Good morning everyone. Um the meeting of the Escamia County Board of Adjustment on March 18th, 2026 is hereby called to order with four members present. We have a quorum. Um can we have the swearing in the staff? Will the court please swear the staff members of staff? Please raise your right hand. And do you shall swear and affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth of the God? I do. You Thank you. Members of the board, copies of staff's resumes have previously been provided and remain on file for reference. The
board has previously recognized staff as expert witnesses. Does anyone have any questions regarding their qualifications and abilities to offer expert testimony? Seeing none, the BOA meeting package for March March 18th, 2026 with the development services staff findings of facts have previously been provided to the board members. The chair will now entertain a motion to accept the BOA meeting package into evidence. Do we have a motion? Motion by Mr. Patterson. Travis, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Sorry. Um, do we have a second?
Second. Second by Ross. All those in favor of the motion, please raise your right hand. Motion. Motion passes. With all members in favor, do we have a proof of publication? Yes, sir. Did the publication meet all legal requirements? Yes, sir. The chair will now entertain a motion to wave the reading of the legal advertisement. Do we have a motion? Motion. Motion by Ross. Do second by Greg.
All those in favor of the motion, please raise your right hand. Motion passes. Four in favor. Members of the board, you have reviewed the minutes of the board of adjustment meeting held on February 18th, 2026. Upon your review of the minutes, are there any additions, deletions, or corrections? Seeing none, the chair will now entertain a motion regarding the minutes of the board of adjustment meeting held on February 18th, 2026. Do we have a motion?
Motion by Travis. Do we have a second? Mot second by Greg. All those in favor of the motion, please raise your right hand. Motion passes. Um if we could have the purpose of the board of adjustment and conduct of meeting by um Ross. The board of adjustment hears administrative appeals, variances, and conditional use requests. These hearings are quasi judicial in nature. Quasi judicial hearings are like evidentiary hearings in
a court of law, however less formal. All public testimony will be taken under oath, and anyone testifying before the board of adjustment may be subject to cross-examination. All documents and exhibits that the BOA considers are entered into evidence and made part of the record. The giving of opinion testimony will be limited to experts and closing arguments will be limited to the evidence in the record. After hearing the testimony and arguments for and against the proposed action and before making it decision, the BOA will consider the relevant testimony, the exhibits entered into evidence and the applicable law. Because decisions of the
BOA relating to variances, conditional uses, and extensions of development order for site plan and approval are final unless overturned by a court of competent jurisdiction. The county may issue development orders and permits for properties in accordance with the decisions of the BOA. However, if applicant requests the issuance of any such order or permit and such order and permit is issued, the applicant and not the county shall bear the risk that uh such decision may be set aside. The development order or permit may be revoked or the development may be otherwise
enjoined by the reviewing court. Any applicant for relief from a decision of the BOA for said actions or any agreved party as defined by state law may seek review of such decision by filing an appropriate pleading in a court of competent jurisdiction within 30 days of the BOA decision. The date of the BOA decision shall be the date that the BOA voted at the conclusion of the hearing. Whenever the BOA denies an application, no new application for an identical action on the same parcel shall be accepted for consideration within a period of 180 days of the BOA decision.
Any person agreved by a decision in the BOA relating to an appeal of an administrative decision may within 15 days thereafter apply to the circuit court for review. Each individual who wishes to address the board regarding a particular issue must complete a blue request to speak form and submit it to the clerk of board. These forms are located on the table at the back of the commission chambers. You will not be allowed to speak until we receive one of these completed request to speak forms. We must have these forms completed. Sorry, we must have these completed
forms for public record. All written or oral communication outside of this hearing with members of the BOA regarding matters under review today are considered exparte communication. Espartate communications are presumed predicial under Florida law and must be disclosed as provided in the board of county commission resolution 96-13 before decision by this board on any administrative appeal variance or conditional use request. The chair would ask each case is heard
that any board member who has been involved in any exparte communication regarding the um respective issue to please identify themselves and describe the communication. Our first case is um case number CU 2026-06 um 1516 1512 1800 1800 and a half um 1716 and 1800 Border Street.
A conditional use request to allow a Savage yard request by Meredith Bush, agent for TWWM Corores LLC owner. Um, have there been any um, Esparte communications regarding this case? I'm seeing none. Any knowledge or information obtained from the site visit or other sources? Seeing none. If any um, if any board member intends to refrain from voting due to a voting conflict of interest.
