it's not it's not a show sh
up
that yes e
all right good morning everybody uh meeting of the Escambia County planning board for February
4th 2025 is hereby called to order with six members present we do have a quorum uh just a reminder to put your phones on silence or turn them off to not disrupt the meeting and if you would please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance our pledge allegiance to the flag the United States of America and to the rep stand indivisible andice
thank you uh do we have proof of publication yes sir did the publication meet all legal requirements yes sir I now entertain a motion to wave the reading of the legal advertisement so moved second we got a motion in a second all those in favor please signify by raising your right hand all those opposed motion carries the resoning meeting minutes from the previous meeting dated January 7th 2025 have been provided to the board members are there any additions deletions or correct s if not I'll entertain a motion to accept the resoning meeting
minutes into evidence second got a motion in a second all those in favor please signify by raising your right hand all those oppose motion carries the resoning hearing package for February 4th 2025 with findings of fact have been provided to the board members I'll entertain a motion to accept the rezoning hearing package with findings of fact and legal advertisement into evidence do we have a motion Move Motion seconds second all those
in favor please signify by raising your right hand all those opposed all right the resoning hearing package with findings of fact and legal advertisement will be marked and included in the record for all of today's cases will the court reporter please swear in members of the staff all right the board has has previously qualified staff to offer expert testimony in
the area of land use and planning does anyone have any questions regarding their qualifications and ability to offer expert testimony all right at this hearing the planning board is acting under its authority to hear and make recommendations to the board of County Commissioners the BCC on rezoning applications these hearings are quaji judicial in nature and these hearings are like evidentiary hearings in a court of law however less formal all testimony will be given under
oath and anyone testifying before the planning board may be subject to cross-examination all documents and Exhibits that the planning board will considers today will be entered into evidence and made part of the record opinion testimony will be limited to experts and closing arguments will be limited to the evidence in the record before making a decision the planning board will consider the relevant testimony the exhibits entered into evidence and the applicable law each individual who wishes to address the planning board must complete a speaker request form and
submit it to the planning board clerk before uh these forms are on the table in the back of the room uh you will not be allowed to speak until we receive a completed form please note that only those individuals who are present and give testimony on the record at this hearing before the planning board will be allowed to speak at the board of County Commissioners meeting no new evidence can be presented at the BCC therefore all testimony and evidence must be presented here today the planning board will provide a recommendation for each resoning request to the
BCC which will review the testimony documents and Exhibits consider the closing arguments and make a final decision all Decisions by the BCC are final anyone who wishes to seek judicial review of the decision of the BCC must do so in a court of competent jurisdiction within 30 days of the date the BCC approves or rejects the recommended order of the planning board all written or oral communication out Ed this hearing with members of the planning board regarding matters under
consideration today are considered expart communication expar Communications are presumed prejudicial under Florida law and must be disclosed as provided in the BCC resolution number 96-13 as each case is heard I will ask that any board member who has been involved in any expart communication to please identify themselves and describe the communication as required by section 2-7 .2 of the Escambia County Land Development code the planning board's recommendation to the
BCC shall include consideration of the following approval conditions the applicant has the burden of presenting competent substantial evidence to the reviewing board establishing that the requested zoning District would contribute to or result in a logical and orderly development pattern the appropriate surrounding area within which uses and conditions must be considered may vary with those uses and conditions and is not necess necessarily the same area required
for mailed notification a logical and orderly pattern shall require demonstration of each of the following conditions a the proposed zoning is consistent with the future land use flu category as prescribed in LDC chapter 3 and with all other goals objectives and policies of the proposed flu Amendment transmitted for state agency review the proposed zoning is consistent with proposed flu and conditional to its adoption B the proposed zoning is consistent with the purpose and intent
and with any other zoning establishment Provisions prescribed by the proposed District in chapter 3 C all of the permitted uses of proposed zoning not just those anticipated by the rezoning applicant are compatible as defined in chapter 6 with the surrounding uses these uses of any surrounding undeveloped land shall be considered the permitted uses of the district compatibility is not considered with potential condition uses or with any non-conforming or unapproved uses
also in establishing the compatibility of a residential use there is no additional burden to demonstrate the compatibility of specific residents or activities protected by fair housing laws appropriate is spot zoning where the proposed zoning would establish or reinforce a condition of spot zoning as defined in chapter 6 The isolated District would nevertheless be transitional in character between the adjoining districts or the differences between those districts would
be minor or sufficiently limited the extent of these mitigating characteristics or conditions demonstrates an appropriate site specific balancing of interest between the isolated district and the adjoining lands and E if the land uses or development conditions within the area surrounding the property of resoning have changed the changes are to such a degree and character that it is in the public interest to allow New Uses densities or intensities in the area through resoning and the permitted uses of proposed District are appropriate and not premature for
the area or likely to create or contribute to spraw at the beginning of each case as long as there are no objections from the applicant we will allow staff to briefly present the location and zoning map and photos of the property next we'll hear from the applicant and any Witnesses they may wish to call then we will hear from staff and any Witnesses they may wish to call and finally we'll hear from members of the public who have filled out a speaker request form today there's
one case to be heard the rezoning application for consideration is case number z-20 24-20 which requests resoning of 810 Neil Road from low density residential district four dwelling units per acre acre to LMU low density mixed use seven dwelling units per acre as requested by Meredith Bush agent for 29 and Neal Development LLC the owner members of the board have there been any expart communication between you the applicant of the applicants agents attorneys or Witnesses
with fellow planning board members or anyone from the general public prior to this hearing have you visited the subject property please also disclose if you are a relative or business associate of the applicant or the applicant's agent no all all no all no to all no to all no all no to all no to all right great Mr Adams thanks for joining us and happy birthday oh so there you go this one to be uh staff was notice of the hearing sent to All interested parties yes sir and was notice
of the hearing posted on the subject property yes sir great um Meredith are you okay with photographs going first all right staff will now present maps and photographs for casez 202 2420 good morning Allison Lindsay urban planner development services um before I show the maps I do want to um note that this case went to the the board of County Commissioners on December 12th and
um their recommendation was to remain it back to you the planning board so you can access to assess the request for low density mix use so this is the location map showing the location on Neil Road this is the zoning map showing the current zoning of ldr this is the future land use with the mixed use Suburban this is the existing land use of the properties around the subject parcel
and this is an aerial photo of the property and this is the public notice that was uh posted along Neil Road this is looking West along Neil Road looking East along Neil this is looking North onto the subject property this is looking South across Neil Road and that's the maps and photography
great thank you uh Martha you'll please come forward and then just state your name and address for the record uh yes good morning board Meredith Bush 1 125 East in tendencia pensacol Florida 32502 and then you did receive a copy of the resoning hearing package and findings a fact correct all right understand you've got the burden of providing by substantial competent evidence that the proposed resoning is consistent with the comp plan furthers the goals objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan and is not
