[0:06] By the way, we can't win. We can't get in. We get in that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Alright. Yeah.

[0:16] You no idea. Yeah, yeah yeah. She. Yeah yeah. No. Yeah. Yeah. All right good morning

[0:43] everybody. This is the meeting of the Escambia County Planning Board for March the 3rd, 2026.

[0:49] It's called to order. We do have eight members present. So we do have a quorum. This

[0:55] reminder to put your phones on silent or turn them off while we're in the meeting. And if

[1:00] you would, please stand and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge allegiance?

[1:06] Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it

[1:12] stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. Do

[1:20] we have proof of publication? Yes, sir. The publication meet the legal requirements? Yes,

[1:25] sir. I'll entertain a motion to waive the reading of the legal advertisement. So we've got a

[1:30] motion to have a second. Perfect. All those in favor, please signify by raising your

[1:34] right hand. Okay. Motion carries. The planning board meeting minutes for January the

[1:41] 6th have been provided to the board members. I'll entertain a motion to accept the planning

[1:45] board meeting minutes into evidence. If we have no changes, do we have a motion? So moved a

[1:52] motion. Second. Second. Second. All right, all those in favor, please signify by raising your

[1:56] right hand. All right. Motion carries. The planning board hearing package for March 3rd

[2:02] has been provided to the board members. I'll entertain a motion to accept into. So moved.

[2:08] Thank you. Do we have a second? Second? All right. All those in favor, please signify. Raise

[2:12] your right hand. All right. Motion carries. We do have two cases to be heard today. During

[2:18] the regular meeting. The small scale future land use map amendment application for

[2:25] consideration is case SSA 2020 602. This request a future land use change of 1500 West Quintet

[2:35] Road block from RC. The rural community flew to muse mixed use suburban flu requested by

[2:42] Meredith Bush, the agent for 1500 Quintet Road LLC. The owner staff was notice of the

[2:49] hearing sent to all parties. Yes sir, and was notice of the hearing posted on the subject.

[2:55] Property. Yes, sir. All right, staff, can you please present the maps and photographs for

[3:00] this case? Good morning. Board. Caleb McCarty, ACP planner for Escambia County. First we have

[3:11] our location map showing the property just down from highway 29 on West Quintet Road. The

[3:20] 500 foot radius map shows the zoning of rural mixed use. We want to note that the previous

[3:27] zoning designation, which this future land use change relies upon, is v five as village five

[3:34] of our previous zoning. The current future existing future land use is rural community RC,

[3:44] and the proposed future land use for this request is mixed use suburban. There are some

[3:52] wetlands on the northern portion of the property. And also flood zone areas to the

[3:58] north as well. This is a aerial. The property is currently vacant that we could tell. Our

[4:07] notice of public hearing sign placed along West Quintet Road there. This is looking west

[4:13] along West Quintet, looking northwest onto the site. It's wooded site. This is looking

[4:20] north onto the site as well, looking northeast to give us a view and looking east along

[4:28] West Quintet. It's looking directly south across West Quintet from the site. That

[4:35] concludes our maps and photography for this case. All right. Thank you very much.

[4:40] With the applicant, please come forward. State your full name and address. For the record.

[4:46] Meredith Bush, 314 South Bailen Street, suite 108, Pensacola, Florida 32502. Here on behalf

[4:52] of the applicant. All right. And you received a copy of the hearing package with staff's

[4:58] analysis, I did. All right. Go ahead and make your presentation. Thank you. I can

[5:02] be brief this morning. We are in agreement with staff's analysis just running through

[5:08] the small scale amendment criteria. There is an identified land use needs, and

[5:13] the request is based upon professional practices. The parcel is less than 50 acres.

[5:20] It does not involve a text change and the property is not within a designated area of

[5:27] critical state concern. Going through the compatibility criteria, let's see where we

[5:33] are. So average annual daily traffic in the vicinity of the project, 22,500 trips in the

[5:44] area along North Highway 29, with 1350 trips along West Quintet Road. There's

[5:54] infrastructure available through sanitary sewer and water. As staff indicated,

[6:00] there are wetlands on the site. It's within the Jacks Branch drainage basin. Solid waste

[6:10] there's plenty of capacity through Ecua and the Perdido Landfill. The proposed

[6:17] amendment is not anticipated to have any impact on school capacity at Jim Allen, Ransome

[6:24] Middle or Tate High School, there are no historic or archeological resources on the

[6:29] site. This, as staff indicated, does relate to the prior future land use. We have a I'm sorry,

[6:35] the prior future zoning. We have a savings clause application in and the I'm

[6:42] sorry what devil was sign o which horse is indicated. He will definitely sign that the

[6:49] future land use amendment is tied to that savings clause application. So we're reverting

[6:54] back to the Vr5 in order to have some residential development that will allow

[7:00] clustering away from those wetlands. And I'm happy to take any questions. All right.

