um but I don't know if there's really it's not a requirement at large member. What about Okay. Right. Gotcha.
Right. At this meeting, the Escambia County Planning Board for November 4th, 2025 is hereby called to order with five members present or six members present. We do have a quorum. Just a reminder to put your phones on silent um or turn them off. And if you would please stand for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands nationy
and justice for all. All right. 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. Got a motion in a second. All those in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. All those opposed. Motion carries. Reszoning meeting minutes for the previous meeting dated October 7th have been provided to the board members. Are there any additions, deletions, or corrections? If not, I'll entertain a motion to approve. Motion second. A motion and second. All those in favor,
please signify by raising your right hand. Motion carries. The hearing package for November 4th, 2025 with finding a fact has been provided to the board members. I'll entertain a motion to accept the resoning hearing package with findings of fact in the legal advertisement into evidence there. Motion moved. Second. Second. A motion second. All those in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. Okay. Motion carries. Will the court reporter please swear in members of the staff?
I do. Okay. Board 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. Seeing none, uh, at this hearing, the planning board is acting under its authority to I'll make a motion to wave the reading of the, uh, uh, reasoning criteria to expedite things today. Okay, we've got a motion. Do we have a second? We got a second. Uh,
all those in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. Okay, motion carries. Today, there is one case to be heard. The resoning application for consideration is case number Z-20225-10 which requests resoning of 362 West Oakfield Road, 300 block West Oakville Road and 227 Kinmore Road from HDMU highdensity mixed use district 25 dwelling units per acre to HCLI heavy commercial and light industrial district 25 dwelling units per acre as requested by Meredith Bush, agent for
Roy Listister and fourstar are drywall inc. The owners members of the board have there been any expert communication between you and the applicant of the applicant's agents, attorneys, witnesses with fellow planning board members or anyone from the general public prior to the 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 to all. No to all. Note to all. Not all. No to all. Not all. Okay. staff was notice of the hearing sent to all interested parties. Yes, sir. Notice of
the hearing posted on the subject property. Yes, sir. All right. Meredith, are you okay if they go through the photography? Okay. Staff, if you'll go ahead and present those photographs and maps. Good morning. Allison Lindsay Development Services. This is a location map showing the location between Kenmore and Oakfield. This is the 500 foot radius map showing the property
uh outlined in red. This is a future land use map showing mixeduse urban and this is existing future land use showing the existing uh uses around. This is the aerial photography of the site. This is the public hearing sign that was posted um on Oakfield. This is looking onto the subject property at 362 West Oakfield. This is looking west along Oakfield. Looking east along
Oakfield. This is looking south along Oak actually across Oakfield. This is the public hearing sign that was posted at the 300 block of West Oakville looking south from the Oakville Road property. And this is looking onto the property at the 300 block of Oakfield. This is the public hearing sign that was posted on 227 Kenmore. Looking onto the Kenmore property. This is looking north
across Kenmore Road. Looking east along Kenmore from the subject property and looking east along Oakfield. Looking west along uh Kenmore Road. And that's the map. All right. Thank you. Um Meredith, we'll have you come forward and just state your full name and address for the record. We don't have to have you sworn in unless you've got any witnesses that you'd like to have today. Okay. Meredith Bush uh 314 South Balin Sweet 108 Pensacola, Florida 32502. All right. And have you
received a copy of the resoning hearing package with findings of fact? And do you understand that you have the burden of providing by substantial competent evidence that the proposed resoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan furthers goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan and is not in conflict with any portion of the county's landing code? Yes. Okay. And go ahead. Um good morning board. I appreciate as always the time to come before you and present. Uh first I'll walk through the criteria as outlined in our application. Um and then I'll
uh kind of pivot and address some of the concerns raised by staff. Um it's rare that we don't always agree on all the criteria. I love it when I can come before you and say, you know, we're all in agreement and ask that you just adopt. Um, as to criteria one, consistent with the comprehensive plan, the proposed amendment is consistent with the intent and purpose of the existing future land use category, which is mixed use urban. The LDC recognizes HCLI is appropriate within MU. Um, this is adjacent to major transportation networks. The site sits between Pensacola Boulevard, Highway