Seeing none, with the individuals who are a party to this item, please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record so you can be sworn in by the clerk. Good morning, members of the board. Meredith Bush, 314 South Balin Street, Sweet 108, Pensacola, Florida, 32502. Um, as an attorney, I'm not typically sworn. Okay. Thank you. Um, Miss Meredith, um, were you provided with a copy of the criteria, um, required, um, to obtain a conditional use and a copy of the findings of facts? Yes, sir. Okay. Um, you understand that
all criteria must be met in order for the board to grant a conditional use? Yes. Thank you. U, would you like to u make a presentation or would you like to hear from the staff first? Um, I'm happy to briefly make a presentation. Um, this is a situation where we are inre in agreement with staff's findings. Staff supports our request. Um, I can run through the criteria. Um, as far as general compatibility, it's a and it's an existing salvage yard. It's existed there for decades. Um,
it's compatible with the surrounding industrial and um other transportation oriented uses. And you'll see on the photographs um the the entire area is industrial in nature. Um facilities and services, public facilities and services are available and adequate um on-site circulation ingress and egress are sufficient. Um the site is not intending any new uh construction. This is part of the process to bring it into compliance with the land development code. Um because the
site has been there for decades, the zoning um did not com you know match the use and so we are currently going through a resoning process. The planning board recently approved or recommended approval of the resoning. That'll have to go to the board of county commissioners. This approval, if granted today, is going to be contingent on that resoning approval. Um, nuisances and hazards, the scale, intensity, and operation of the salvage yard have been established over time, and they do
not generate unreasonable noise, dust, odors, or hazards. um as far as solid waste material storage and waste handling um are operated and managed on site um in a manner consistent with the established use. There will be no new solid waste impacts created. Um screening and buffering screening and buffering will be compliant with the land development code. Um signs and lighting, no new signage or lighting is proposed. Site characteristics. The size, configuration,
and location of the parcels are appropriate for the salvage yard activities as de demonstrated by decades of continuous use. There will be no changes to setbacks, height, coverage, or intensity. And then as the use requirements, salvage yards are expressly identified as a conditional use within the HCLI district and we do meet those criteria. Um, one thing also to note, this is within a CRA district. Um, we've conferred with the CRA department. They have no objections.
If you look at the community redevelopment plan for this area, it specifically identifies um, Border Street as an industrial area, an area to be used for industrial, proposed for industrial, even though recognizing that the, you know, old zoning doesn't uh, match with the industrial use, which again is why we're going through the resoning process. Uh, I'm happy to take any questions. Again, we support staff's findings. All right. Thank you. Any um questions for her from
the board? I have one question for you um before before we hear from staff. Um it's been operated for over a decade and um was it under operation? Were they operating knowing that they needed a salvage yard permit or have new new zoning have have that made them have a need for it? So, it's been operating for multiple day I want to say 20 30 years if not if not greater if you
look at the Google Earth uh images. I don't know whether or not um I mean it the use predates the current zoning. I don't know whether or not the use predates all countywide zoning um because the Google Earth maps when you look back that far, you can't really see. I mean, they're they're kind of um blurry. So whether or not there were cars and um salvage activities back there that long ago such that it predates zoning. Um however, our position that it is grandfathered and
um given that you know historically as far back as anybody can document or remember these uses have existed um it's simply that the zoning was when it zoning was put in place they didn't um it didn't match the existing you know what was on the ground. Okay. Thank you. Um staff. Yes sir. Uh Andrew Homer, Scampi County Development Services. This is conditional use case 2 2026. Here we have our location map. The 500t radius showing the current zoning has high density
mixed use. Uh as Miss Bush explained, u this is in a resoning process. The staff was in recommending favorably to the conditions. The planning board has recommended approval or approval of the resoning. It's going to the BCC beginning of next month and there was no opposition. The future land use for the entire area is mixeduse urban. There we have that
community redevelopment area overlay. there it is within a 20-year travel time contour from a ECUA well. Uh just by overview, the wellhead protection areas are either 7year or 20-year. There are very specific use restrictions within the 7-year. Within the 20, it's more of a notification. This is an aerial map of the site. And on this,
you can see there is quite a mix of uses. Um There are some a few residential uses to the north and west. Um to the east you've got the railroad tracks and then over that you've got a car crushing operation and what had been a salvage yard on just to the east of that. There's a public hearing sign posted on site. This is looking north along Border Street.
This is looking into the site from Border Street. This is facing east. This is a second public hearing sign. It's a large site. Uh looking east into that site from border and this is looking northeast on into the site from border. As to the uh the findings, again, it's a request for conditional use approval to bring this existing salvage yard into compliance with the land development code. And to your question,
Mr. Chairman, the um original zoning the county had put on site was R5. Um possibly for density it was appropriate, but not for existing uses at that time. So this one it this is basically cleaning up that what should have been resolved back in the early 90s. Uh as to the first criteria, this is general compatibility. The proposed use can be compatible with the surrounding
area due to the nature of the existing land uses along Border Street in the adjacent area. The pattern is mixed with highdensity residential and heavy commercial uses to the west of border and primarily intense commercial and light industrial uses to the north and south. Across the railroad to the east is a salvage operation that received conditional use approval in 2008. Criterion B, public facilities and services are available to serve the subject parcel and are currently being
utilized by the applicant. Regarding on-site circulation, ingress and egress will be via existing driveway connections to Border Street. D. No new nuisances or hazards are expected with this request as this is an existing salvage operation seeking to come into code compliance. Solid waste solid waste service will be provided as needed by the applicant. F. This is regarding screening and buffering. Screening along Border Street is necessary to
meet the CRA requirements for outdoor storage. The adjoining parcels to the north and south are undergoing reszoning to HCLI and won't require buffering. The parcel to the east is an existing salvage yard and they will not require screening. Criterion G, signs and lighting. Any new proposed lighting will need to be directed onto the site to avoid nuisance conditions. Site characteristics. The site is currently operating as a salvage yard and has proved to be adequate for the
use. Specific use requirements. The proposed HCLI zoning does not contain use specific requirements for salvage yard beyond this conditional use approval. Um, as to the findings, staff recommends approval of the conditional use as requested pending BCC approval to reszone to HCLI. Thank you, sir. Um, any questions for the staff?