[7:04] Thanks, Meredith. Board, do you have any questions for the applicant? All right. Seeing

[7:11] none. Any questions for staff. All right. We don't have any speakers for this today. So I

[7:20] will entertain a motion if someone would like to make one motion to approve. I got a

[7:26] motion to have a second. Second. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor, please

[7:30] signify by raising your right hand. All right. Motion carries. Next, we'll move on to small

[7:38] scale future land use map amendment application for consideration. It's SSA 2020

[7:44] 603 request for a future land use change of Bower Road. Parcel number 20 seven. Dash

[7:50] two, dash 31 2202. Dash 000000 from conservation flu to public flu as requested by Escambia

[8:03] County, the owner of the property staff was notice of the hearing sent to all parties

[8:09] was notice of the hearing posted on the subject. Property. Yes, sir. All right. And if I

[8:13] can have you present the maps and photographs for this case. All right. Again, this small

[8:19] scale map amendment is shown along Bower Road just north of Atlantis. Here, the current

[8:27] zoning map shows that it is conservation zoning district. The existing future land use is

[8:35] also conservation. This request is to change the future land use to public. There are some

[8:45] wetlands indicated at the bottom associated with the lake north of the subdivision there,

[8:53] and there's also some flood zone areas within the vicinity. This is an aerial map of the

[9:02] property. This is a notice of public hearing sign that we required to place on the

[9:08] property. Looking north along Bower Road. This is looking northeast onto the site from

[9:16] Bower Road. This is also looking onto the site from Bower Road and looking south

[9:24] along Bower Road and across from the subject property is a wooded lot as well. That

[9:30] concludes our maps and photography for this case. All right. Thank you very much. So

[9:36] since the county is the applicant, I don't know if there's any member of staff

[9:41] that is wanting to represent. The county today, but certainly would have you come forward or

[9:49] speak? Certainly we have. Mr. David Cordingly with Facilities Management. This project is

[9:57] associated with a county project, and David may provide a little bit more detail there.

[10:01] Great. Good morning everybody. David Cordingly, I'm relatively new with the county and the

[10:05] county architect. So this is about roughly 5.2 acres that we originally purchased from the

[10:11] Navy with the intent to build a new fire station out on Bower Road. So this is to for fire

[10:17] protection for for the Paradise Beach area. This was a package with also Myrtle Grove that

[10:22] you'll see we're doing four of them because all four of them are kind of zoned. I'm not sure

[10:26] why this one was recreation, but it I think it relates with the property to the West, which

[10:31] is all public. The idea is to get it as close to to Bower Road as possible, using the

[10:36] natural vegetation as a buffer to that wetlands in the back. We don't have any intention of

[10:41] accessing that waterway. And then I know there's some houses to the north and to the south

[10:45] that will use that vegetation to, to buffer as well. It'll be about an 8 to 10 bed, 2 to 3

[10:51] bay, relatively small fire station. So, so the county has engaged with the engineering

[10:58] firm that has conducted a pre-application with the with development services. The issue

[11:03] obviously, what brings us here is that the conservation zoning doesn't allow for much of

[11:07] anything, some passive recreational type of uses, trails, those type of things.

[11:12] It doesn't allow for any residential density. The requested change to public also

[11:19] does not allow for residential density if there's any concerns related to that, but it does

[11:23] allow for public, federal, state, local infrastructure, public offices, those type of

[11:28] things. We understand the intent is the fire station. If the board was to approve this

[11:36] application, then the engineering firm would then continue the development review

[11:42] process. That's right. Yeah. Right now it's just early on. We're just doing some soil

[11:46] testing right now. It's been surveyed and that's that's it. Right. All right. And if I may.

[11:50] Yes, sir. And you know, you know, and even with the Rezonings, we really don't look

[11:54] at the specific uses. But we do know that that the board that there was some critical

[12:03] infrastructure, major capital improvement projects, that was that was necessary in the area.