in conflict with any portion of the County's Land Development code yes all right good to go um yes as was mentioned by Miss Lindsay this case you may recall was before you a few months back we came in initially seeking a commercial designation um on the parcel went to the board of County Commissioners um had discussion there they felt low density mixed use would be more appropriate so we're back before you today within uh with a request for LMU going through
the criteria a consistent with the comprehensive plan the proposed amendment is consistent with the intent purpose of the current future land use of mixed juuse Suburban B uh consistent with the zoning District Provisions the proposed amendment to LMU is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Land Development code the low density mixed juuse District establishes appropriate areas and land use regulations for a complimentary mix of lowdensity residential uses and compati non-residential uses the primary intent of the district is to provide for a mix of neighborhood
scale retail sales services and professional offices with greater dwelling unit density and diversity than the low density residential district um as to criteria C compatible with surroundings the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding existing uses in the area within a 1500t radius the applicant has identified property zon ldr LD CMU and hcli to ensure
additional compatibility with existing adjacent uses if the amendment is approved further review and evaluation through the development Review Committee process may be necessary criteria D appropriate if spot zoning the amendment request if granted would create spot zoning despite being a case of spot zoning the proposed ldm designation demonstrates a strategic and coherent approach to development the introduction of new ldm zoning in this area would establish a distinct zoning District that differs from the surrounding ldr and hcli
however the spot zoning is appropriate because it functions as a critical transitional buffer between these two contrasting land uses by placing ldm zoning between the ldr and hdli zones it helps to mitigate the potential negative impacts of activities on uh the HD parcel with the adjacent residential neighborhoods The ldm Zone provides a gradual shift in land use intensity reducing conflicts such as noise traffic and visual disturbances while offering
nearby residents convenient access to services and amenities this transition enhances the overall compatibility of the area and promotes a more more harmonious development pattern the zoning adjustment also maximizes the potential for economic growth in the region and then as to Criterion e appropriate with Chang or changing conditions based on the existing uses and intensities and Zoning District allowances the proposed amendment would not create urban
sprawl and would be compatible with existing development it is in the public interest to allow the ldm zoning the proposed resoning will contribute to a logical and orderly development pattern um we've also submitted the required compatibility analysis for locational criteria um I have reviewed staff's findings and believe they are supportive of the request and I'm happy to answer any questions all right board are there any questions for Mar at this time all right if there are we'll bring you back up here all right
staff will have you go through your presentation at this time okay so on criteria one consistent with the comp plan the proposed amendment to low density mixed use it is consistent with the future land use of mixed use Suburban the resoning request to low density mixed use would accomplish the directives by creating the possibility for retail sales and services that would provide daily Necessities to
Residents within a short walk or drive the development plan is supported in the future land use 1.5.1 which was created to encourage Redevelopment and underutilize properties and to maximize development densities and intensities criteria B consistent with the Land Development code section 3- 1.6 B the Land Development code states that such criteria are created to allow
for residential and non-residential uses and to be located in close proximity to one another other items of compatibility may be required such as Landscaping buffering screening to protect the lower intense uses LMU District would allow areas and regulations for General commercial activities especially the retailing of Commodities and services under 6,000 square ft changing the zoning from ldr to ldm would allow for a mix of residential and non-residential operations along
Highway 29 that could benefit the residents in the area and reduce the vehicular traffic and congestion within a walkable or short driving distance criteria C compatible with surrounding uses the proposed amendment would be compatible with the surrounding existing uses in the area the majority of the surrounding land uses are lowdensity residential and heavy commercial light industrial the requested lowdensity mixed use district is
appropriate for neighborhood activities such as retail sales and services requiring all to be in the FI in the confines of a building the proposed request to LMU would be a transition between the ldr and the hli resulting in long-term compatibility with the existing residential uses without any conflict criteria d spot zoning it was determined that the proposed LMU would establish
or reinforce spot zoning as there are no other properties zoned LMU however spot zoning is not prohibited while allowing more non-residential uses in the area of the nearby residential the intersection of Neil Road in Highway 29 is an appropriate location for more intense uses such as neighborhood development that will service the adjacent residential neighborhood allowing cohesiveness between residential and Commercial aspects of the area criteria e a CH appropriate
with change or change conditions the land uses or development conditions within the subject area surrounding the property they are changing there is a new subdivision Enclave at bellara located on the adjacent parcel to the north the subject parcel will be is joined with the hcli property located along Highway 29 making it a corner lot the the area along Neil Road has single family
lots the request to LMU and the potential uses would be compatible with the existing surrounding residential development patterns and also since this was combined with the partial on 29 it is still a split Zone parcel you would have the LMU if approved and then the hcli and that's the staff's findings all right thank you uh board members are there any questions for staff
all right see none uh this time we will go to members of the public that wish to speak remember if you want to speak before the board of County Commissioners on this item uh at their their next meeting you will need to speak here today I've got two individuals signed up and we'll start with u m Sharon curn if you please come forward and state your name and address for the record and be sworn in
hi I'm Sharon curn of 1100 Ridgeway and can't yes all right so um I had pulled up the low density mixed use requirements and I wanted to kind of go over some of that um it says here that it should be a complimentary mix of low density residential uses and combatible non-residential uses within a mostly suburban area um if you're
familiar with that area that area is not Suburban it is rural it's a rural area when you saw the pictures all you saw Were Trees um the lot sizes um in the neighborhood I live in are between two and three acres um it is a small two-lane Country Road beautiful trees um it's a rural area um It
also says it's intended to rely on a pattern of well-connected streets and provide for the separation of suburban uses from more dense and intense Urban uses um we don't there's one street it's a dead end it's Neil Road and it dead ends into our neighborhood it is not connected to anything it is by itself it is a small Country Lane Road um Also it talks talks about um talks
about separation from more dense to intense urban areas there is nothing if you are on the west side I'll say this again if you're looking at the west side of 29 from the paper mill there are no commercial properties um I sat here at a meeting when we were considering another property talking about improving infrastructure and I can't remember what gentleman said this to me we talked about kind of like it's a chicken and egg kind of thing that we can't really improve
the infrastructure until there's a reason to and so with all of the approving of the neighborhoods it would have to wait well there's no commercial around here okay is this a chicken and egg kind of thing too is what I'm thinking because there's nothing there there's no commercial properties from high from Mogi road all the way um I know that at the uh board meeting Mr Barry was very
uh he thinks that this is a great idea in his opinion although he does not live on the street what concerns me the most is what can happen in this ldm um medical marijuana dispensing facility sales of beer and wine tattoo parlors restaurants um there's also uses there conditional uses that can be approved um nursing homes assisted living facilities dormitories and residential facilities
substance abuse treatment and post incarceration re-entry manufactured homes liquor sales telecommunications towers of any Heights self storage facilities um all of those things could happen I you wrap up if you got another I mean I have more I'd like to say but if you make it quick that' be all right all right so a lot of the things it says um along an arterial