29, and North Palifox. Um, MUU future land use category explicitly contemplates an intense mix of residential, office, retail and light industrial uses and encourages infill redevelopment where the urban infrastructure already exists. Converting these under utilized MU parcels to HCLI aligns with sustainable development objectives by locating employment generating uses near that Palifox Boulevard and North Palifox transportation spine. Uh the requested district implements the
MU intensity framework and advances economic development goals as to criteria 2 consistent with zoning district provisions. The proposed amendment to HCLI is consistent with the intent and purpose of the land development code. The variety and intensity of non-residential uses within the HCLI district is limited by the applicable flu and their compatibility with the surrounding uses. HLI's stated intent is to accommodate light manufacturing, large-scale wholesale and
retail and major services in areas serviced by transportation networks. Given the parcel's MEU designation, the HLI intensity cap, um a floor area ratio up to 2.0, and the corridor's network, uh this request fits squarely within the district's purpose and establishment provisions. Um, if desired by the county, the applicant is amanable to reinforcing compatibility via voluntary conditions customary to HCLI, such as enhanced screening, limited access, and orienting
development away from any nearby dwellings. Um, if you'll look back at the existing use map, you'll see that the surrounding parcel um is commercial, and you'll also see on the zoning map the surrounding area as HCLI. Um, and that kind of plays into the next criteria, compatible with surroundings. The proposed amendment is compatible with the surrounding existing uses in the area. The property is already adjacent to HCLI, surrounded by HCLI, and there's HDMU zoning. Compatibility under Florida planning law does not require identical
uses. It requires uses that can coexist without material diminishing each other's utility. The comprehensive plan and LDC define compatibility in terms of complimentary or mitigating design not uniformity um as a transitional use to exa existing HCLI in your other non-residential districts. The request formalizes a long functioning functioning employment and service cluster. Um criteria four appropriate if spot zoning. Um the amendment request if granted
would not create spot zoning. the property is directly adjacent to existing HCLI and in close proximity to other properties zoned HCLI and then appropriate with changed or changing conditions. The Oakfield Kenmore blocks have experienced incremental uh commercial commercialization and light industrial activity consistent with MU over time. This is driven by its proximity to US 29 and North Palivox and the corridor's established supply chain and service economy. Upzoning to HCLI
recognizes these evolving market conditions and directs growth to a location already equipped for this sort of development. As infill on sites with existing access, the request is not premature, does not contribute to sprawl, and instead channels investment to logical urban node while leveraging existing public capital investments. Um, we've also submitted a compatibility analysis which meets the locationational criteria. Um, county staff in their uh, findings point out a
few things that I'd like to counter. Um, as far as consistency with the comprehensive plan, MU future land use category explicitly permits light industrial and employment generating uses. The staff's suggestion that commercial zoning is more appropriate conflicts with the comprehensive plans mixeduse urban framework which prioritizes compact corridor oriented redevelopment with diverse use types including light industrial and I would direct you to flu 1.5.1 encouraging redevelopment
in underutilized MU properties and flu uh 2.3 encouraging infill development in appropriate urbanized areas where infrastructure is sufficient. Um, on criteria B, staff incorrectly constrs HCLI location criteria as limiting parcels directly fronting arterials. However, the LDC allows documented documented compatibility as an alternative. Um, the applicant in this case provided a full compatibility analysis which demonstrates the property's adjacency to HCLI
uses and existing HCLI zoning, its location within an established service area, and again agrees to any design commitments necessary. Um, next, um, in response to staff's findings on compatibility with the surrounding uses, again, compatibility, uh, means coexistence without adverse impact, not uniformity. staff admits HCLI zoning already exists adjacent to the site. The requested district sim simply formalizes an existing pattern ensuring consistent regulation and site design
control. Uh staff does concede that this is not spot zoning and that um therefore the request is a logical extension of established industrial and commercial activity um and satisfies the LDC's intent. And um as far as changed or changing conditions, again, this area, this corridor has evolved with commercial and light industrial uses over time. Um e Skim County's economic development framework promotes the retention and expansion of employment centers near transportation routes.