[12:07] So the board proceeded to go down this path. The use is identified. The need is still

[12:15] public in order to get those those critical needs, infrastructure projects zoned

[12:23] correctly. Yeah, yeah. Get fire insurance down, get public safety, you know, critical

[12:28] needs. Exactly. All right. Thank you. Board. Are there any questions for the county? You

[12:36] know, I just I felt like I couldn't wait. Now the county it's our turn to get get these

[12:41] guys on this one. They've they've painted themselves a corner. They have to come for a

[12:45] rezoning for. And I knew exactly what it was for and I saw duck on it. It's a good

[12:51] cause I don't we don't get to give him a hard time, I said finally. The shoe is on the

[12:56] other foot, but it is for a good cause. It just seems way too easy for you guys. Yeah, we

[13:01] have three more after this and we got some more coming, by the way, so. All right, well, thank

[13:05] you all very much. All right. Thank you. We do have two speakers for this case. So as I

[13:10] call your name, if you'll come forward state your name and address for the record and then

[13:15] we'll get your time started. So I've got Sonny Walbeck. Hello, I am Sonny Burke Walbeck. I

[13:30] live at one, two, three, two, three Alanthus Drive. I have been around the zoning board.

[13:37] I've spoken multiple times with Mr. Caleb. My concerns for this project. The governor's office

[13:45] reached out to me yesterday afternoon. Nick of time. And they have a program called

[13:50] Florida Forever program where we can petition the state to purchase this land and keep it

[13:57] in conservation. I am requesting a town hall meeting so that we can the citizens of

[14:03] the area go over the wetland, study the gopher tortoise relocation and the water

[14:11] abatement. I am part of the Flood Defenders organization. My community suffered

[14:17] tremendously during hurricane Sally. We had seven feet of water in my backyard. I had

[14:21] four feet in my front yard. My land was built up. Now it is not. I have not done a wetland

[14:30] delineation study in my own backyard to prevent more flooding for my own house, and

[14:35] I am quite concerned about water encroaching into what is our lake and canal system that

[14:46] runs the entire circle of my community. We are a giant circle surrounded by water

[14:52] since hurricane Sally. Every time it rains, we flood. I have lost seven feet of land between

[15:02] my backyard and the lake since hurricane Sally. We used to have a long space. When it

[15:10] rains, it comes right up to my chain link fence, which is much further than the property line.

[15:17] I am very concerned about flooding. I'm very concerned about the ecosystem, and I'm a

[15:24] little irritated that all of this happened so quickly, and we don't even know if there

[15:28] were gopher tortoises that needed to be relocated. But the land is now cleared out to show

[15:35] where it's going to be. I understand the fire station is very important. It would lower

[15:40] my insurance. I'm all for that. I am also all for the fact that I don't want to flood. So can

[15:46] we make sure that water abatement is good if we have to depend on the Navy? Mr. Steven

[15:53] is not very good at clearing out his beavers to keep me from flooding. So what are we going

[15:59] to do for flooding? You're going to put this in. What's the direct impact on my house

[16:06] and my neighbor's house? I am a partially paralyzed person. I will walk my entire community

[16:11] and get everyone to sign against it. I am that passionate because we flooded

[16:16] and I don't want to flood anymore. So how do we feel about a town hall meeting to

[16:22] discuss all these things? If I may? The board is clearly. And I'm not. I'm not just trying to

[16:35] just snowboard. I'm very, very clear what I'm saying. The board is very, very clear with

[16:39] your concerns. I understand your concerns. These this parcel of land has been really,

[16:46] really discussed thoroughly. Now, it's not done because there will be another process

[16:53] if it is approved by recommendations made. There's another process that is called

[16:58] the site plan review process. Yes. That will that will definitely, definitely be have

[17:07] questions have addressed the stormwater impacts to the whole area to your property as well.

[17:13] So so those things would definitely be addressed because this the county project and I

[17:19] and I can speak for the county, the county do not want to have infrastructure that will cause

[17:27] additional harms on neighboring properties. That's not the county position as all,

[17:33] especially when they are owning property and when they are building new infrastructure. So

[17:39] this site plan review process, the engineering department, along with my other team in

[17:45] this process will clearly they're going to address all of those things to make sure

[17:50] adverse impacts is minimized sufficiently. I can always stay involved with the site plan

[17:58] review process and who horse if is that a public meeting? It's all of what it is public

[18:04] information, public public structures. There will be public reviews and you can

[18:10] always contact the public safety department, all of those things. So everything that

[18:14] we're doing is clearly public. It's in the public records. Yes. And and you know, we've had

[18:21] conversations. If you could always reach out to myself, me and Mr. Jones are part of the

[18:27] DRC, the development review. That would be the next step for site development. We've we've

[18:31] made our concerns, per the land development code known to the applicant, which is ourselves,

[18:36] but engaged with a local engineer. They will have to do a site specific survey, wetland

[18:43] delineation if there's any threatened endangered species that are found. We'll approach

[18:46] that for any type of federal state permits that would be needed. There's process. So

[18:50] this is a first step in the process of getting the zoning right for the potential use. It

[18:55] doesn't allow for any type of development. This doesn't confer development rights yet.