or collector Street no two-lane Little Country Road that connects to nothing that's number one proximity to an intersection number two proximity to traffic generator um infill development an area where already established non-residential uses are consistent no there's nothing um all right thank you yeah thank you all right Miss jacqulyn Rogers if you'll please come forward state
your name and address for the record and be sworn in uh my name is jackan Rogers 1420 Ridgeway
I do okay thank you for changing the notification to put the board action on here but you didn't do that when you read it today and your handout today doesn't talk about board action so you can deny this if this up zoning would be worse and have adverse impacts for the community so I just want to remind you of that but I do appreciate you put that on the mail out this is very slim analysis on here doesn't talk anything about water capacity or anything like that um they're using old maps and Aerials it's no longer vacant next to it it is a big subdivision that you guys approved when
you let it opt out of the subdivision so there's low density residential and they've already built a house right up to this lot the this is not a built area the staff and the applicant are using flu 1.51 to maximize development and densities in a in a built area but like she said this is a rural area the things that are allowed here sales of beer and wine medical marijuana dispensaries
and if there's a neighborhood um uh retail it could go up to 35,000 square feet that's what you're permitting here and then with conditional uses there's even worse things the they keep saying they've combin the lot so why didn't they bring proof today that the lot is combined they keep saying and the staff is says they're going to we've been to how many of the meetings but then they say oh it's on Highway 29 because they're going to combine it or they did combine it but there's no proof and you can only consider consider the proof that's in the record they had
plenty of time when I read through the application for uh the applicant there's talk about commercial um resoning to commercial so there's a lot of mistakes even in the application itself but um they say this is going to be a transition if they truly did combine this lot it can't be a transition because they're going to put one development on that lot they're not they wouldn't be combining the lot unless they wanted to put one development so it cannot serve as a transition like Sharon said there's no um uh traffic uh interconnected streets it is spot zoning
um the industrial uses that she's saying you're buffering against are not even allowed in mixed juuse Suburban with hcli zoning so you don't need a buffer there for that and and you can't buffer it's going to be on the same lot there are no the only other ldm that is located around there is on Highway 29 so there's no other commercial there the hli that they're talking about look
at the existing uses in your packet look at the pictures they're single family homes just because the county came and dropped hcli on there they're single family large lot homes resoning to LMU is suitable for um developed uh networks is what it says and this does not have that it doesn't meet any of the location criteria like she like Sharon just went over there's none of the location criteria that they that they are meeting um seven dwelling units per acre when when we have large
lot subdivisions right next to it um there's no proximity to any type of in um arterial or collector streets is what they're calling it and I I will yeah in in the findings the the staff says the intersection of Neil Road and Highway 29 this is not at the intersection of that it's an interior lot and there's homes right across the street so while ldm is better than commercial it
still allows you know multif family dwellings up to 35,000 square feet of residential so for those same reasons that you denied it before I would ask that you would consider denying it again thank you thank you all right um were there any questions for either of the speakers or no all right okay um did youall have any questions at this time for staff or the applicant themselves I do
have one uh I know we had this discussion a few months ago so is this still two independent Lots or was this combined it's been combined it's it has been combined okay it has been combined through the Property Appraiser's office um the maps have not yet been updated so um and contrary to what was just stated testimony is evidence and so I'm letting you know I mean it's been combined
I wasn't here for the previous meeting um but since they have been combined it's now the the larger parcel that's on 29 is hcli correct correct um historically if you combine two lots what happens to the lower um zoning does it from a from a I'd like to hear from staff in this case that that would not apply okay that that that would not apply in this case at all do do to the size of the larger piece so that that would not apply no there's a provision that does allow for
that but in this case want to be clear for the record because there's a lots of misinformation out there in this case that will not apply this LMU this LMU which which which was a recommendation a director from the board of County Commissioners to come back to make consideration for this LMU is an appropriate zoning and section 3- 2.6 F of the Land Development
code it says this specifically it says I want to State it for the record because there's a lots of misinformation that's not accurate it State the district is appropriate LMU is appropriate to provide as stated by both parties to provide transitions between areas zone or used for low and medium or medium density this district is got a low low drr it's ldr so the Land
Development code supports this zoning category for when you want to have when you want to have neighborhood type of commercial type uses that's that's fronting a major Arial road we you have those services that can come in and also to um Mr Owens I want to say this for the record this zoning category it has certain restrictions and certain protocols in place so that anyone go
beyond a certain size that project must go before the com the board of adjustments in that process they must present the size the scope and the use because there's a certain Criterion that's associated with this low density mixtures because these type of areas they do need low impact neighborhood type uses it was stated that this area is not mixure Suburban this
area is according to the fal land use map and if you read the definition for mixure Suburban we can read that it is says an area of low predominantly residential type uses that come from if want to stay it for the record that's the definition so it states that I don't want to I just want to get the correct information out there so you can have have and make make the choice based upon accurate
information okay thank you thank you Mr chair yes yeah so what would be the total capacity for residential units on that property so or they tied in with the other property or it's up to 29 well the density on the the piece that is um ldm is seven per seven per acre on hli is 25 25 AC commercial on 29 commercial it's heavy commercial light industrial the piece and and the reason it
can't that hcli can't simply apply to the whole parcel is because as Mr Jones was stating the the aggregate is greater than 10 acres and so that provision otherwise we could just take the hcli and make the whole thing hcli with without ever coming before you and we did look at we did we did look at that option but the code does not support that split zoning so if it is on LMU
the requirements of the LMU the density all the the safeguards must be in place and must remain in place and and just in response to some of the concerns about the size of Neil Road um although not within your purview it's a it's a development Review Committee um issue access would be off 29 so that was going to be my kind of question was the you know both speakers talked about
location criteria not meeting because it is a a smaller Road and not in a collector so is that the only reason why we can agree that the location criteria is is acceptable because it's going to have access from 29 can youall explain that a little bit um I would not say that's the only reason so you only have to meet one of those location criteria that she listed one of which is a compatibility analysis which we've submitted as part of our as part of our
packet so even not considering whether or not it's on an arterial or collector just based on the strict compatibility of the uses we would submit that we've met locational criteria so it's an or not an and correct thank you yes and and and to support that based PL the code got to have accurate information it says at least one at least one of the following and because and because because it has been supported it has been presented the property is combined but again
Chris Jones don't update their Maps as quickly as we would like them to do that's the process thank you thank you yeah my our friend Bubba Peters would like to and I know Bubba Peters very well I just got to get used to that no disrespect um yes so at least the co says at least at least one and all of that will be looked at wholeheartedly because we do know this area very well we we are aware of the neighborhood concerns so we would definitely not take this decision lightly at
all any further questions I don't think so I just would like to say to this board one of the speakers said there's not a lot of commercial but if you look at this image Allison's got pulled up here there's a lot of commercial on 29 so you know that's a lot of commercial opportunities definitely so just consider that it's going to be bordering that the potential is there
