Supervisors place moratorium on new construction

A Farley Ridge Subdivision community group opposed a rezoning of 105 acres at Highway 302 and Barringer Road from Residential Estates to Industrial-1 at the March 18 meeting of the Marshall County Board of Supervisors.

The property, owned by John Porter, was approved by the Marshall County Planning Commission by a vote of 4-1 with Commissioner Clista Ash opposing the measure.

Michael Whitson and Tracey Talley, with the community group, opposed the rezoning.

“We feel this rezoning request should not be approved since it does not support a need and plenty of other property is available,” Whitson said. “There is extensive land available in other areas.”

Whitson said the industrial use of the property would be detrimental to residential areas and that the developer, Porter, has a poor track record regarding lack of control of silt and other flooding violations.

“The developer doesn’t seem to care,” he said.

He added that provision of fire and police protection in the area would be sketchy until the new substation is opened in the Chickasaw Trail Industrial Park.

He said rapid development also creates challenges with infrastructure, schools, electricity, water and sewer.

And it creates unwanted traffic, he said, destroying the peaceful country setting and the environment.

He said the rezoning of the property was defeated in 2021, but now land speculation is going on with buyers purchasing land to resell it.

“At this time we feel there’s plenty of industrial land available,” he said.

Talley, taking a turn, said the land should only be rezoned if there is a need and she thinks there is no need for it in her opinion.

“No development should be taken when it increases erosion,” she said, alleging that Porter is being allowed to violate regulations.

District 2 supervisor Johnny Walker said development is coming, “I’m telling you.”

Talley said plugging in an industrial development in the area with a small frontage is like “plugging a square peg in a round hole.”

“It doesn’t fit,” she said. “What is the true need for this type structure to be placed in this small amount of space and become an issue to our way of life?”

Walker asked what the community group wants. They don’t want residential.

Talley the community group is opposed to highdensity residential and is opposed to the removal of the topsoil clearing off the land that causes erosion and sediment which is not controlled.

“It hasn’t been one month,” Walker said. “I am going to get with the developer and work things out.”

“We’ve (the county has) given this developer open range,” Talley said.

Walker said he bet Talley had a problem when I-69 came through. It rerouted the water, he said.

“Slow it down,” Talley said.

District 3 supervisor Keith Taylor said means should be thought about that will reroute the water.

“I think we need to follow through,” he said. “There’s going to be some changes out there. It’s not going to be a forever fix. I get it. When people move out there, it’s going to be their forever home.”

Taylor said if he wanted seclusion he will have to move to another county.

He said he would chose industrial over dense residential, something supervisors like Ronnie O’Neil Bennett and George Zinn III do not have to deal with.

“We need a professional planner to say how it should go,” Taylor said. “I don’t want to dictate how it’s developed. It’s sort of like making the best out of a bad situation. Most people on Farley wouldn’t have come here if they had known.”

Whitson said I-269 did not take out neighborhoods and schools. He said the Industrial Development Authority’s website is years out of date.

Taylor said if the county got a planner in, it would help

“I work for the citizens,” he said. “I am not arguing for or against industrial. I’m just giving Keith’s opinion.”

District 1 supervisor Charles Terry said supervisors are concerned about new growth.

“It’s coming to your neighborhood,” he said. “I think industrial sometimes is better than residential. They go to work and go home.”

He said with a zoning board, “You have 10 eyes looking at it, than just five.”

“You often go back to the track record of the developer (Porter),” he said.

“His track record is what’s causing the issues,” Talley said.

“If you had a different developer, would you be in the same?” Terry asked.

Whitson said Chickasaw Trail has 1,000 acres but this one development has 100 acres.

Porter came before the board to speak.

He said he bought 280 acres and only asked to rezone 100 acres to industrial use.

“We may have another 700 acres, but some of it is not usable,” he said. “This property has zero environmental issues on it. It will be one of the best industrial sites in the county.”

He said the property has access to sewer.

“Lots of stuff has changed to justify rezoning,” he said. “To put houses is a waste of prime Marshall County land.”

Walker pointed out a 170- acre site mapped in red.

“You must most definitely have to work on this drainage,” Walker said.

Porter said the property will have to have a silt basin and detention pond.

“It’s illegal to put post development flow to exceed pre-development flow (of water),” Porter said.

“It’s ditched from Farley to the bottom now,” Walker said.

“It was a problem before, the same amount of water before and after,” Taylor said.

“I don’t want to cause any more problems for Farley Road people PERIOD,” Walker said.

“I’m as tired of looking at those ditches as anybody else,” Porter said. “We will start working on the ditches (sodding the ditches) in May.”

Board attorney Amanda Whaley Smith asked if the map Porter presented to the board will be attached to the material in the site plan.