[18:59] So just be aware you can keep in contact with me. I'll be I'll be happy to help you out.

[19:03] Okay, then. I'm satisfied with that. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Joseph Tarver.

[19:13] You did pretty good on that. Thank you. Yeah. I don't have any complaints. Okay. My

[19:18] property line is the adjacent to the northeast truck. Just for the record, we got to get

[19:26] you to say, state your name and address. My name is Joseph Tavernetti at 1110 Bower Road.

[19:33] And my request is to have a right of way access. Should a fence be erected on our common

[19:42] property line. I share property, the northeast property line of the Red triangle. That's my

[19:48] house in the middle of the. Just just north of the red triangle. So if a if a fence

[19:57] was erected, it would cut me off from part of my property that I maintain on the other

[20:04] side of the canal. It's kind of hard to see the canal in that photo, but I have property on

[20:09] that. And the I'm just requesting a right of way. All right. I guess it would be the

[20:20] southeast corner. I see where you're talking about where the red line cuts across the canal

[20:24] and. Yeah, right. Yeah. Right there. Horse. How would something like that work? I

[20:28] know that's not something that we grant or do. Right. And and what would do we would refer

[20:33] him to to to to our public works director and his department. Those are, those

[20:39] are issues. That's beyond that's beyond me and this board. But definitely we'll get with

[20:44] and they will relay. We can relay your concerns and your requests to them. Will it

[20:49] happen? I don't know, but but I know they will definitely listen to you as you explain to

[20:55] them. So that gentleman right there, make sure you give him his name and your card and so

[21:00] they can make and stay in contact with them. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. All

[21:04] right. Thank you. That was our two speakers for this case board. Are there any questions

[21:11] for the applicant? No. I'm just glad they're keeping the county on their toes. That's good.

[21:16] That's right yeah I agree. Anyone else? All right. If not, I will entertain a motion for

[21:22] this case. Motion to approve. Second. Got a second? Any discussion on the motion? All

[21:27] those in favor, please signify. Raise your right hand. All those opposed? All right. That

[21:35] is the end of our regular board meeting. So I will adjourn that. And we will start our rezoning

[21:43] meeting for March 3rd, 2026. Hereby called to order with eight members present. We do

[21:50] have a quorum. Do we have proof of publication? Yes, sir. Did publication meet all legal

[21:56] requirements? Yes. The. I'll entertain a motion to waive the reading of the legal

[22:03] advertisement. Do I have a motion? Motion to wait a second. Second? All those in favor,

[22:08] please signify. Raise your right hand. All those opposed? Rezoning. Meeting minutes from

[22:13] the previous meeting, dated February 3rd, has been provided to the board members. Are there

[22:18] any additions, deletions or corrections? If not, I'll entertain a motion to accept.

[22:24] Motion to accept. Second, all those in favor, please signify by raising your right hand.

[22:30] Motion carries the rezoning hearing package for March 3rd, 2026 with findings of fact has

[22:38] been provided to the board members. I'll entertain a motion to accept the rezoning

[22:42] hearing package with findings of fact and legal advertisement into evidence. Do I have a

[22:46] motion? Motion to accept. Second, all those in favor, please signify by raising your

[22:51] right hand. All right. Will the court reporter please swear? In members of staff, please raise

[22:57] your right hand. Do solemnly swear or affirm. The testimony about to give in this case will

[23:02] be the truth, the truth and nothing but the truth is I do it for. Thank you. All right.

[23:10] And the board has previously qualified staff to offer expert testimony in the area of land

[23:14] use and planning. Does anyone have any questions regarding their qualifications and

[23:18] ability to offer expert testimony? All right. Seeing none at this hearing, the

[23:24] Planning Board is acting under orders today. I'll make a motion that we waive the

[23:28] reading. All right. We've got a motion to waive the introductory statement reading.