yes all right there's nothing further I'll um entertain a motion one way or the other from somebody I'll make the motion to approve uh Z 2024 D20 uh as um presented okay we
got a motion on the table is there a second second got a second any discussion okay all those in favor of the motion please signify by raising your right hand all those opposed okay motion carries uh that is the only case we had today for rezoning and we will move on over to our the regular planning board meeting so I'll adjourn that meeting and now the esam the meet this meeting of thecam County planning board for February 4th 2025 is hereby called to order with seven members present we do have a quorum do we have proof
of publication yes sir did the publication meet all legal requirements yes sir I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading of the legal advertisement do I have a motion so moved second all those in favor please signify a raising your right hand those opposed the planning board meeting minutes for January 7th have been provided to the board members uh entertain a motion to accept the planning board meeting minutes into evidence do have a motion so moved second got a motion in a second all those in favor please signify by raising your right hand
all those opposed motion carries the planning board hearing package for February 4th 2025 has been provided to the board members I'll entertain a motion to accept the planning board hearing package and legal advertisement into evidence we have a motion so moved second all right all those in favor please signify by raising your right hand all those opposed great all right we do have a public hearing today this is um an optout application for consideration in case number OSP
202-1342 block from the Midwest sector plan Regional employment and wetlands Jacks branch and assigning the future land use category RC rural community as requested by Meredith Bush agent for David Fitzpatrick and Diane it's Patrick the owners um we want to start with any Aerials
or photos that we have or do we have that for this case okay is that okay morning board Caleb mccardy aicp certified planner for the county um yes this request is to remove a parcel from the Midwest sector plan Jack Branch daap detailed specific area plan and it's located on North Highway 29 uh this shows the location of the property um this is near the central Commerce Park
as you see success and power Boulevard um this parcel was not included in the plotting of that and essentially is a part of the sector plan that wishes to be removed um this shows the zoning map of the property um the request would be rural mix use rmu the 2020 future land use map AA and then our 2030 future land use map showing the regional employment and the Wetland as
indicated by the daap this is the proposed future land use their rural community future lus designation let's request it and then our desap map again that gives us a overall of the area this is in Jack branch um sector 48 um that shows that this is a need part of the Commerce
Park there is some flood zone that runs across the property um this is our development program acreage map um the property is 2.4 Acres of the totality of JB 48 80 acres this is the aerial is currently vacant on 29 this is our notice of public hearing sign that we placed on the property along 29 it is looking
West onto the site is heavily wooded at this time this is looking onto the site again from 29 uh looking North along 29 towards success looking east across Highway 29 here and this is looking South along 29 toward power that concludes our photos and maps for this
case all right thank you um Marth would you like to come forward and walk us through the applicant's case on this yes thank you Meredith Bush attorney at Clark Partington 125 East in tendencia Pensacola Florida 32502 um I will walk you through the opt out criteria um I have reviewed staff's findings and staff does support our request um first criteria is
wellheads based on the county uh GIS system the subject property is not located in a Wellhead protection area any historical sites a copy of the division of historical resources TRS site file review correspondence has been uh submitted there were no historical resources to detected on the subject property a cultural resources map and Survey roster was also submitted as far as natural resources the property is located within the Jax Branch drainage basin
although um part of it is designated wetlands and there is flood zone indicated uh if you look at the County GIS Wetlands map there are no Wetlands indicated properties located within the flood zone X and flood zone a the soils indicated on site include troop porch and Pelham lomy sand the proposed uh request is consistent with the comprehensive plan there's infrastructure in
place to support any allowable development consistency with key components in the comprehensive plan include traffic the subject property is located um west of Highway 29 North fdot provides an annual average daily traffic count along this portion of Highway 29 of 25,000 trips all area roadways have capacity to support the requested change in future land use category as to sanitary sewer and water Cottage Hill Water Works is the area water provider the proposed
amendment is not expected to create capacity problems for Cottage Hill Water Works once a project is proposed and application submitted to the county such proposals shall identify any other providers and determine whether Septic Tank Service or available sewer connection will be utilized any proposed development would receive approval through the site plan review process ECUA will provide sanitary sewer if applicable um the proposed amendment is not expected to create
capacity problems for ECA wetlands and drainage um any necessary storm water management will be provided gentlemen sorry thanks course will be provided in accordance with the Escambia County and Northwest Florida Water Management District regulations the storm water system would be designed for a 100-year storm event um Solid Waste Solid Waste will be collected by EC
way for disposal in a scambi County landfill which has adequate existing and projected capacity schools the current School assignments for this location for the 2024 2025 school year are Jim Allen Elementary Ransom Middle and Tate High um any proposed development will adhere to the site plan review process again there were no um historical structures or on the site our submission includes a list of 405 comprehensive plan policies and Land Development
code Provisions which we um have met next the opt out requires that we looked look at the parcel size and aggregate of other opt outs the subject property is 2.38 Acres this represents 0.292 per of the existing in development acreage of 8,168 point2 Acres described in the sector plan
the total acreage of the Jax Branch daap designated Regional employment is 283.15 4.27% decrease in developable acreage at the time of the application the total acreage opted out of the sector plan is 4779 Acres Transportation infrastructure again it's located on 29 with an average daily traffic count of
25,000 trips there is existing capacity the underlining zoning is rural mixed use which is compatible with the requested flu category of RC the requested flu category of RC will be consistent with the underlying zoning uses densities and intensities the prior future land use designation of this parcel was rural community and as to Lost development rights prior to the
adoption of the Midwest sector plan the parcel was zoned VR2 VR2 had a gross density of one unit per. 75 Acres Regional employment is primarily for office distribution and Industrial uses commercial and residential uses may also be permitted in Regional employment however there were no density requirements included in the daap um we feel we've met all the criteria and would ask that you recommend approval of the opt out I'm happy to take any questions any questions for the applicant
all right staff yes thank you um as confirmed we did find that it met all the criteria and I will provide a brief analysis for this again we confirm that this is removal of a 2.51 acre parcel um from the Jax brch daap um this property is located La 29 um the applicant is requesting and to assign a
future land use of rural community the underlying um zoning of the parcel is rural mixed use which allows two dwelling units an acre um concerning the analysis of available facilities and services um for sanitary sewer Services the utilities will be reviewed by ECA engineering ECA service lines are indicated along 29 and within the Cal Central commer Park um as indicated in the daap Wastewater
plan once a project is proposed and appliation is submitted to County the proposals will be evaluated through the site plan review process in conjunction with ECA review for sanitary sewer for solid waste disposal um we found that Escambia County continues to maintain its adopted Solid Waste levels of service commitments um Solid Waste Service is six pounds per capita per day according to the application Solid Waste will be collected by ECUA for disposal at the county
landfill concerning potable water service we found that pable water for this area is supplied by Cottage Hill Waterworks a conceptual P Water dist distribution system was developed based on this analysis and is available in The daap Cottage Hill Water Works portable water system was found to meet the capacity for the final buildout as calculated by the deap impact indicated funding for any expansion or improvements to the portable water distribution and water treatment