um the staff's own submitt of supporting evidence. Although in their findings they referenced the condition of the streets. County TTO reviewed the submittal and issued no objections and that there would be no negative impact explicitly noting that any roadway issues would be addressed at the DRC stage. over 50% of the 500 foot radius is already zoned HCLI and um transitional zoning should match the predominant budding use not a lesser intensity placeholder. HCLI appropriately extends the
existing employment corridor. Uh so we would ask that you adopt the applicant's findings. Again, if you'll pull up the map and show the surrounding HCLI um and that this is an appropriate zoning category for this area. I'm happy to respond to any questions and um address any comments of staff speaker members. Yes, sir. Go ahead. I was going to ask for Meredith. I'm shocked you you enjoy an argument with staff as an attorney. Uh I I don't mind one every once in a while either. Um
uh the the only thing I I'm just I don't mean to point you out, sir, but did you happen? I came in. I just spoke to him. I think he he told me that he just want to sit in and listen. I did tell him that he was if he want to speak, he got it signed. So, thank you, Mr. Pow. I did notice that when I came back in. Yeah. I just I mean obviously I I very well articulated arguments but I keep seeing the single family single family single family and this is where I think this board actually gets to utilize the gray matter between our ears. Uh because we didn't start this county on a perfect
flat plane and have everything sectioned off nicely. We run into these situations where people from the outside drive by and go, "What were they thinking? Why would they ever do something this silly?" But now we have single family and what always concerns me are the people and I mean I feel like it's I guess it speaks volumes that no one's here to speak anything uh to some degree but I don't know and and I just point out yes you are correct there may not be no one here to speak but
that's the job of the planning department the government services department and I believe that's your job as to look at the criteria because just because they may not be able to hear once many times citizen are not engaged until it directly come things start going up once they start going up believe me we definitely get all of the phone calls from from every which way so so so I understand what you're saying but but Miss Lindsay she'll present the findings but
again we have to look at because I will receive the phone calls and I will get calls on once it's actually going up. So we have to that's a good point but we I can't and my department cannot look at the because people are not here. Okay. Is there any uh other questions for the applicant at this point? Y I've got just a simple question. I'm slightly confused by two pictures on page 22 and page 24. Are you sure that's the applicants? I thought that was Philly. That was because
Filliam has a gate around it. I don't didn't think the applicant had a gate on their premises. So just making sure it's the right pictures that we're presenting in our in our findings because that's that right there is the Philly building. You would know, right? Yeah, I would been there many many many times. It is. I I know exactly what it is. So So we we have our we have our sign on the wrong parcel and we have the wrong pictures. It looks like cuz it is sitting there on you know
the the the sign is on the corner of the film and within the gate to me that's the wrong place and I don't know if that constitutes a violation of um proper I notice to everybody that that may squish this meeting today. Be right. Mhm. That's that's a very good point. There'll be three parcels.
This is So this is Philly. Who do you think the sign is? Oh, I think they have to be very This is the insurance. This is the Gotcha. They're one block. One block off. I didn't I mean I know This is right here is the linear color. That's why right there. [Music] Good catch, Mr. Rushing. Good eye. Yeah, good eye. Good catch. You paying attention?