I just have one um one thing to um ask. So basically uh as you stated this is um cleaning up from something in what it was 2008. The the approval uh across the railroad tracks was 2008. Um I've been here a long time. I remember that one well. Um there there was a number of things that this operation has been going through to clean up. Um there was some right of way that needed
to be vacated in the area that was taken care of through the BCC. The reasoning to HCLI is in the process and this would be that final step is the conditional use that would bring it all into full compliance. Okay. So, is it fair to say that um part of that cleanup process it was it could have been decisions or um or it was not decisions that the um county had made at that time. I believe
there was a code case because the existing use wasn't matching the current zoning. So they're doing a clean sweep here and bringing everything into compliance. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Drew is absolutely correct along with Meredith. This basically is is is clean up and there was some what we call commercial creeping and all of those things. We trying to bring everything together and because this site had never be developed for anything else. Never because
of all the all the contaminants that's already existed because of this use. So, so the county, the the CI area said, "Let's get it, let's get it cold. Let's get it correct and let's make it even better for this type of operation." That's definitely in that whole area. So, so, so that's why all parties, all the CRA areas, the resonings, everything. and they're going to possibly need some site plan process, but everything is in line to
bring this site making an industrial area for this specific section of the county. And that's what I was going to touch on um as to your question. So, we will be going through DRC at least to provide, you know, a current site plan. Um there may be some additional screening and buffering. Um but it is part of an overall process to um you know at least make it look better and meet code. Yes. Any more questions from the board? Anything else? No sir. Um I personally feel that the
applicant has operated this yard um for years without requirements and per uh required permits. um and continue unpermitted operation cannot constitute uh competent substantial evidence of compliance with the land development code. Criteria H um the finding the facts. Can you go back to that if you would? Um the site is currently operating as a savage yard and has proved to be adequate for the use. Um
any um claim of self of adequ ad adequacy is self-created um and there's no verified evidence that you satisfy safety environmental compatibility and comp comprehensive um plan requirements. Um how do is is that a is that a um like a a real fact I meant um that they're adequate? I meant how do you know if they're not permitted? So, let me let me let me come. Okay. Okay. Again, in this area, in a type of operation like this, there going to be some there going to
be some what we call commercial creeping and of of different things and possibly because people don't always coming to see us when they doing certain things. After this came to light, after this came to light, big staff really is in support of this fully because it's necessary. After this came to light, the owners, the applicants, the attorney, they said, "Yes, we want to we want to make it whole. We want to get everything right, get everything in order, lined up so it could be
consistent with operations that are ongoing with some future operations that may have occurred and with some things that may not have been done appropriately. So, so, so, so we they came had a good extensive meeting because the area again it'll never be residential never because of the contaminant that's out there and this area. So the zoning the zoning was not adequate for those type of uses. So sir, let's let's get it everything and and and there are some additional parcels
that that may have been acquired. So the owner the owner want to comply and staff is in full support. CIA area said that even with the plan, there's a CRA area for this plan and they said this area should definitely be zoned industrial so that it can fit some of those old uses that may not have been done at as they should have but they were occurring. So, so that's why this is a this
is a good way of doing things where the owner can proceed to try. Let's make it right so we can buy by all of the evidence. And if there's any other things that necessary for them to do during the site plan review process, we will uh uh uh get those things mentioned and they got to comply. If not, they're going to do it because they have to. Engineers have already been involved. We have meeting with them. So So it's a good move of foot with this to bring everything together, make it whole. I I agree with you. I mean, it's it's good. It's a good thing to make it whole,
but I have seen, you know, far too often um people not complying and then, you know, years later they they want to comply. I know it needs to be made right and I know I know we're dealing with stuff um that maybe it could have been a business owner or it could could have been the county. You know, we're not going to point the blame at nobody this morning. And um I don't see any uh residents,
you know, here um that's not in agreement of it um this morning. Um, but is is there a way if this is approved and only if if the board sees fit um could there be any um um fines or penalties added on to um whatever permit um fees they have. Um and if I may just address and I respect your concerns
and your questions. Um, we're not conceding that it's been an existing violation because again, if the use predates the zoning, then there are lawful non-conforming use provisions. There are grandfathering pro provisions um in an attempt to work with the county. We're not we're doing this process versus going in and arguing against the county's ability to enforce anything at all because we do, you know, want to be good citizens. the, you know, the owner wants to comply with the
concerns, address the concerns, go ahead and get it all um fully, you know, in line with current code. But the idea um or question whether or not for years and year, you know, 30, 40, 50, I don't know how long, I can't give you a date that this started, you know, however long ago, but as again, as far back as we can document, using satellite imagery, using all records and evidence, this has existed. Um, so the idea that, you know, anyone has been flagrantly violating the code is something that that we would, you know, my position and our position is that's