systems within the service area is generated by the respective Utility Authority storm water management we found that the amendment request to opt out will not rely on storm water requirements or calculations however all developments are required to meet or exceed the standards by the Northwest Florida Water Management District and the lead development code the applicant has acknowledged the requirements for storm water management and as stated storm water system will be designed for 100 years storm event compliance with these storm water management provisions and
these policies will be reviewed and confirmed at site plan approval at site development plan approval process regardless of the proposed future Lage change or use concerning traffic streets and access um based on Section 4.02 in the public facilities plan and the sector plan a transportation analysis were conducted on different roadways and segments that evaluate the existing facilities and travel characteristics as well as the potential impacts and row capacity needs for the 5-year intern period and the buildout of the plan the County's traffic
transportation department is provided comment and they have no traffic capacity concerns related to the request any development again commercial or residential requires submittal review and approval through the site plan process meeting all the requirements of the LDC and the comprehensive plan us29 is a state roadway and any proposed connection would need to be reviewed by fdot um concerning Recreation and open space our analysis found that the intent of open space
is to serve as a buffer to protect and preserve areas of significant natural resource and wildlife habitat while offering passive recreational opportunities the rural community future land use category intends to recognize existing residential development and neighborhood serving non-residential activity while supporting new development through compact development pattern that serves the rural and agriculture areas of the county the county does not have a level Serv service standards for recreation however any development could create usable accessible
open space that would contribute to the overall interconnectivity of development the amendment will not rely on open space requirements however any development must be reviewed through the site plan development review process concerning public school facilities um we found that based on the public records of the county the signed schools are JM Allen Ransom Middle and Tate High the school district provid a c review which demonstrates capacity will not exceed the calculations for residential development on the 2.5 acres once plans are submitted will be and
this will be reviewed and if the need arises there may be adjustments to the School boundaries to balance capacity among the school um concerning impact on natural resources for wellheads we found that based on g county systems the subject property is not located in a Wellhead protection area all right concerning historically significant sites we found that the applicant did provide
documentation stating there are no previously recorded historical research was U resources within the parcel we did uh have a copy of the division of historic resource resources TOS site file review correspondence that was included in this opt out request and according to the correspondence a cultural recess assessment survey of the resurfacing of state road 95 us29 from County Road 184 to Fletcher Creek was published by the fdot the County's comprehensive plan has
a section of historic preservation at any time during development if artifacts are discovered there to cease construction under that policy concerning the natural environment we found that as stated in the sector plan natural resources the daap contains significant Wetlands as regulated by the state federal and local governments and the final design was to avoid minimize Wetland impact to the greatest extent possible the wetlands in the daap are regulated by the state federal and
local government and according to the approximate Wetland map in the daap approximate wetlands are shown on the subject property further evaluation will be required at the site plan review process to determine the extent of any environmentally sensitive areas proposals that anticipate any impacts to these areas will require appropriate federal state and local authorizations also stated in the sector plan document natural resources the daap contains significant systems that listed as regionally significant Natural Resources by the Emerald Coast Regional planning Council
and the final design was to avoid and minimize Wetland impacts to the greatest extent possible according to County GIS maps there are Hy SCS on the Northwestern portion of the property and further evaluation will be required at the site plan review process tree protection and mitigation will be required also during the site plan review process as for comprehensive plan requirements for changes in the existing daap our evaluation and Analysis of impact show that components of the daap include ass aspects such as Community design environmental analysis Transportation guidance
and economic development principles the final land use map attachment a identifies the overall boundaries of sector plan the distribution extent and location of land uses the land use plan and development program provides subit specific growth data with development program calculations and assigns permissible densities and intensities for the various uses the type of development land use plan and corresponding densities were assigned based on the appropriate share of the overall
sector plan the total developable area under Mogi daap located in the southern section of the sector plan is approximately 3380 acres under Jack Branch daap located in the northern portion of the sector plan the total development land is 5,231 acres and is identified an attachment a as well this parcel is on the east side of North Highway 29 in the regional employment and wetlands of the Jax Branch daap if approved the requested removal of the parcel from the sector plan would not create a
fragmented daap in the JB 48 section concerning the parcel size in relation to the individual daap land use category and in relation to the overall sector plant and the aggri AC acreage of the Granite opt outs the applicant's parkal is approximately 2.51 acres and is in the Jax bran stap and is specifically identified in the land use map B based on staff's calculation utilizing data from section 2.02 of the daap document the total developable acreage in the entire sector
plan is 8,611 point8 Acres the applicants parcel represent 0.029% of that existing developable agage under Section 2.02 development program calculation tables the total residential development acreage of the Jack BR daap under the regional employment District use is 283.15 One Acres will result in a decrease of 0.89% of available residential developable areas in
the Jack Grant Regional employment District Jack Brank section 48 um the app parcel has 2.51 Acres which represents 3.12% of the total developed Acres of this section removal of the aent 2.5 acres that are in section JB 48 from the total develop of acreage will result in a
reduction of 2.52 total dwelling units under the high density allocation of that area this is the 15th optout requesting um submitted to the county and processed by the county if approved the total sector plant acreage will be 4757 eight the original sector plan profile identified 15,000 acres of land the availability of infrastructure and public services and the protection of Natural Resources the calculation used to complete the maximum development scenario of the plan
were specific and resulted in a balanced jobs to housing ratio changes to or variations of any of the orig original data and used for the plan could hinder the balance and viability of attaining the sector plan goals and objectives assuming a maximum theoretical buildout under the mixture of uses the daap area will produce approximately 27,1 145 jobs when analyz using the maximum residential Bild out of 20 thou 23,000 dwelling units the results to to to job ratio is that 1.18 it should
be considered that although there is no single perfect ratio an area is generally considered to be balanced if it has a jobs to housing ratio of 0.8 to 1.12 if the proposed amendment is approved the resulting job the r housing ratio will be 1.26 to maintain cohesive of the sector plan while at the same time fostering Innovative Planning and Development strategies County staff
will continue to access assess each request within the sector plan on a case-by Case basis providing continuous analysis of the impact of each proposal the existing Transportation infrastructure and any effect the proposal may have on the capacity of that in infrastructure or traffic and transportation office has no concerns regarding capacity at this location um concerning the underlying zoning district and the compatibility with the surrounding daap land use designation the
existing parcel is currently Zone rural mix use the surrounding Parcels of Zone Ro mix use and heavy commercial light industrial if this property is removed from the sector plan the following range of permanent uses are allowed under the existing zoning district and we provide the um allowed and pensable uses of the rural mixed use which is a again mixed use um smallscale retail sales and services typically are found and the rural mixed use along with low density residential uses continuing on um concerning the consistency of any requested future land use designation