[23:33] Do we have a second? Second? All right, all those in favor, please signify. Raise your

[23:37] right hand. All those opposed. Okay. And I'll just give a brief synopsis for the public

[23:43] that we've got five criteria that we base our decisions off of. And we base our decisions

[23:50] off just those five criteria. And that if you would like to speak at the Board of County

[23:56] Commissioners meeting about one of these cases that you will need to speak today. So this is

[24:00] a little different than the previous meeting. We were just in as we were all sitting here.

[24:05] This one, you do have to speak here under oath, give testimony as this is a quasi judicial

[24:12] meeting that we're in now. So if you want to speak to them, you got to also sign up to

[24:17] speak. Speak to us as well. And at the beginning of each case, as long as there's no

[24:23] objections from the applicant, I'll allow staff to briefly present the location and zoning

[24:28] maps. And next we'll hear from the applicant and any witnesses they may wish to call. Then

[24:34] we'll hear from staff, any witnesses they may wish to call. And then we'll hear from

[24:38] members of the public that have signed up to speak. There are four cases to be heard today,

[24:44] and we'll start with the rezoning application for consideration. Case Z 2020 605

[24:52] request rezoning of Bower Road, parcel number 27 to S 3122 02000000 from Conservation

[25:02] District dwelling unit density limited to vested development to public district dwelling

[25:08] unit density limited to vested residential development as requested by Escambia County,

[25:13] the owner members of the board. Have there been any ex parte communications about this case

[25:20] with you, the applicant of the applicants, agents, attorneys or witnesses with fellow

[25:25] planning Board members or anyone from the general public prior to this hearing? Have you

[25:30] visited the subject property and also please disclose if you are a relative or business

[25:34] associate of the applicant or the applicant's agent. I'm familiar with the property as

[25:42] it was part of a land exchange with the Navy. I have visited the site and know to the rest.

[25:51] No to all, no to all, no to all. I have visited the site and no to the rest. No to all, no to

[25:59] all. All right. Staff, since I assume that you are good with presenting the maps and

[26:08] photographs first, yes, we'll continue again. Caleb McCarty, on behalf of the county, here's

[26:13] our location map showing the subject property along Bower. The 500 foot radius zoning map.

[26:20] The conservation zoning district assigned to the property, the future land use

[26:25] map continued upon the previous meeting would now be future land use of public continued on

[26:32] BCC acceptance. This is our wetland map again showing the subject property and the flood

[26:40] zone map of the property. An aerial of the subject property as well. Our rezoning sign

[26:49] placed along Bower Road there, looking north along Bower, looking northeast onto site

[26:57] from Bower. Looking on to site from Bower and looking south along Bower, and then directly

[27:04] across from the subject property across Bower. That concludes our maps and photos

[27:08] for this case. All right. Thank you. And then who from staff will be presenting for the

[27:20] rezoning hearing. And then as we do for all cases, just state your full name and address for

[27:27] the record. And I don't know if you were sworn in earlier, but we could have you sworn in.

[27:34] Okay. We'll have you sworn in as well. Raise your right hand. Do solemnly swear our testimony

[27:39] about to give in this case will be the truth. The whole truth. Nothing I do right. David

[27:44] Cordingly working with the county. I'm 23, 75, Pinto Circle and Cantonment, Florida.

[27:50] All right. Five. Three. Three. Spell your last name accordingly. C o r d I n g l y.

[27:56] Perfect. All right. And I understand the county has the burden of providing substantial,

[28:03] competent evidence that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the comprehensive Plan.

[28:07] Furthers the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and is not

[28:11] in conflict with any portion of the county's land development Code. Yes. All right. Go ahead.

[28:18] Well, it all down. Yeah. I'm with with the county. So the point of this future land use

[28:25] is to is to turn it to public so it can be a future fire station. That's it seems we

[28:31] agree with all the staff findings and that's it. Okay. All right. Any questions for

[28:39] the representative for the county? Seeing none. Thanks. All right. And I assume it's

[28:49] the same the same thing from you guys as we typically do this a little little odd since

[28:53] it is the county. So we'll move on to public comment at this time. And we'll have you come

[29:01] forward. State your name and address. This time you'll be sworn in and we'll start your

[29:08] time. And remember that if you want to speak at the Board of County Commissioners meeting,

[29:14] you do need to speak here today. So, Miss Wahlbeck, you are up first. Yes. Oh, God. Don't ever

[29:25] break your spine. You solemnly swear or affirm the testimony about to give me the truth. All

[29:31] truth. Nothing but truth. Yes. My name is Sonny Burke. Walbeck. Okay, we already answered all

[29:39] of my questions in the last one, but I just want to remember to provide us with a wetland

[29:46] delineation study, relocate gopher tortoises. And I am very interested in the water

[29:51] abatement process for this project. Thank you, thank you. Any questions for now? All

[29:59] right. Our next speaker is Mr. Tavernetti. I think he maybe has exited the building. So

[30:08] okay. All right. Any other speakers? Very good. All right. Board. That was the only

[30:16] speaker we had for this case. If there's any further questions we can take those at

[30:20] this time for the county. Otherwise I'll entertain a motion for this rezoning.