simply not the case. But again, we do recognize current zoning u, you know, needs to be HCLI. Um, as Mr. Jones and and our report states, even the county's own documents indicate that this area is to be industrial. The re redevelopment plan itself specifically calls out Border Street as an industrial area for future industrial growth. Um, criterion H specifically, you know, it calls
for the size, shape, location, and topography of the site. The size of the site is adequate. Um actually the the five or six parcels listed as part of this process have been combined into one parcel. Um again the roadways have been vacated. So this has been you know a lengthy and expensive process for the owner willing again to fully comply. So the size is adequate. The shape is adequate. The you know the lot's not configured in such a way that it would not allow for this
operation. the location is adequate again because it's in an industrial area. It's surrounded by industrial uses and it's been identified you know I don't know when the CRA was put into place but but quite a few years ago um as an industrial you know area and then the topography it's not you know hills and valleys I mean it's you know flat piece of land um so looking specifically at that criteria even notwithstanding the fact that it's been proven proven as adequate because it's been
there forever and you know or for as far back as we can document um you know the other issues the use setbacks intensity bulk height open space all of those are um you know documented by the the actual facts and so to answer your question I believe criterion H has been met through the facts um and again you know we're trying to be good partners with the county rather than fight some lengthy legal argument about whether or not they can make us do this we're voluntarily coming in
and saying, "Hey, let us comply um you know, if you want whatever steps we need to take, we want to do it uh because we want to continue operation um in the appropriate area. Um obviously, if it were surrounded by, you know, subdivisions or lowdensity residential, then you know, you would have a much stronger um argument to to or basis to to question. But again, this is um you know, designed and designated by the county within mixeduse urban. So the comprehensive plan, we're in compliance with comprehensive plan. It allows for HCLI. Um and so,
you know, given that that your um position is constrained by you're, you know, directed to look at competent substantial evidence, the county staff, all of their testimony as experts and all of their documents fully supports every criteria and uh the decision has to be based on the criteria. We are aware that um someone filed a code enforcement complaint. Absolutely. And and that kind of triggered this. Before that, whether or not there was any knowledge, you know, working awareness of the current owner operator that there was a question to zoning. You
I don't know that to be true. Um I can't tell you county may know. I don't know the year that the current owner took possession. Um whether or not someone else operated, somebody came in and bought the business and just continued to do what they've been doing for decades. I I'm not going to represent that, I don't know for sure. But that certainly happens in a lot of cases where it's only when somebody brings it to your attention that says, "Hey, there's there may be a zoning issue here that you ever even approach the county or have the the county approach you." So,
um again, you know, we want to be good neighbors and I do understand and respect respect your concerns. Uh but that's why we're here. So, all right. Thank you. That that um clarified my question to that criteria. I appreciate that. Um board, any um anything from the board staff? No, sir. Okay. At this time, the chair will now entertain a motion regarding item CU-2026-07.
And with your motion, please state whether or not you adopt the staff's findings of fact as presented by staff. If for any reason you don't accept staff's findings, please go through all the criteria and address each one specifically as to why you do not concur with staff findings and provide substitute findings. Do we have a motion? Motion by Travis. Second. Second by Ross. All in favor?
Motion passes with all in favor. Our next case is um case number CU-2026-11 30001. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, it's a good one. Thank you. And thank you. I thought you said when earlier that you read CU 20267 was the last but the case was 06. Okay. Did I did I not hear I was maybe I misheard. Okay. Oh,
if I if I make a ending statement on that, would that correct that first one? If we can just clarify on the record that the previous case, the vote pertained to what is listed as 6A and that was case number CU 202606. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Case number CU 2026-06. Um that was what the vote was for. Um just to clarify the record.
All right. Our next case is case number CU-2026-07 1512 1510 and 1509 Border Street a conditional use request to allow Savage Yard requested by Beredith Bush agent for Angelos's Auto Parts Inc. Um that's the owner. Um any esparte communications regarding this case board? Seeing none, any knowledge or information obtained from a site
visit or other sources? Seeing none, if any does any board member intend to refrain from voting due to a voting conflict of interest. Seeing none, with the individuals who are party to this item, please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record so you can be sworn in by clerk. And and um Miss Bush, she does not need to be sworn in again. Thank you. Meredith Bush, 314 South Balin, um Sweet 108, Pensacola, Florida 32502. And
um this is a case where I would um ask that we simply adopt my prior statements. It the facts are exactly the same. These are adjacent parcels. Um, you know, I'm happy to run through it and read through, but you know, in order to expedite and, you know, out of an abundance of respect for your time and everyone's time, the only reason this case was not brought in the last case is that they're two separate owners. So, again, all the facts remain the same, whereas it's a longstanding
existing uh salvage operation, um, staff has fully recommended approval. And so, you know, for the record, I would, you know, simply um ask that we adopt my prior um running through the criteria for this case recognizing staff um also agrees and answers to your questions would be the same. It's same exact fact pattern, just separate ownership. Okay. Um will we need a motion to adopt that?