within the underlying zoning the requested rural community future land use category will be consistent with the underly underlying zoning uses and densities allowed in the rural mix use the rural community um future land use is intended to recognize existing residential development and neighborhood serving non-residential activity while supporting new development through a compact development pattern that serves the rural and agriculture areas of Escambia County concerning the previous future land use designation again as they'll shown our Maps the
2020 future land use was aa15 and concerning the analysis to consider whether the applicant lost development rights or was effectively down Zone as part of the sector plan uh this was parcel was VR2 like the applicant stated and was attended as a single family residential district characterized by rural land development patterns and rural Community non-residential uses were allowed with the adoption of the daap and assignment of the regional employment District the development
rates of the parcel will decrease allowing one dwelling unit per acre with a total maximum allow residential development of 10% of the Northern Regional employment District if approved any development will need to be evaluated by the development Review Committee utilizing current zoning regulations while addressing and minimiz minimizing any impacts a proposed development could have on the characteristic of the existing residential development in the area if approved the sector plan boundary map will be adjusted accordingly to reflect the removal of the parcel
from the plan and we provide that in attachment B and if approved the parcel will be assigned a future L use of rural community as requested and that is provided in attachment C and complete staff's findings and Analysis for this case thank you uh board any questions for staff all right we do have two speakers signning up uh Jaclyn Rogers if you come forward state your name and address for the record and be sworn in I mean you don't have to be sworn in this go around apologize I
still promise to tell the truth if you could just pull up that map that um has the land uses with the deap that I guess right there that's fine no that shows the parcel just leave it right there that's good I mean you can use your imagination I've said this before when is a long range plan that we've spent over a million dollars not just worth less than the piece of paper and that's
that's what we're doing in Escambia County look how ridiculous this is I live right up there this is a Commerce Park and this was planned and now we're going to take a piece out of the Commerce Park because they had decreased development rights how is that decreased development rights they could put one house per 75 Acres when the sector plan was put on now they can put Industrial and Commercial you can't put the density of housing but it's not decreased development rights there's things that can be put on there I don't have a lot of skin in the game here but it's just
ridiculous what we're doing you you have a master plan that you're doing at the planning level you guys are the planning board supposedly this is development service that cares about planning and you make something you approved it look at the look at on the staff the staff on on page seven of the staff under natural environment they did did no analysis on the natural environment they said there's hydric soils that indicate Wetlands uh so we will look at further evaluation will
be required at the site plan review phase so basically they admitted to doing no data and Analysis as whether this would be appropriate to put housing there um they they just avoid it they say Cottage Hill but they they don't have any letter of capacity this is a comprehensive plan future land use change um your continually going out of balance with the uh jobs to housing ratio
but then the last thing yeah the the decreased one that one just really killed me so development rights for the parcel were decreased well I guess only if you're a home builder and that's who we're catering to so why are we doing this we either need to remove the plan or was it a bait and switch to get all those High developments in there right north of this Mr hemmer has a big development that used to be rural development so the county lied and said we were going to have all these planning he even says in the natural I mean he quotes the daap language for natural
environment I'm just going to end here where he says the daap contains significant Wetland systems that are listed as regionally significant Natural Resources by the Emerald Coast Regional planning council do you know how many meetings they had citizen input they had and the final design was to avoid and minimize Wetland impacts to the greatest extent and then it goes on to say there's hydric soils you guys are undoing all the planning with no data and Analysis again this is not something
that's going to cause me a lot of heartburn but at some point when do you really become the planning board we need you Citizens need you to become the planning board and to require I miss um the other D1 representative welcome to Mr Owens uh I'm sure he'll do a great job too when he required the staff he asked the staff he never required it to provide by the data and Analysis and the whole picture and you guys just aren't getting that thank you thank you any questions for the
speaker I mean I'd like to make comment make comment first of all that was pretty uh kind of an attack to us we have unless I miss them we haven't done anything yet we're just listening to an opt out application so we hope through the process that we will make the right decision all right next we've got I think this says is it Tony or Troy tner I think they left I believe he
left yes all right um all right is there any discussion on uh this this opt out case uh I just Bor I just would like to point out that this piece of property wasn't actually included with the central Commerce par absolutely it was not included excuse me with the plat losing
my voice um it wasn't included with the plat for the central Commerce part um that's why we're here um because the applicant um attempted to want to develop the property but realized that the sector plan with you know the environmental possible constraints um it's not a very big piece of property to be developed um so again we can pull up the plat for Central Commerce Park but this piece of property was not included in that plat for that and if I may thank
you Caleb for for that fact Jack um and also to and I know y'all know this the Tallahassee gave us a provision the citizens a provision for those Apostles that are in the sector plan they gave them the opportunity they gave them the right to opt out we have had several opt out requests on the the the argument I don't want to say argument
the issues that was raised by Miss Rogers those things were challenged our packet has been the fact the way that our processes the argument has been successfully I want to say successfully appeal to various Court proceeding meetings so the analysis that we presented it has been supported carefully reviewed and it went through Court proceedings so it has with stood
all of the challenges all of the issues that was raised now we're not negating that but the issues our the the the way that we proceed with this it has been in accordance to all of the laws as given and reviewed by the administrative law judges court cases and court filings so this is
we're just proceeding doing the same thing this proly it's very it's very constrained you see the wetlands so it's it's rational planning that can Prevail in this issue as well all right thank you horse any further questions or any discussion I'll accept a motion at this time if anybody's got one one way or the other I'll motion to approve OSP 20251 all right we've got a motion for approval do we have a
second second all right any further discussion all those in favor please signify by raising your right hand all those opposed motion carries we do have one other item on the agenda today um it is a ordinance change on per Mutual so I I'll just go ahead and turn this over to staff
if you want to run us through um this and then we'll you just open up you CH in knock it out um just just to give just to give you a recap on this uh issue I don't want to go to all of the historical um abuses but just recently recently at a planning at a BCC meeting there was a there was a discussion on paramutual card rooms gaming this what the request is currently
I would currently this issue these type of uses they're heavily regulated by the state heavily deeply because of the nature of the uses and so therefore the board gave on January the 9th the BCC gave explicit directions to to draft an ordinance not to not to not to approve it but to draft an ordinance to wor certain condition let me read it carefully for the
record this was the motion that was made on January the 9th 2025 move to sen paramutual cart room ordinance back to the planning board to review the draft with distance restrictions to be recommended by the planning board so this is where we are this a discussion item we're going to come back with the proper meeting so that this can so this can proceed accordingly back to the BCC for the final review and and to see what they want to do we need to
add this use to the zoning categories uh and this is what staff has done with restrictions and and and in a certain category and Mr and our uh the County Attorney officers here to to add any insight that is necessary as we engage in this discussion for today thank you board for your time Chris J for attorney for Escambia County so this is an ordinance
