[CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:09] THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING FOR FEBRUARY 19TH. TO ORDER, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. COMMISSIONER CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER RAFAEL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CARROLL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. PEACE. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. YES, MA'AM. TODAY WE HAVE AN INVOCATION BY PASTOR DANIEL CHERRY, JENKS AVENUE, CHURCH OF CHRIST, AND THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY JOHN DEACONS WITH OUR VETERANS SERVICES. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE STAND. LET'S PRAY. OUR GOD AND OUR CREATOR. THANK YOU FOR A NEW DAY, FOR NEW OPPORTUNITIES TO HONOR YOU WITH OUR LIVES AND WORK, OUR FAMILIES AND OUR WORDS. AMIDST SO MUCH POLARIZED ANGER IN SOCIETY. GRANT US A SPIRIT AND A RESOLVE FOR PEACE AND UNITY. HELP US REMEMBER THAT WE ARE BUT STEWARDS OF WHAT YOU HAVE MADE YOUR PEOPLE YOUR BEAUTIFUL WATERS AND SKIES, ASSETS THAT ARE ULTIMATELY YOURS. AND WE ARE KEENLY AWARE OF OUR OWN MORTALITY, THAT THESE THINGS YOU HAVE MADE WERE HERE BEFORE US AND WILL BE HERE WHEN WE ARE GONE, TO BE STEWARDED BY THOSE WE TRAIN UP FOR THIS TASK. I PRAY FOR THE PEOPLE IN THIS CHAMBER TODAY, THOSE WHO HAVE GRIEVANCES AND THOSE WHO WILL HEAR THEM. MAY THERE BE MUTUAL EFFORT FOR RESOLUTION. BE WITH THESE COMMISSIONERS. WATCH OVER THEIR FAMILIES AND BLESS THEM IN THIS WORK OF SERVICE TO OUR BEAUTIFUL BAY COUNTY. AND I PRAY FOR THE CITIZENS AND THE GUESTS TO OUR COMMUNITY WHO WILL BE AFFECTED BY DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE HERE TODAY. BLESS THEM AS THEY GO ABOUT THEIR WORK, AS THEY BUILD HOMES, FAMILIES AND MARRIAGES, AS THEY GO TO SCHOOL, AS OUR CHILDREN INTERACT WITH THIS COMPLEX AND OFTEN CONTENTIOUS WORLD AND LEARN TO NAVIGATE MEANINGFUL LIFE WITHIN IT. AS PEOPLE CONTEMPLATE THE BIG QUESTIONS IN LIFE, MAY THEY FIND REST IN YOUR ARMS, IN YOUR GRACE AND TRUTH. ENCOURAGE AND PROVIDE FOR THOSE WHO STRUGGLE TO FIND THE RESOURCES TO LIVE COMFORTABLY. THOSE EXPERIENCING PAINFUL LIFE AND FAMILY TRAGEDIES AND THOSE WHO FEEL ALONE AND FORGOTTEN. PROTECT OUR MILITARY PERSONNEL AND FIRST RESPONDERS. EMPOWER OUR TEACHERS, MEDICAL WORKERS. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, THOSE IN SERVICE AND TOURIST INDUSTRIES WORKING BEHIND THE SCENES. FOR ALL THOSE WHO HELP KEEP OUR COMMUNITY RUNNING AND MOVING FORWARD. BE PRESENT IN ALL OF OUR LIVES. GUIDE OUR DECISIONS AND GRANT WISDOM, COMPASSION, UNITY, UNDERSTANDING, AND PEACE IN OUR INTERACTIONS WITH OTHERS. I PRAY ALL THIS IN THE NAME OF YOUR SON, JESUS CHRIST OUR SAVIOR, EXAMPLE, MEDIATOR AND LORD. AMEN. AMEN. PLEASE. ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ALL RIGHT. ANY [APPROVAL OF AGENDA (Additions or Deletions)] ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA? NOTHING FROM STAFF. MR. CHAIRMAN, COULD I GET APPROVAL? AGENDA? A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. MOTION AND MULTIPLE SECONDS. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. COMMISSIONER CARROLL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. PEACE. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. CROSBY. COMMISSIONER RAFFIELD. