[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.