to identify par Mutual card rooms as a permitted use of hcli heavy commercial light industrial zoning uh it would add the permitted use under Recreation and entertainment uh the ordinance further defines card room paramutual wagering and paramutual Facilities uh these definitions align with the Florida Statutes uh a card room a facility where authorized games are played for money or anything of value uh param Mutual facility and paramutual
wagering are also defined in the terms as they'll they're used in the ordinance and finally there's restrictions under supplemental land use restrictions and these provide that no state licensed par Mutual facility shall be located within 1,000 fet of a place of worship Child Care Facility K12 educational institution park or playground it also provides that if a paramutual facility is adjacent or contiguous with an existing single family home duplex
Triplex quadplex apartment condominium townhouse or townhouse a minimum 20ft vegetative buffer shall be required additionally an 8ft high wooden privacy fence shall be construction constructed along the shared property property boundary and I'd be uh happy to answer any questions you have about this uh the ordinance chair yes sir yeah so it's th foot from the school is is that th000
foot the path of a child can walk or is it across the road because we got involved in this out there in Middle School on the situation where somebody wanted to put something the road so that's what I'm sure the measurement is provided for so the distance required between a any of those uses uh shall be measured along the shortest route of ordinary pedestrian travel within public rights of way from the main entrance of facility to the main entrance of the place of worship childcare
facility or park or for an educational facility to the nearest point of the grounds in use as part of the facility that's that's the problem I I have overall is they're using if there's not a crosswalk across that road as I understand it they could put a liquor store right across the road or a gaming facility because it's by the path the child walks can we scroll down to that in the in this please huh I was asking if they could scroll down to it so we've got it on the screen here yeah so that was my concern we had that problem out there bu but we were able to get it rectified
out there but that is a shortcoming there that's in the in these policies yeah and and I agree with you Kevin um we can't get across while across Road on uh yeah so we dealt with this issue when I was on the board of adjustment uh someone came in and wanted to sell alcohol or Brew alcohol um and again you know if somebody wanted to stop shop across the street from here right and do it but
it's 1,200 ft the way you're legally supposed to walk ever pasture in the county coming out and all the troops but that that loopholes in this MH and that's what I wanted to confirm with the attorney there that that's what it meant where the child shortest route to the school which on 9 Mile Road they had to walk from bu middle all the way to BU road across and then back and then somebody that's where we got discussion on when it was proposed here at one of them uh uh planning board meetings
gotcha so uh it is a concern and I'll I'll talk to the superintendent board about it and I can also add that uh the language is added for consistency because it's used for other types of facilities and when possible when I draft these I attempt to be consistent with previous language but under the direction of the planning board this can be amended under your direction to reflect what the board wishes it to to read as let me ask you a question one there's only isn't there only one
license given for one of these facilities in the county correct as Horus mentioned there's a radius requirement for param Mutual Gaming facilities which effectively would limit the county to one and there currently is a paramutual facility in the county uh on the far western side uh that would be the only one allowable because they have the license the dog track formerly TR okay am my
understanding is they're wanting to move locations is that yes correct want trans yes they want to transfer to a different to a different site to a different to a different uh site and and and and it's my understanding and if they're here they can respond I don't want I don't want to speak out of turn because the the issue is very complicated but it's my understanding that that there still will be only one in this County because of the distance criteria to other uses that's my understanding
that still if it is allowed there still would be only one because of the the licenses and the distance and other protocols that are in place by the by the Florida gaming commission Horus do you know where the tended place going to be I don't know maybe they do I don't I mean it's not going to be right beside a school something no Meredith Bush uh with Clark pardington we do represent the um that currently holds the license in the county um as of right now there's no site uh determined
we have had several sites however have been unable to have County sign off on zoning verification to allow the use because this language was not in the code so we appreciate the fact that they are putting it in as a permitted use um however there's not a property that's been identified so I can't tell you the proximity to the school I would note um with this language you you know when you talk about consistency with the code I'm not aware of any other um use that measures
from a park or playground you know I am familiar with from the church and school um but the Parker playground language is new and different than what you typically see with the liquor sales and things like that and so to the extent you know obviously we're going to ask for the broadest language you will grant um you know personally throughout the state um these facilities have been allowed in commercial this is heavy commercial light industrial so I'm going to ask that you consider putting it in just commercial as well but to the extent that you are taking action we we do
appreciate the effort so that would be my only concern that it' be a th foot as a as a bird flies so radius radi you would do with radi yeah radius from property line to property line right okay instead of drawing a line a half mile down the road and then coming back and going right in front of the school yeah I know I'd back Kevin on that one I'm assuming that would conflict with consistency so would it be easier instead of going a th000 feet you know as you walk Go
25 200 feet and that would kind of take that into consideration you know a little bit further as a radius I I see what you're saying there Reed but I think for just all intens of purposes and this is going with like cannabis sale or medical cannabis and such you know the state has ordinances that say specifically radi not by the you know foot um we use it here shortest route travel for that um
by foot um I just think myself radi is an easy alternative to yes sir get to complacency here sir I agree I'm not a voting member but I agree and um and I will um am my deputy director uh uh uh Mr Andrew Homer he basically is to leave with the board of adjustment because I believe I think when walk with there there was there was some we went to there because there was some problems with
the radi but if that's if that's the if that's the case the board make that recommendation we can add it in here and let the public hearing that there still could be more discussion going there could be at that public he we could address that further and he has more experience in that than I do when it comes to the measurement because he been doing that for many many years and so what We've ran into with those particular cases is that we can't tell someone to jwalk right to cross the road and we talking about radio that's why we're talking about R and that that we deal
with a lot with the alcohol uses and and like you said you have to go down to the crosswalk and cross there so it it comes contentious sometimes do we have any other um uses that are measured by radius here in the county that's the only one I believe was the only this previous use radio c c radius for a specific overlay but I'm talking about this is General use throughout the county
this is not specific to an overlay this is specific to a zoning classification so we are going to be creating a rule just for this um in a zoning classification so I mean this Miss bush is an attorney attorneys get paid to file lawsuits uh this would open us up if we are set setting this no it won't I and and I and I would C but now we do have other measurements for other type of facilities we definitely do have for example I don't want to get into those we do have other
radius for for bars and for alcohol uses and for adult entertainment those are so we will not be singling this use out specifically because the code does allow does put even got if you in certain zoning categor is 200 ft from another so radius and distance are throughout this is this was add to be consistent with what we got from the alcohol so it's already in place we we're just trying to be consistent so if there by the by the distance walking measurement so but just
think about like this John it's tomato tomato to a degree I mean this one here we just make it a little bit more restrictive on the overall radi then you know the shortest route by a foot can be gamed a little bit more I I just see this being a nicer cleaner thing in the code that we say hey property line to property line radi it just makes it EAS easier my personal opinion from reading it well it keeps me from having a bar trying to be put across school too when they kid child has