[30:25] Motion to approve. Second. And a motion. And a second. Any discussion? All those in favor,

[30:30] please signify by raising your right hand. Okay. Motion carries. Next, we have the

[30:39] rezoning application for case Z 2020 602 request rezoning of 1900 Border Street from HDMI,

[30:48] high density mixed use district to CLE heavy commercial and light industrial district

[30:54] requested by Meredith Bush, agent for Crass Pro Services, LLC, the owner members of the

[31:01] board. Have there been any ex parte communications on this case? No to all. No to all. Not

[31:10] all, not all. No to all. No to all. No to all. No. All. Staff was notice of the hearing. Sent

[31:17] to all interested parties. Yes, sir. And was were signs posted on the subject property. Yes,

[31:22] sir. Perfect. Meredith. Are we good with maps and photographs being shown? Okay, I'll go

[31:30] ahead and do that. All right. Board. Andrew Homer, Escambia County development Services

[31:37] department here we have our location map. This is the 500 foot radius zoning map showing

[31:46] the zoning on site is high density mixed use. You can see to the north and to the east is

[31:52] all heavy commercial light industrial. Future land use map. The whole area is mixed use

[31:59] urban. This is from Ecua. This is our wellhead protection zone map. This is within a 20 year

[32:10] travel time contour. And this is our community redevelopment area map. The site in question

[32:19] is part of the Englewood Community Redevelopment Area. This is an aerial of the site.

[32:28] This is the public hearing sign posted on site. This is looking northeast onto the subject

[32:35] property. Looking east onto the subject property. Looking southeast onto the property.

[32:45] And this is looking across Border Street to the west from the front of the property. And.

[32:55] We can go into the findings if you'd like. Yep. So under the approval conditions, the first

[33:03] one being consistency with the comprehensive plan, the proposed amendment to CLE is

[33:12] consistent with the intent and purpose of future land use category. Mixed use urban.

[33:17] Mixed use urban is intended for an intense mix of residential and nonresidential uses, while

[33:22] promoting compatible infill development and the separation of urban and suburban land uses

[33:29] within the category. The proposed request would not change the character of the use

[33:34] on the property parcel, rather, it would bring the preexisting use into compliance with the

[33:40] code. The second one is consistency with the land Development Code. And the

[33:53] findings on that. The proposed request for heavy commercial light industrial is consistent

[34:00] with the intent and purpose of the Land Development Code. Zoning allows for a mix of

[34:05] industrial uses with a broad range of commercial activities. The primary intent of the

[34:10] district is to allow light manufacturing, large scale wholesale and retail uses.

[34:15] Major services and other more intense uses than allowed in the commercial district. All

[34:23] commercial and industrial operations are limited to the confines of buildings to

[34:28] alleviate undesirable effects on other property. To retain adequate area for commercial

[34:33] and industrial activities. Other uses within the district are limited. A memo from

[34:39] Transportation and Traffic Operations staff regarding this request provides the following

[34:43] commentary. Tito has no concerns regarding this proposed rezoning. However, the

[34:49] existing right of way width is substandard, and please note that Tito's review is solely

[34:55] based on the application submittal packet, so the comments above hold no bearing

[35:00] on any Tito comments made during the development review process. As to compatibility

[35:09] with surrounding uses. The uses permitted within Hcli zoning can be compatible with the

[35:16] surrounding area. Due to the nature of the existing land use along Border Street in the

[35:21] adjacent area, the pattern is mixed high density residential and heavy commercial uses to

[35:26] the west of border, and primarily intense commercial and light industrial uses to

[35:31] the north east, across the railroad and south along the street. The proposed change

[35:37] would bring the existing uses into conformity with the LDC. Regarding spot zoning. Hcli

[35:46] zoning is directly adjacent to the north, and the change would not constitute spot zoning

[35:53] appropriate with changed or changing conditions. The commercial building on site was

[35:58] built in the 1970s and predates zoning, as do many of the surrounding buildings, and uses.