Zinn commented.

“Some years ago when I came on board, there was a cry that Marshall County was just dead to new growth,” he said. “When the industrial park kicked off and I-69 came through, the area became more valuable as a high-growth industrial area. I would support to keep it, if the developer would put in buffers and drainage. I’m proud Marshall County’s growth has kicked off.”

District 5 supervisor Ronnie O’Neil Bennett made a motion to support the decision of the zoning board to allow the rezoning of the 105 acres.

Board attorney Amanda Whaley Smith asked that a reason why the rezoning is justified be attached to the motion.

“I’d rather have industrial rather than housing,” Bennett said.

“Because?” asked Terry.

Bennett said his reason is that the land is very valuable as an industrial property.

Bennett’s motion passed 4-1 with Taylor opposing the motion.

“I work for the people who live in my district,” Taylor said.

Taylor then said zoning has the authority to stop work on a site if it is not sodded or seeded.

“I think the board has let residents down as far as making people do what’s right,” Taylor said. “I hate changing anybody’s way of life.”

Terry agreed saying from “this day forward, the site development should be done in the proper way.

“I don’t see why we let them clearcut,” Walker said.

Terry said it is up to the board to prevent those measures (erosion, silting and flooding) from happening.

“It’s neither here or there,” said Walker, “Because it’s already done. We are talking about the future.”

“Anything the zoning board has not acted on, I want to pump the brakes to,” Taylor said. “I want to hire somebody to do a comprehensive plan to make recommendations. I think these things need to be tweaked.”

Y’all need your own county engineer,” Walker said.

Taylor said he wants to see if Larry Britt “can find somebody to put here.”

“We need somebody’s eyes on the ground,” he said. “I just want to improve it.”

Terry said he favors an engineer to work with the county.

“We have control from this day forward to make sure any developer, whoever it is, does it to our specifications,” he said.

“Now, you got to come up with specifics,” Walker said.

“Thats why we need an engineer,” Terry said.

Whitson said the developer has to start those fixes in a month or so.

“If within 1,000 feet of residential, it has to be chopped,” he said.

Taylor said he thinks the board has let Whitson down in the past.

He wanted a moratorium on building any new subdivisions.

Talley said there are too many loopholes in the zoning regulations.

Britt joined the conversation.

He said when he came to the county, it had no zoning and didn’t have detention.

“Now, we have detention,” he said. “We really need to hire a planner to redo zoning and planning (regulations/ ordinances).”

He said a moratorium would give the county time to look at subdivision regulations and zoning.

Taylor said there is a concern about developers who clearcut and burn sending smoke over into homes in subdivisions.

“They will start burning on Friday afternoon, Saturday and Sunday and you can’t stop it,” he said.

Zinn said if the board addresses burning, it has to be regulated countywide.

“If they start burning on Friday, the state won’t send anybody down here,” Taylor said.

“Put in the ordinance, no burning on weekends,” Terry said.

Walker said he is in construction.

“It’s raining Monday through Thursday, and I’ve got to work on weekends,” he said. “Make them go to a pit and burn.”

“Why not give the engineer an opportunity to draw up a plan,” Zinn said.

“We can do that,” Britt said.

“I want a moratorium on anything industrial in the Barton area. No more permits,” Taylor said.

“I’d be in opposition to a moratorium,” Zinn said.

“I’m talking about Barton. Sixty days. I think we ought to take time to develop a plan.” Zinn said.

“That’s a moratorium,” said Taylor. “We are just saying, stop a minute. Our zoning is just screwed up. It’s a joke.”

“We need to fix it,” Walker said.

“Require a burn permit,” Whitson said.

“It’s a lot more than just burning,” Walker said.

“Water control. It’s everything,” Taylor said.

“It’s broke when a man can go in there and clear the land and no consequences,” Walker said.

“It all (silt) goes downhill.”

Taylor made a motion for a moratorium on industrial and commercial and subdivision development from the Tennessee line on the north, westward to DeSoto County, East to Cayce Road and south to Deer Creek.

“What are we not going to allow to happen?” asked Smith.

“You don’t want nothing to be done until we redo zoning,” Walker said.

“I’m asking to slow down. Pump the brakes for a few months,” Taylor said.

“We need to look at it and make sure we can live with it,” Terry said.

Smith asked the board to recognize it will take time to redo the zoning ordinances.

“You have to have public hearings and all that,” she said.

“It’s overwhelming,” Taylor said. “We need to get some help. Other counties have done it. We are just now doing it.”

Zoning director David Johnson said the ordinances were written in 2005 and 2006. Certain questions considered in 2024 may not have been asked in 2005, he said.

Taylor asked that nothing be put on zoning’s calendar for a while.