to walk all the way half mile down the road and then turn come back AC that's a loophole that's there to bring that but we could fight every one of them that come up but that's you know that that' be my job if we don't get this type of sport Horus can you give me a little bit of history of how we have a um past gaming facility on the west side of town without this now we're adding this for the is it purely because 2015 since we changed everything that was Prior this
it's my it's my understanding that that that facility I guess I know as old dog track per say that that that was here before yeah yeah that was here before we really came into these rules and regulations that was that it could have been a grandfather then uses my understanding I know it was it before I got started in in 2000 so it was always here so so but we never ever
it was it was a legal non-conforming use that could have been existence so that's why we're adding this if the board so wish to make it now as part of the Land Development code my main suggestions going with these these other guys is either extend it from a th000 feet if we have to do it by walking or do a radii U which everyone
keeps us out of out of legal issues um because I don't want to create something that's that conflicts with everything else um but I think a th000 fet is a little too too short I I can clarify something for you I believe in regards to the measurement it really does come down to a a matter of preference that it's legal to do it one way and it's legal to do the other way uh you all have the discretion of how to do it uh the uh Florida statute puts it uh limits other paramutual
facilities within 100 miles they use the radius measurement in the Florida statute not that that has any terrible re relevance for how the county does their their ordinances but I just want to clarify that it one won't keep us out of legal problems significantly more than the other uh just as a point of clarification and the the code also does I want to point out the code does also have uh similar restrictions for uh adult entertainment facilities or uh I believe uh bars
as well yes uh that do prohibit it within a th000 feet from existing place of worship child care facility and and does include park or playground uh within that and it does use the measurement as it is drafted in this in this draft here but it isn't binding on how the future uh restrictions can be done all this Falls within the supplemental land use regulations which are by their nature a
little more one-offs uh than the rest of our code but uh it's ultimately up to the board okay um we do have a speaker I'll get there in just a second and I guess you know I'm thinking of the radius thing which I I do like I do have had an issue with this thousand foot the way you can can walk um but I take for instance you know I'm looking at schools and I look at fairy pass Elementary
School on uh North Davis across from West orta Hospital to south of there on Olive Road and I'm just hypothetical here okay guys just just help me out so if you if you had this facility on Olive Road and we were going off of the radius right they're going to be back door neighbors with Fair p Elementary which Ingress egress is off of Davis the Ingress egress for this facility would be off Olive so would that then fall into this thousand foot radius even though they're really not to me
like I don't see the issue there but but the issue is is where what this does they have it's the closest path they can walk you have a state road there where you can't get a crosswalker either they they they could walk three blocks down one block across the road well the distance to walk would be well over 1 th000 feet but I'm thinking the th radius from the back of the property would
certainly be within a th000 foot radius you see what I'm saying here's the thing I mean we're looking at more restrictive or more you know controlling this is for you know Kevin's bringing up here when we do the radi from the property boundaries it is farther because I can say that we have two piece of the property next to each other there's no Street connections I could have to walk all the way and it's they right next to each other this allows for it to be purposely farther apart geographically okay you're always gonna be that way as a bird as a bird fli gotta yeah
I can't think of a circumstance where that changes actually all right um Jack Rogers I have you come up um Jacqueline Rogers I have a question about um when Wilson Robertson op out of his property um and wanted to make it hli he couldn't do it because it was mixed
use Suburban so the county allowed hcli in mixu Suburban where it was never allowed before but they said you just can't do industrial if hcli is in mixed Suburban so I guess my concern is you're saying if it's an hli it'll be allowed well that might not be appropriate in mixed use Suburban hcli is also available in mixed use urban and other um land uses so I'm not saying you can't have it at all but do you think it's appropriate to have paramutual um facilities in mixed use
Suburban areas and that might be a limitation that needs to be added to this ordinance um when we went to Deo I contested the industrial and it was not listed as a range of allowable uses and I don't see that it would be here but I don't know what param Mutual is considered um if that's just retail sales and services I'm not sure but that's something to consider do you want in mixed to Suburban areas where you just saw how rural it was up there you saw the homes
up there there are hli lots there even though there're single family homes you're going to allow a paramutual facility up there amongst that area so just something to consider thank you all right um any more discussion and and horse I just want to clarify the the action of the BCC was for us to discuss and give a recommendation on just the distance uh uh the ordinance itself with
the with the zoning category with heavy commercial light industrial along with these restrictions yes gotcha because again we got to have a public meeting we got to come back for before go for the board I make a motion to move forward with uh the language it's currently the dra language as written all right we've got a motion on the table to move forward with the language as written do we have a
second all right um there's no second motion fails for lack of second um I'll go ahead and make a motion that we take this forward with a radi restriction uh thousand foot yeah we just use radi versus walking distance that way we stay the state likes to use
that more in their ordinances for this very reason because there's less interpretation on how you get to that it's property boundary to property boundary on the shortest you know Corners do we have to articulate that exact language in this motion or can we task staff to rewrite with that type of change it is small enough where I could do the rewrite of that measurement calculation according to the direction of the board and present that version
with my legal sign off to the board of County Commissioners for their uh approval or denial come back here excuse me before that yes so we would have to see the exact language again and vote on it yes so this motion is another 30-day delay no no we could well when it's coming back before the this is only a discussion item so we're not voting it to go to the BCC anyway but I do want but I
do want to be clear I do want to be clear I do want to be clear on the schedule on the schedule we we still want to have the public hearing on when when the public hearing on this this this is coming back to the planning board on March 4th right so so so we do want to keep that we do want to keep that timeline then it's going to go to the BCC for its first hearing on March 6 so if it's a discussion item is is it really a motion or can we just say here please rewrite and bring back to us for a vote I think a motion for direction of direction of the board okay yes sir so your motion
was to have an another draft ordinance brought to us using radi instead of yeah the language we have here along the shortest for review at the next meeting all right do we have a second on that motion second second any further discussion all those in favor please signify raising your right hand all those against all right perfect so we'll uh review that next month and keep on chugging
along I don't I didn't have anybody signed up for uh public forum is there any further information we need from staff uh can I just ask for a clarification just out of pure personal interest with paramutual is it's a Florida State regulated and and with the statute of the distances where only one can be in Escambia County that distance does not apply to other states then because
it's just Florida I would leave that up to the legal because if there's a distance in Baldwin County I can look into that issue this is a discussion item so I could address that uh question at the following uh meeting I would suppose it stops at the state's jurisdiction correct yeah I just yeah all right I want just question for um for staff talk to us
about because it's not on the calendar when is um the 2411 going to come back to us again for the third time when when we have more information from the app the client we if there would definitely be another public meeting a everything will be notified so I just don't want to give you a certain date but it got to come up
from this board as recommended and Direction given from the BCC so it's definitely coming back before this board don't know when yet all right thank you if there's nothing else we stand ad journ