No. Okay. Thank you. Okay, that'll be just fine. And moving forward, um staff, would you like to um pres I I would only add one thing. Um similar situation with the proposed reszoning to HLI. The one difference in this case is that the property on the west side of Border Street is under the Brownsville overlay uh as opposed to the Englewood overlay. The other case was completely within that. This is split by the two overlays. Um, same results,
same recommendations. Okay. And, um, we have a speaker for this one. Um, okay. All right. Um, any Yes, sir. Go ahead. Uh, on this one, was there any kind of reported code enforcement violations? That's a good qu. I would have to do some digging. Um, possibly on the eastern side. I'll leave that to their representative. Um to my knowledge there was not um the only code of
enforcement that I'm aware at least current code enforcement um was on 1516 just one of the parcels on the other on the other case prior to the combination. Um there may have been some historic may have been I I just can't say with any certainty at this point without looking it up. I I couldn't remember which kicked the whole thing off. there were multiple parcels and rightways team picked it off. Okay. Well, thank you for clarifying and and to my knowledge again there there no open violations on these parcels. Thank you.
You had a question? Oh, I thought she was Any more questions from the board staff? Any questions? No, sir. Miss Bush, anything from you? Okay. At this time, um since there's no further questions or um anything, um the chair will now entertain a motion regarding the item CU-S2026-207.
And with your motion, please state whether or not you adopt the staff's findings um of fact as presented by staff. If for any reason you do not accept staff's findings, please go through all the criteria and address each one specifically as to why you do not concur with staff findings and provide substitute findings. Um, do we have a motion? I move we accept the staff's finding and recommendation. Motion by Ross. Do we have a second? A second. Second by Greg. All in favor? Right hand. Motion passes. All in
favor? Thank you. All right. Our next case is case number CU 2026-11 30001 Langley Avenue. Conditional use request to allow an educational facility request by Richard Colbert, agent for um Aerospaces Housing LLC owner. Any AS part communications regarding this case board?
Seeing none, any knowledge or information obtained from a site visit or other sources? Seeing none, um does any board member intend to refrain from voting due to a voting u conflict of interest? See, seeing none with the individual. Okay, we have the individual um who's a party to this item um already at the podium, right? Yes, sir. You know. Okay. If you would um please state your name and address for the record so you can be sworn in by the clerk. Yes, sir. My name is My name is
Richard Colbert, 3001 Langley Avenue, Pensacola, Florida 32504. Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear and affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help you God. Thank you. I'm sir. Were you um provided with a copy of the criteria required to obtain a conditional use and a copy of the findings of facts? Yes, sir. All right. Um do you understand that all CR the criteria must be met in order for the board to grant a conditional use? I do. Okay. U would you like to make a presentation or would you
like staff to go first and you go behind them? I can make a brief statement just to kind of give a little background to sir. Be helpful. Yes sir. Um we are the owners of Carrier Landing Apartments on the parcel adjacent to the site where this um proposed use is going to exist. Carrier Landing Apartments basically is occupied solely. All our tenants are flight students um either with engaged or active duty with the Air Force, the Navy, the Marines or the Coast Guard or our civilian flight students um seeking to become pilots for one or more major airlines.
The other tenants in the build in our facility are flight instructors and basically these are the same instructors that are teaching these flight students and taking them up for flight training. Um we have an accessory building that we built when we built the apartments. It's we call it the clubhouse, but basically in that building is um a dining area. We have flight simulators which are actually kind of cool to use if you go up there and do that. um that the students can use on their time to train and and get ready for what they have to do. Um we also have some space that
they will meet with their instructors. Um which is kind of why we're here today. You could we didn't necessarily view it as an educational use, but it is under the technical definition since they are instructing the students um on occasion in the building. It it has an educational use and that's why we're here today. We really just consider this an additional accessory use for our complex. Um we didn't build a big enough clubhouse to start with, so we need more space. Um so everybody, and I want to make this very clear that everybody that uses this space is either an existing tenant
student or an existing tenant instructor. There's nobody coming to the property that's not already um living at the apartment. So there's no more traffic, there's no more cars, there's no more people coming there. We just needed additional space um for the existing use we already have with our students. Okay. Thank you staff. Good morning. My name is Kimberly Wilson uh development services. So I'm going to this is the the uh they are requesting conditional use for an educational facility. Uh so I'm going to go through the criterion and defining effects.