Um, and I do apologize. I didn't look at the the the And I and I and I take full responsibility for that. Um when putting out the signs of Miss Kang, she put the signs out. So we have to that's if that's an issue. We I do want to be fair. I do want to correct if that's the which of the squash we get with consider we'll bring them back at our expense. That's if that instance they
were so clearly identified the right parcel signs out accordingly is is is that the wish of the board at this at this moment? I'd love to hear from our attorney. Yeah, chairman. I'd like to hear from the attorney as well. Hey, look. Oh, they definitely are three parcels involved. If the sign was posted on the wrong property, my suggestion to the board would be to continue this
and have proper notice given by having the sign posted on the correct property. I don't think we could continue uh if proper notice wasn't given to the public as to the proper lot. Okay. Sure. So, without a sign posted on the correct property, uh there's not sufficient notice to the public. So my uh recommendation would be to continue this hearing to have the sign posted on the correct lots. Okay. And and and if I may, attorney, I would like to hear from the client if she if she
feels like that is it's what if if so if that's what the board you you represent any challenge at all later on. Of course. I agree with you. I agree with you. Thank you, Mr. Reed. Correct. And I'm not familiar with that fence. I mean, I've I've visited the site and seen my own photographs, but if it's if you know, it's a representation that it was mis um misposted and proper notice hasn't been given, then um we would have no objection to properly notifying the neighborhood, allowing
this to come back at the next available meeting with the understanding the county would bear the cost. Um so, really can't argue. All right. So, to the east. Go ahead. That's okay. Okay. That happens. It happens. Yes, that's it. So, we need a motion, Mr. Ch. We need a motion. Do we need to include the fact that the county will be absorbing the cost for continuence wholeheartedly?
Okay. Yeah. I'll make a motion that we uh have a continuence of the Z2025- what is it? 10. Uh in order to give us time for proper signage to be located and that all costs would be by the county, not the um applicant. Second. Any discussion on the motion? All right. All those in favor, please signify by raise your right hand. Okay. All those opposed? Motion carries. Um All right. Well,
good good notice u find on that and uh certainly want to make sure everything's done correctly. So that was the the only reasoning case we had today. So we'll go ahead and adjourn that meeting and we'll go into our regular planning board meeting and so the meeting the Escambia County Planning Board for November 4th is hereby called to order with six members present. We do have a quorum. Do we have proof of publication? Yes, sir. Did the publication meet all legal requirements? Chair
will entertain a motion to wave the reading of the legal advertisement. Second. A motion. Second. A second. All those in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. All those opposed? Okay. Motion carries. Planning board meeting minutes for October 7th, 2025 has been provided to the board members. I'll entertain a motion to accept planning board meeting minutes into evidence. So moved. Motion and second. Second. All right. All those in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. Those opposed? Motion carries. The planning board hearing package for November
4th has been provided to the board members. I'll entertain a motion to accept the planning board hearing package and legal advertisement into evidence. Do I have a motion? So moved. Got a motion and second. All those in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. All those opposed. Okay. Motion carries. We have one public hearing today. a smallcale map amendment application for consideration case number SSA 202507 which requests the future land use
change of 6490 and 6505 highway 29 north from RC rural community to MU mixeduse urban as requested by Meredith Bush agent for 29 and Molina Road Development LLC the owner staff was notice of the hearing sent to all interested parties was notice of the hearing posted on the subject property and are you good with maps and photographs? Okay, we'll go ahead and have staff present those now.
Hey, this is a SSA 202507. This is a location map of the site at Molino and 29. This is the radius map showing the parcel outlined in red is RMU. This is the existing future land use map of rural community. This is the proposed future land use for mixeduse urban. This is the aerial photography of the site. This is the public uh hearing sign that was posted on Highway 29 at the 6490. This
is looking at the subject property across Highway 29. Looking south along Highway 29 from the 6490. This is looking north west next to the subject property. And this is looking at the corner parcel at uh 6505. Looking at the property between the two subject partals just to get a a a perspective. This is looking west at the intersection of Highway 29 and Molino Road. Looking north from
the subject property on 29. This is the public hearing sign that was posted on Molino Road. This is looking at the corner parcel from uh Molina Road across the street. This is looking onto the site along Molino. It's the back side of the development on Molino. Just another view. And it's another view of the uh development that on the corner of 6505 Highway 29. And that's the maps and photography. All right. Thank you. Meredith, would you come forward and just state your full
name and address for the record again and then let us know if you received a copy of the hearing package with the findings fact. Meredith Bush, 314 South Balin, uh, sweet 108, Pensacola, Florida, 32502 and yes. Okay, great. And now I'll let you go ahead and proceed with your presentation. So, um, this is a, uh, sort of distinct situation where these properties were previously zoned Gateway Business District and were downzone during the countywide resoning in 2015. That action constituted a legal taking of certain property rights by eliminating previously authorized
commercial uses and intensities. In response to that uh un unanticipated consequence and to avoid a takings claim, the county implemented a savings clause within the land development code um in order for owners in similar situations to restore their development rights. Here we filed the um necessary documentation to invoke the savings clause and reestablish the C1, C2, and GBD uses. However, um as outlined in the code, to implement those prior uses, the future land use
category has to be amended. And so here we're seeking a flu amendment to mixed juice urban um which will go along with the entitlement from the savings clause. Um the application the cost of the application is borne by the county and in this case the county um is supportive of our request. However, I'll walk through um the criteria. Um, as far as environmental, we're in flood hazard zone X. Uh, soils nitrifying sandy loom soils. Uh, we're not within a wellhead protection area.