[36:03] The original zoning assigned to the area accounted for the high density residential uses, but

[36:10] did not account for the nature of the existing commercial uses, bringing the zoning into

[36:15] compliance with the actual uses would be appropriate, and that concludes staff's findings. All

[36:21] right. Thank you. Any questions for staff from the board? All right. If not, Meredith, if

[36:28] you'll please come forward. Bush 314, South Balan, suite 108. We agree with staff's

[36:38] findings. I'm happy to run through ours, but they are pretty much in line with

[36:43] staff's position, which supports this application. Happy to take any questions

[36:48] related to this. The subsequent applications are along the same street, so some of the

[36:54] questions may be similar. All right. Thank you. Any questions for the applicant. All right.

[37:02] If not then I will entertain a motion for this case. Make a motion to approve case 2020 602

[37:10] second motion a second. Any discussion? All those in favor, please signify by raising your

[37:15] right hand. All opposed? Motion carries. All right. We have. Our next case is 20 Z 2020 603.

[37:27] Request of 1516 1512, 1800, 1800 and a half, 1716 and 1800 border Street from DMU to Cly,

[37:39] as requested by Meredith Bush for T.W. cause, LLC, the owner members. Have there been any ex

[37:48] parte communication on this case? No to all. I'm sorry. No to all. No at all. No to all.

[37:58] No to all. No to all. No to all, no to all. All right. And we'll now take a look at the maps and

[38:05] photographs for this case. Yes, sir. This is rezoning 2020 603. And the maps are going to be

[38:14] very important with this and the following case. Because of the location right next to each

[38:22] other, they are different cases. It may look the same, but they are different cases. This is

[38:28] our location map. Here's our 500 foot radius zoning map showing the zoning as DMU and

[38:35] the zoning to the north and east as heavy commercial light industrial. On the zoning map,

[38:42] you can see there there are portions of recently vacated right of way in this part. This

[38:50] parcel, the zoning map just hasn't caught up to that right of way vacation. It will be

[38:56] filled in with the appropriate zoning soon. Future land use map showing the future land use

[39:05] for the entire area is mixed use urban. The wellhead map. Once again, it is in a 20 year

[39:14] travel time contour. And this one is well is within the Inglewood CRA district. Here's

[39:24] an aerial of the site. This is the public hearing sign. This is looking northeast onto the

[39:34] subject property. Looking southeast onto the property. Another public hearing sign.

[39:44] That's okay. Looking onto the site from Border Street and again looking onto the site

[39:50] from Border Street. It's a large site. This is looking directly across Border Street

[39:55] from the subject property. Now again from a different portion of the property looking across

[40:02] border. And this is then looking north along Border Street. As to the findings for

[40:12] this case. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the proposed amendment to CLE is

[40:22] consistent with the intent and purpose of future land use category. Mixed use urban.

[40:27] Mixed use urban is intended for an intense mix of residential and nonresidential uses, while

[40:33] promoting compatible infill development and the separation of urban and suburban land uses

[40:38] within the category. Aerial photography shows a similar mix of uses in the area, continuing

[40:46] from 1980 to the present day. This request, along with the approved right of way vacation,

[40:52] would serve to bring the zoning and alignment with the existing conditions. Consistency with

[40:59] the Land Development Code, the proposed request for heavy commercial light industrial is

[41:06] consistent with the intent and purpose of the Land Development Code. Zoning allows for a mix

[41:11] of industrial uses with a broad range of commercial activities. Primary intent of the district

[41:17] is to allow light manufacturing, large scale wholesale and retail uses, major services and

[41:23] other more intense uses than allowed in the commercial district. All commercial and

[41:28] industrial operations are limited to the confines of buildings to alleviate

[41:32] undesirable effects on other property. To retain adequate area for commercial and

[41:37] industrial activities. Other uses within the district are limited. A memo from

[41:43] Transportation and Traffic Operations staff regarding this request provides the following

[41:47] commentary. Tito has no concerns regarding this proposed rezoning. However, the

[41:53] existing right of way width is substandard. Please note that Tito's review is solely based

[41:58] on the application submittal packet, so the comments above hold no bearing on any Tito

[42:03] comments made during the development review process. Compatibility with surrounding

[42:09] uses. The uses permitted within CLA h zoning can be compatible with the surrounding area due

[42:16] to the nature of the existing land uses along Border Street in the adjacent area, the

[42:22] pattern is mixed with high density residential and heavy commercial uses to the west of

[42:27] border and primary, primarily intense commercial and light industrial uses to the north

[42:33] and south. Across the railroad to the east is a salvage operation. A more intense use

[42:39] than the proposed change would allow, and requiring conditional use approval.