Uh what we have here is the location map of uh the site. Have the 500 500 foot radius map zoning map. Have the future land use map of mixuse urban. Have an aerial map showing the entire site. This is the u notice of public hearing sign posted along Langley Avenue. the sign uh posted along the east side of Langley Avenue. And this is looking on the site from Langley Avenue from directly on
Langley. Looking on the site from Langley again. And this is just west along Langley Avenue by itself. It's across the street uh from the site on Langley Avenue. And this is another public hearing sign posted along Alicia Drive. looking east along Alicia Drive. This is uh looking onto the site from Alicia Drive. This is west along Alicia Drive. This is actually looking across
uh the site uh across Alicia Drive. Now I'm going to go through the criterion and the finding effects. Uh again the uh they are requesting an educational facility conditional use for an educational facility. Going to start with criterion A, general compatibility. Uh the finding the facts. The proposed use as requested by the owner applicant is an educational facility intended to intended to serve the existing uh residents or flight students residing at the carrier landing apartments. Proposed use appears uh capable of being conducted and operated in
a manner compatible with the adjacent properties and overall character of the surrounding area. The applicant has submitted a site plan illustrating the proposed 2,677 square ft facility uh along with a sil survey identifying the location of the proposed structure. Um B facilities and services public facilities and services are available to serve the subject parcel and are currently being utilized by the applicant for the existing development which is carrier landing apartments. Uh C on-site circulation ingress egress. Uh the property is located on the south side of Langley
Avenue. The site will utilize the existing parking lot and driveway uh which currently serves Carrier Landing Apartments that development. Uh the parking within the right of way is prohibited. So you know you can't have any parking on the right of way at all. Um all parking associated with the proposed use shall occur within proposed parking spaces located within the carrier landing complex that already exists. Uh the proposed structure is not anticipated to adversely impact uh traffic circulation or pedestrian safety or emergency vehicle access. Uh and uh it appears
it should be is consistent with the functional use of the roadway. Uh D nuisances and hazards. The applicant has stated that the proposed use will not produce unreasonable noise, glare, dust, smoke, odor, vibration, electrical interference, or other nuisances or hazards affecting adjacent or nearby properties as all activities will take place indoors of the facility. E. Solid waste. Based on the submitted application, the proposed facility will not adversely impact the solid waste
collection services currently being provided to the parcel by ECUA Emerald Coast Utilities Authority. Uh screening and buffering F based on the applicant submitted plans, uh a 6-ft wood privacy fence will be installed along the northern and eastern property lines uh meeting the screening and buffering requirements of our Scami County Land Development Code. uh G signs and lighting. Uh applicant has stated that all exterior lighting will be attached to
the proposed building and will be designed and directed to avoid glare and impacts on traffic safety. The lighting will be operated in a manner that does not create a nuisance for neighboring properties. H characteristics site characterist characteristics. Based on the survey and the site plan submitted by the applicant, the site can accommodate the proposed building. If conditional use is granted, the applicant will be required to submit construction plans to comply with all the applicable standards outlined in the land development code and
the Florida building code. Additionally, any other site characteristic reviews uh you know, setbacks, those items will be addressed uh during the uh land use approval process, the site plan review process. Uh I I'm sorry. Use requirements. The proposed use will comply with the additional conditional use requirements of the zoning district and other provisions of the land development code as outlined in section 3-2.9 C4F educational facility. If conditional use is approved uh approval is granted, the applicant will be required to submit plans
that meet all applicable construction standards in the LDC land development code and the Florida building code. again. Um, in conclusion, staff findings based on the review of the submitted material and the applicable land development code standards for an educational facility, uh, they have been met. Uh, therefore, staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use. If approved, again, the applicant remains responsible for obtaining all required permits and completing any additional reviews necessary prior to construction of this location at this location.
Thank you. Any if I may just if you could show the aerial again. Sure. Just Yes, sir. I just want to point out where the building is. It's not really clear in the Yes, sir. I don't think um just right there, that little area, the wooded area right next to the swimming pool. Basically, it's got apartments on this side. The north is the state farm insurance office. They sold us that little piece of land, so they're very happy with what we're doing. And on the other side is the city um soccer fields and and park there. So, okay. I don't think we have any impact. The only impact really is the the noise of all the soccer kids,
which actually I kind of like. It's kind of fun to hear them. All right. Thank you. Any questions? Any questions from the board? All right. We have uh one speaker um and we have one that um that is in favor um that wishes not to speak. and um Miss Linda Williams. You approach the podium, state your name and address and get sworn in by the clerk. Sure. My name is Linda Williams. I live at 6150 Alicia Drive, Pensacola,
Florida, 32504. Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear and affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, you got I do. Thank you. Okay. Since I lived directly down from this complex, I wanted to know what was being built because after driving through the property at the time, I was not aware that they had purchased additional property because there's not one square inch on that property to build anything else. So coming to this I realize
now that they've purchased additional property of where it will be built. So I guess my answers the questions that I had although I do have a question. Um, originally when this project was going to be built, there was sworn testimony that it was going to uh the people that would be living there that first of all they were apartments and they're not. They're four bedrooms connected with the kitchen. So, they're basically dorms. Um, but we were told
they were going to be all officers living there and that they had contracts with the Navy and contracts for this whole flight school with some helicopter company. um none of which turned out to be true. So is everyone living there a naval aviator which is constantly being stated at these meetings or can anyone live there? That's that's not um respectfully that's not something that we
hear for today, but it's something that's talked about for approval for all conditional use permits involving this property. What else? So, the county doesn't regulate who property can be rented to. Uh, and apartments or apartments are a matter of how the the transaction is set up. It's not a dormatory. It's an apartment. Some things aren't always traditional as far as number of units within, but it still meets the definition for an apartment. And we again we don't regulate who can
be rented to. But if you're stating that you only allow certain residents and and that's not true. So basing your conditional use on those facts. Don't you think that's pertinent to this issue? Conditional use is based on the nine criteria. One of which isn't who their civil relationships are worked out with. Okay. and flight simulators to my knowledge uh dealing with a lot of aviators
and knowing a lot of people who have been through all this process cost approximately 6 to8 million. They have actual flight simulators 6 to8 million flight simulators are going to have on the property. Again, educational facility doesn't regulate what goes on within the building. We're talking about that use of the building, not the specifics of it. So, you can just come in here and say anything you want and then it's okay. So, all testimony is given under oath. Um, they are saying what they're saying. Conditional use runs with the use of the land. So, that's
something to keep in mind. Okay. Well, we'll keep an eye on the project. Absolutely. Thank you. All right. Um, do does the board have any questions for Miss Linda? No questions. Um staff, any more comments or um anything from the owner? Okay. At this time, um the chair will now entertain a motion regarding item CU 2026-11.
