Olive Branch planning panel recommends rezoning for 262‑lot Foxpaw Creek subdivision

The Olive Branch Planning Commission voted to recommend that the Board of Aldermen approve rezoning about 108 acres on the west side of Davidson Road from AR (agricultural residential) to R2 (single‑family residential) to enable the proposed Foxpaw Creek subdivision of 262 detached single‑family lots.

Staff presented the application and said the site sits roughly 0.25 miles south of Goodman Road and is designated “suburban neighborhood” in the city’s Comprehensive Plan 2040. Staff noted R2 requires a 9,000‑square‑foot minimum lot area and that, in theory, R2 minimums could permit as many as 522 lots on 108 acres. Staff nonetheless recommended tabling the preliminary plat so the city engineer could finish reviewing a traffic study the applicant submitted late.

Jason Gambone, representing Garden Street Communities (the lot developer for Adams Homes), told commissioners the application before them is for 262 lots and described a design with no houses fronting Davidson Road, a wide landscape buffer and internal trails. "We are not proposing 522 lots," Gambone said, adding that minimum house sizes would be about 2,000 square feet with some smaller, attainable units reserved for roughly 50 lots.

Neighbors who spoke during the public hearing raised traffic, school capacity, environmental and neighborhood‑character concerns. Eugene Rose, of Timber Oaks Drive, warned that on portions of Davidson Road "two cars are hard to pass" and urged sidewalks and widening. Jacob Fentress of Autumn Oaks said higher density and smaller homes could harm adjacent property values and "bring in crime." Several speakers asked whether additional students from the development would worsen overcrowding at Pleasant Hill Elementary and the local high school.

Gambone and staff disputed some public claims. Gambone called the suggestion that the project would increase crime or reduce nearby values "inaccurate and false" and said environmental consultants will refine which streams and buffers require protection under MDEQ permits. Staff reiterated that 522 is a theoretical maximum under R2 minimums and not the application before the commission.

Commission discussion focused on how to secure design commitments. Commissioners were told that covenants recorded with the final plat and the preliminary/final plat review process can bind lot sizes, house minimums and architectural requirements; a planned unit development (PUD) would be another path to lock in design standards, but the applicant said it would not materially change the commitments already shown on the preliminary plat and related covenants.

At the end of the meeting Commissioner Janice Lewis moved to recommend approval under staff option two — finding that the broader area’s character has shifted toward suburban residential and concluding a public need exists for the rezoning. The motion, seconded by Commissioner Dion Jones, passed by voice vote. The commission also voted to table the preliminary plat to the commission’s Dec. 9 meeting to allow the city engineer to finish reviewing the traffic study; the rezoning and the plat will both be heard by the Board of Aldermen at a public hearing on Dec. 16.

What happens next: the preliminary plat will return to the Planning Commission on Dec. 9 with the city engineer’s recommendations. The Board of Aldermen will hold the final public hearing on the rezoning on Dec. 16. If the board approves the rezoning, the applicant would still need final‑plat approvals and any required permits (including environmental approvals) before building can begin.