[42:45] Regarding spot zoning. Zoning is to the east, and the change for climate change to CLE for

[42:53] this parcel would serve to more closely align the zoning districts to the existing land

[42:59] uses on the land. The site is located in an area where an already established

[43:05] nonresidential uses are otherwise consistent with CLE, and the proposed change would

[43:10] constitute infill development of similar intensity. Additionally, the location

[43:15] would not contribute to or promote strip development due the existing surrounding uses.

[43:22] Change conditions. The recently approved right of way vacation for this property is a change

[43:28] condition that will serve to bring the use into compliance, but the rezoning to CLE is

[43:34] required to fully meet the code provisions. And that concludes staff's findings. All right.

[43:39] Any questions for staff from the board? Seeing none. Meredith, if you please come

[43:45] forward your way, we can expedite all of these since they're all approved by the

[43:51] staff. And I'm assuming you probably don't have any issues with any of them. There's

[43:55] nobody speaking on them. I'm happy to to consent to expedited hearings. We adopt

[44:01] fully. Staff's findings would ask that ours be also included in the record. You know, should

[44:08] anything later come of this. Again, there's no objection. It will upgrade the area they are

[44:13] in CRA. CRA is fully supportive. CRA plans themselves identify the street as industrial, so I

[44:20] don't see any future problem. I'm happy to expedite on this. And, you know, carry over those

[44:25] comments to the following case. All right as well. Happy to do that. And we'll just but we'll

[44:32] do it for this case separately in the next case separately just to keep them. So yeah. So

[44:38] as long as they're kept separate okay I'm fine with that. All right. Very good. So

[44:45] we've got the applicant and staff in agreement. No speakers on this case. So happy to

[44:51] entertain a motion. Motion to approve. Approve. Second. All those in favor, please signify

[44:55] by raising your right hand. Motion carries. All right. Our final case for the day is case

[45:02] Z 2020 604. Request zoning 15, 12, 1510 and 1509 Border Street from TMU to Cly. Requested by

[45:12] Meredith Bush for Angela's Auto Parts, Inc. the owner. Have there been any ex parte

[45:19] communications board members on this case? No to all. No to all. No to all. No to all. No to all.

[45:26] Chairman, I need to abstain from this. And I'll read the disclosure for officer's

[45:31] interest. Jonathan Owens hereby disclose on March 3rd, 2026, the measure came or will come

[45:37] before my agency in order to special gain or loss of my business partner or business

[45:42] associate, Angelo Alexakos. The measure before the agency and nature by my conflicting

[45:48] interest in measure as follows Angelo Alexakos and I are business partners in a separate

[45:53] company dated March 3rd, Jonathan Owens. All right. Thank you, Mr. Owens. No to all.

[46:01] No to all. All right. And, Meredith, if you'll come forward and if you are also in

[46:12] agreement with staff's findings on this case as well. Mr. chairman, if, sir, while staff

[46:18] findings are similar, I do want to show you on an aerial map, just for the record, this,

[46:24] while similar in nature, this does also include a property on the west side of Border Street

[46:31] just by way of separation that these are different cases, but staff has no objection to the

[46:38] rezoning on this property. All right. Thank you. Meredith Bush 314, South Bay Lane, suite 108.

[46:46] We would agree with staff's findings. Fully adopt those. For the record, ask that our

[46:51] submittal also be included in the record and agree to an expedited hearing. Again, we've

[46:58] had no objection from the public. These are located within a CRA. And the CRA plan

[47:06] itself identifies this area as needing to be future industrial. I've spoken with Clara Long,

[47:12] has no objection, and just like any case, it'll go through site plan review process. Happy to

[47:18] take questions. All right. Board, any questions? If not, I'll entertain a motion for

[47:27] this case as we have no speakers and applicant and staff are in agreement. Move to

[47:32] approve 2020 604. All right. Do I have a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor,

[47:40] please signify by raising your right hand. All those opposed? Any abstentions? All right.

[47:45] Motion carries with six yeses and one abstention. That is our last case for the day. Staff,

[47:54] is there anything you'd like to say before we part ways for a month? I would just like to say

[48:00] that next month, meeting Tuesday, April 7th. We have nine cases on there. When you

[48:05] do see the agenda, however, six of them are for three of the county. Kind of like we had

[48:12] today, a small scale and a rezoning. So just whenever you see the agenda, know six of

[48:16] them are together. All right. That call can't be coughing right now.

Planning Board-Regular

Transcript