And with your motion, please state whether or not you adopt the staff findings or fact as presented by staff. If for any reason you do not accept staff's findings, please go through all the criteria and address each one specifically as to why you do not concur with staff findings and provide substitute findings. Do we have a motion? I make a motion that we accept staff's findings and uh approve the request. Have a motion by Greg. Second. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second. All in favor, raise your right hand. Motion passes. All All in favor?
And our last um case for the day. Um case number CU-2026-12 8700 block Mer Road. A conditional use request to allow a drive-thru within 200 ft of LDR zoning. Requested by James Hughes, agent for Aqua Ventures Properties LLC. Um that's the owner. Um any esparte communications regarding this case board? Seeing none, knowledge or information obtained from a site visit or any other source? Seeing none, um does any board member intend to
refrain from voting due to a voting conflict of interest? Seeing none. Okay. We have the individual who who's a party to this item um at the podium. Uh, please state your name and address u for the record so you can be sworn in by clerk. Sir, James Hughes, 412 South Broad Street, Mobile, Alabama. Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear and affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So beyond God, I did. Um, were you provided with a copy of the criteria required to obtain conditional use and a
copy of the findings of facts, sir? Yes, sir. Um, do you understand that all the criteria must be met in order for the board to grant a conditional use? Yes, sir. All right. Thank you. Um, sir, would you like to uh make a presentation first or hear from staff and then hear from staff and then take any comments? Yes, sir. Staff again services. Development services. Uh we're going to start with the uh I'm sorry, this is called conditional use 202612. um location map,
500 foot radius zoning map, the future land use map of mixed use uh suburban, I'm sorry, aerial map, excuse me, notice of public hearing sign looking northwest onto the site looking south along Ber Road. This is east across Buer Road from the site as uh and now we're going to get into the
uh request of conditional use along with the uh criteria. So, they are requesting uh to allow for a parcel boundary of a restaurant or brew pub uh within with a drive-thru or drive-through services less than 200 ft from an LDR or MDR, medium density res residential or low density residential uh zoning district. Um and conditional use of course is it's for uh this one is for residential services, restaurants uh not among the permitted uses of the district. So starting with criterion
A general compatibility the proposed use is compatible with the adjacent properties and the character of the surrounding area while the site abuts LDR lowdensity residential and MDR medium density residential zoning districts. The applicant has stated that the development would be located as far from these districts as practable practical in order to minimize potential impacts on the surrounding residential area. B, facilities and services. Public facilities and services will be confirmed through review by Emerald Coast Utilities Authority. Uh, and if approved,
uh, will be utilized by the applicant for the proposed development. C. On-site circulation, ingress, egress. The subject property is located along Baher Road. All ingress and egress will be required to comply with the standards of the land development code and will be evaluated evaluated during the site plan review process to ensure that all applicable requirements are met. prior to approval uh such that the proposed development will not adver ad adversely affect traffic circulation, pedestrian safety or emergency vehicle access and will be consistent
with the functional use of the roadway. D nuisance and hazards in accordance with the requirements of the land development code. The proposed development which is adjacent to residential uses will be subject to site plan review to ensure that it does not produce unreasonable noise, glare, dust, smoke, odor, vibration, uh any type of electrical interference, uh other nuisances or hazards affecting adjacent or nearby properties. Uh the ordering kiosk and speaker will need to be oriented away from the residences to extend to the extent possible. I don't know if Mr. Homer wanted
to chime in on that. I think that's what you that correct. Um that's just a a general condition that will that comes up anytime we have drive-throughs near residential uses. No one wants that to hear the squawk box in the middle of the night. So, um the site plan that was submitted would there's going to need to be some adjustments made to that regarding turn radiuses and the location of those. um those speakers relative to the residential uses. And something else for the board to keep
in mind, uh we do deal with sign variances from time to time. Um as uses change, sometimes the signage required changes. Um we've we've been seeing more and more situations where drive-throughs have multiple lanes and m multiple ordering kiosk. Our code wasn't written anticipating multiple ordering locations and the signage there. That's something we're going to have to address going forward. Thank you, Mr. Homer. Uh E, solid waste. Based on the information
provided by the applicant, the proposed facility is not expected to adversely impact solid waste collection services for the uh property uh which will be reviewed and provided by ECU coast utilities authority. Uh F screening and buffering in accordance with the Escami County Land Development Code, the applicant is required to comply with all applicable screening and buffering requirements. Compliance will be evaluated during the site plan review process. Per
