property Rights Appraised Fee Leasehold De Minimis PUD Actual Real Estate Taxes $ (yr) Loan charges to be paid by seller $ 0 Other sales concessions Lender/Client Address Occupant Vacant Appraiser Paul Williams Instructions to Appraiser Location Urban Suburban Rural Good Avg. Fair Poor Built Up Over 75% 25% to 75% Under 25% Employment Stability Growth Rate Fully Dev. Rapid Steady Slow Convenience to Employment Property Values Increasing Stable Declining Convenience to Shopping Demand/Supply Shortage In Balance Oversupply Convenience to Schools Marketing Time Under 3 Mos. 4-6 Mos. Over 6 Mos. Adequacy of Public Transportation NEIGHBORHOOD Present 90 % One-Unit 5 % 2-4 Unit % Apts. % Condo 5 % Commercial Recreational Facilities Land Use % Industrial % Vacant % Adequacy of Utilities Change in Present Not Likely Likely (*) Taking Place (*) Property Compatibility Land Use (*) From To Protection from Detrimental Conditions Predominant Occupancy Owner Tenant % Vacant Police and Fire Protection One-Unit Price Range $ 140 to $ 650 Predominant Value $ 200 General Appearance of Properties One-Unit Age Range 0 yrs. to 120 yrs. Predominant Age 20 yrs. Appeal to Market Comments including those factors, favorable or unfavorable, affecting marketability (e.g. public parks, schools, view, noise) I COULD DETECT NO NEIGHBORHOOD FACTORS THAT WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE VALUE OF THIS PROPERTY. Dimensions 50X125 = 7,900 sf Corner Lot Zoning Classification RESIDENTIAL Present Improvements Do Do Not Conform to Zoning Regulations Highest and Best Use Present Use Other (specify) Public Other (Describe) OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS Topo Mostly level with some gentle slope Elec. Street Access Public Private Size TYPICAL Gas Surface HARD SURFACE Shape RECTANGULAR SITE Water Maintenance Public Private View N;Res; San. Sewer Storm Sewer Curb/Gutter Drainage ADEQUATE Underground Elect. & Tel. Sidewalk Street Lights Is the property located in a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area? Yes No Comments (favorable or unfavorable including any apparent adverse easements, encroachments, or other adverse conditions) NO ABNORMAL CONDITIONS WERE NOTED. The undersigned has recited the following recent sales of properties most similar and proximate to subject and has considered these in the market analysis. The description includes a dollar adjustment reflecting market reaction to those items of significant variation between the subject and comparable properties. If a significant item in the comparable property is superior to or more favorable than the subject property, a minus (–) adjustment is made, thus reducing the indicated value of subject; if a significant item in the comparable is inferior to or less favorable than the subject property, a plus (+) adjustment is made thus increasing the indicated value of the subject. ITEM SUBJECT PROPERTY COMPARABLE NO. 1 COMPARABLE NO. 2 COMPARABLE NO. 3 Address 1100 Chapman Dr Cicada Cv 1105 Chapman Dr 426 Magazine St Tupelo, MS 38804 Tupelo, MS 38804 Tupelo, MS 38804 Tupelo, MS 38804 Proximity to Subject 0.29 miles NW 0.03 miles SW 0.88 miles SE Sales Price $ $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 27,500 Price $/Sq. Ft. $ $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 MARKET DATA ANALYSIS Data Source(s) INSPECTION MLS#22-33025;DOM 47 MLS#21-1028;DOM 1 MLS#22-344;DOM 97 ITEM DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION +(– )$ Adjust. DESCRIPTION +(– )$ Adjust. DESCRIPTION +(– )$ Adjust. Date of Sale/Time Adj. 10/26/2022 04/16/2021 05/16/2022 Location N;Residential N;Residential N;Residential N;Mixed use -5,000 Site/View Average Average Average Average Improvements NONE NONE NONE NONE Stie Size 7900 sf 6117 sf +1,783 6250 sf +1,650 11753 sf -3,853 Sales or Financing 0 ArmLth ArmLth ArmLth Concessions Cash;0 Cash;0 Cash;0 Net Adj. (Total) + – $ + – $ + – $ 1,783 1,650 -8,853 Indicated Value of Subject $ 16,783 $ 16,650 $ 18,647 Comments on Market Data There was very low turnover in the area of similiar properties. Comments and Conditions of Appraisal APPRAISAL WAS MADE TO ESTABLISH PROBABLE MARKET VALUE FOR LOAN PURPOSES. Final Reconciliation SALES COMPARISON CARRIED THE MOST WEIGHT WITH ESTIMATED COST USED AS AN INDICATOR OF VALUE. RECONCILIATION INCOME APPROACH WAS NOT USED DUE TO INSUFFICIENT DATA. I (WE) ESTIMATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS OF 11/20/2023 TO BE $ 16,800 Appraiser Paul Williams Supervisory Appraiser (if applicable) Date of Signature and Report 11/21/2023 Date of Signature Title Title State Certification # RA-916 ST MS State Certification # ST Or State License # ST Or State License # ST Expiration Date of State Certification or License 11/30/2024 Expiration Date of State Certification or License Date of Inspection (if applicable) Did Did Not Inspect Property Date of Inspection 08/11 Form LAND - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  Comparable Photo Page 550 Borrower NONE Property Address 1100 Chapman Dr City Tupelo County Lee State MS Zip Code 38804 Lender/Client Comparable 1 Cicada Cv Prox. to Subject 0.29 miles NW Sales Price 15,000 Gross Living Area Total Rooms Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Location N;Residential View Average Site Quality Age Comparable 2 1105 Chapman Dr Prox. to Subject 0.03 miles SW Sales Price 15,000 Gross Living Area Total Rooms Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Location N;Residential View Average Site Quality Age Comparable 3 426 Magazine St Prox. to Subject 0.88 miles SE Sales Price 27,500 Gross Living Area Total Rooms Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Location N;Mixed use View Average Site Quality Age Form PICPIX.CR - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  Subject Photo Page 551 Borrower NONE Property Address 1100 Chapman Dr City Tupelo County Lee State MS Zip Code 38804 Lender/Client Subject Site 1100 Chapman Dr Sales Price Gross Living Area Total Rooms Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Location N;Residential View Average Site Quality Age Subject Street Form PIC3X5.SR - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  Location Map 552 Borrower NONE Property Address 1100 Chapman Dr City Tupelo County Lee State MS Zip Code 38804 Lender/Client Form MAP.LOC - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  Tax Map 553 Form SCNLGL - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  554 Form SCNLTR - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAMODE  555 APPENDIX J  556 APPENDIX J  557 APPENDIX J