Traffic average daily traffic in the vicinity of this project, 17,500 trips on Highway 29, about 2200 trips on Molina Road. The amendment will not adversely affect capacity of the surrounding roadways. Uh, our packet includes documentation from Molino utilities indicating that sanitary sewer and water are available to the property. The proposed amendment is not expected to create capacity problems for Molino utilities. Um, again, no wetlands uh on the subject property. Um,
it's in the JS Branch drainage system uh basin. Solid waste uh will be provided by ECUA. The level standard for solid waste disposal six pounds per capita per day and um the Purto landfill has adequate existing and projected capacity. Um parks, recreation and open space. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect parks, recreation or open space. As far as schools go, school assignments for this property are Molina Park Elementary, Ernest Ford Middle School, and
North View High School. uh changing to mixeduse urban with a GBD uh savings clause category is not anticipated to create any capacity issue for the school district. And we've also submitted um docu documentation from the Florida Division of Historical Resources noting that um there are no protected historical or cultural references on the subject property. Um our application outlines um many comprehensive plan provisions with which we are compliant and supportive. And again,
this is part of the necessary remedy to that um countywide reasonzoning which removed the GBD uses. Um, as an aside, although not required by the county, we also voluntarily recorded or we haven't yet recorded but prepared, executed, and will record upon adoption a um limitation on the property to um agree not to implement any of the super heavy industrial uses such as salvage yards,
solid waste transfer facilities, materials recovery facilities, recycling facilities, uh volume reduction plants, concrete or as asphalt batch plants, any mineral extraction, paper mills, power plants, chemical plants, refineries, slaughter houses, etc. So, and happy to take any questions. All right. Do we have any questions for the applicant? All right, seeing none, we'll uh let you sit down and we'll turn it over to staff at this time. So since since we don't have um any speakers, I can either go through everything, explain the GBD
and the and the savings clause or I can give you the short version. Short version or version? Okay. All right. I think you this is the small scale map amendment. 6.95 uh plus or minus acres from rural community to mixeduse urban. And um the sweet and short is that this does meet all the requirements that the state has for u smallcale map amendment. It is uh 6.95. It is less than the 50 acres. It isn't in an area of critical concern. Um and it doesn't h this doesn't uh require any text change
to the comprehensive plan. So it does meet all uh requirements for our small scale and staff agree. And and and just briefly and to add to the side, you know, heavy commercial does it it does incorporate some of the excre uses, but the but the client on their own accord agreed to eliminate some of those uses and we thought that was very very favorable. So with that staff as well as an agreement that makes use urban mix urban does allow for light some type of light
industrial uses, but they're going to limit the heavy side. So that's why staff is in for support of this agreement and because of their willingness to do that and with the and with the concern that the that the BCC had raised we did all of the changing of the zone in the future category. All right. Any questions for staff? Do you have anything else? All right. And then if not I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve. Motion to approve and a second. All those in favor please signify by raising your right hand. All those opposed. All
right. Carries. That was all we had today. Anything from staff before we for the day. And this result in the one that we going to. All righty. Thanks. We're