section 2-2.3 of the land development code, Scammy County land development code uh design standards manual, the applicant will be responsible for constructing a 16 ft vegetative buffer along the property lines uh that abut those single family residential uses. um compliance with the screen and buffering uh requirement will be confirmed during the site review uh process. Criterion G, signs and lighting. Uh the applicant has stated that all exterior lighting will comply with the
Escami County Land Development Code and will be designed and directed to minimize glare and impacts uh to traffic safety. Therefore, the proposed lighting will be operated in a manner that does not create a nuisance for neighboring properties. Criterion H site characteristics in accordance with the requirements of the land development code and Florida building code. The applicant must meet all applicable development and construction standards to accommodate the proposed building compliance with these standards uh including the site characteristics such as setbacks uh things of that nature. They will be evaluated during the site plan review process uh
and the planning uh land use approval process. Uh I use requirements. The proposed use will comply with the additional conditional use requirements of the zoning district and other provisions of the land development code as outlined in section 3-2.10 uh C3A for restaurants. If conditional use approval is granted, the applicant will be required to submit plans that meet all applicable construction standards in the land development code and the Florida building code building code.
In conclusion, the is staff findings. Uh based on the review of the submitted material, the proposed restaurant with a drive-thru meets the applicable standards of the Escambia County Land Development Code. Therefore, staff recommends approval uh of the requested conditional use. If approved, uh the applicant shall remain responsible for obtaining all required permits and completing any additional reviews prior to construction to this location. And that concludes uh our staff findings. Thank you. Any questions from the board?
I have a question for staff um just concerning the uh order in like the drive-through um intercom system. Um, are there any kind of way is there any kind of way like when you know these restaurants start moving closer um to the subdivisions, is there any kind of way for like a sound wall or something um or does that um vegetation um kind of cut cut the noise down level down?
So again, that's there. The reason these are um conditional use is so that they come before this board for review like that. That is certainly within your purview to uh recommend something of that nature. Um because um my concern is um that neighborhood there's a neighborhood right next to that property, right? you know, it's pretty close. It's easing close cuz it's a McDonald's on the corner, but that, you know, their intercom system is um close to
the road and um I doubt they can hear that, but easing closer closer to that subdivision. Um um I feel like there should be some type of um sound wall or something to pro protect them for the no noise. Question. We purposely move step to the mic that way it could be on record. Yes, sir. You go ahead. purposely moved the potential QSRs closer to the Tom Thumb to the north uh area to be furthest away from the residential neighborhood. And then we have proposed to put as our esteemed
colleague here says squat boxes uh furthest to the north facing that Tom thong. So we are trying to limit you know that that noise where that noise is going to the north and not to the west per se. Um, and we agreed to do all screening, fencing, and everything else that is going to, you know, prohibit that sound from being able to transfer to those neighbors,
including parking lot lights to be also in the back facing and facing down and not facing out where there would be any potential glare into the back of those residences as well. How much uh how many feet of um that vegetation is going to stay back there um towards those uh houses on the northwest corner? Well, I developed and built the storage facility anytime storage on the opposite side of 9mm and um because of the tree ordinances that the county has,
I ended up saving basically the 10-ft buffer that was recommended that I take out. I left I left lots of trees. I you know the you're going to probably see on the plan that the engineer states to clear that out and plant trees back. But it's in my opinion that I want to keep those trees. I have no desire if they're not in, you know, in the circulation of the of the building and it's it's within that 10 to 15 foot rideway. I I plan on keeping every piece of vegetation that I can.
If they require that I come back and plant more, I'm I'm completely amanable to being able to do that. And and they are required to have a minimum of of a 16 foot vegetative buffer there. So at the minimum 16 ft, if you feel like it needs to be more, that's you within. So in addition to the trees that we keep within that buffer and then add to we're we're agreeable to keep that uh from not becoming a nuisance to those neighbors. Okay. Any questions, board? Okay, if no further questions,
um um the chair will now entertain a motion uh regarding uh item CU-S2026-12. And with your motion, please state whether or not you adapt the staff findings of fact as presented by staff. If for any reason you do not accept staff's findings, please go through all the criteria and address each one specifically as to why you do not concur with staff findings and provide substitute findings. Um, do we have a motion?
I move we accept staff's findings and recommendation. Motion by Ross. Do we have a second? A second. Second by Greg. All in favor? Right hand. Motion passes. All in favor. Thank you.
I'll just say at our next meeting at April 15th, I already have at least two cases. So, we will have a meeting next month. No sir.
Yeah.