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. YES, MA'AM. WE HAVE NO PRESENTATIONS TODAY. THE NEXT IS PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS IS RELATED TO ANY ITEM ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA. IF ANYONE HAS ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ADD TO THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SEEING [CONSENT AGENDA] NONE GO ON WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA. MR. MICHAEL. YES, SIR. MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS, GOOD MORNING. ON YOUR CONSENT AGENDA TODAY UNDER THE CLERK'S OFFICE. ITEM ONE REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES. RECOMMENDATION BOARD, ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THE RECORD OF THE REPORTS UNDER COLLABORATIVE SERVICES ITEM TWO, FY 2024, FEDERAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY SECTION 5310 GRANT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD. ADOPT THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AND EXECUTE THE FY 24 FDOT SECTION 5310 GRANT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $77,500 UNDER THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. ITEM THREE LEASE RENEWAL WITH NIMSCHKE PROPERTIES FOR STATE ATTORNEY'S STORAGE FACILITIES. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. THE BOARD APPROVED THE ATTACHED LEASE WITH NIMSCHKE PROPERTIES FOR A STORAGE FACILITY FOR THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE SAME UNDER EMERGENCY SERVICES ITEM FOR FUEL CARD PROGRAM WITH WEX BANK STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, THE BOARD APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ADDENDUM TO THE FUEL CARD SERVICES FOR FUEL CARD CREDIT APPLICATION WITH WEX BANK UNDER PUBLIC WORKS ITEM FIVE. RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THOMAS DRIVE GRANT APPLICATION STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AWARD. AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT TO APPLY FOR A SMALL COUNTY OUTREACH GRANT FOR THE RESURFACING OF THOMAS DRIVE FROM MCKELVEY ROAD TO CAUSEWAY ROAD. ITEM SIX CLEAR LAKE ESTATES RIGHTS OF WAY AND EASEMENTS APPROVAL. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. THE BOARD APPROVED THE CLEAR LAKE ESTATES UNRECORDED SUBDIVISION RIGHTS OF WAY AND EASEMENTS, AND TRANSFER TO BAY COUNTY, AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO RECORD THE CONVEYANCES AND MAINTENANCE BOND WITH THE [00:05:02] CLERK OF COURT. MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT'S YOUR CONSENT AGENDA THIS MORNING, AND STAFF RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. CAN I GET A MOTION? MOTION. SECOND. MOTION. AND SECOND. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL COMMISSIONER. RAFAEL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CARROLL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. PEACE. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. [Utility Services] YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT, NOW, ON TO REGULAR AGENDA. UTILITY SERVICES. MR. BOBBY GIBBS, THIS IS NORTH BAY, SEPTIC TO SEWER, PHASE ONE. LOOKING MIGHTY DAPPER. THANK YOU, SIR. HOW ARE YOU THIS MORNING? DOING WELL. ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING. THIS REQUEST IS FOR THE BOARD TO AWARD CONTRACT. ITV 20 4-58 NORTH BAY SEPTIC TO SEWER CONVERSION. PHASE ONE A IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,148,597 TO ROYAL AMERICAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT AND MAKE ANY NECESSARY CONTRACT MODIFICATION AS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. QUESTIONS FOR MISTER BOBBY. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I'D LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, GREAT JOB AND PUT THIS OUT TO BID. THE COUNTY SAVED OVER $2 MILLION IN THIS PROJECT, AND THIS IS A HUGE DEAL FOR US IN OUR RESERVOIR AND OUR ONE OF OUR GREATEST ASSETS THAT WE HAVE TO ENSURE WE PRESERVE THAT. SO GOOD JOB. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST ONE QUESTION. WHAT'S THE TIME FRAME TO. WE'RE LOOKING AT IT'S GOING TO TAKE 300, I THINK 11 MONTHS TO DO THE CONSTRUCTION. THE HOT TUB IS READY. LIKE I SAID, IT'S OUT AND WE'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD. SO I WOULD SAY IN 30 DAYS. YES, SIR. OKAY. FANTASTIC. THANK YOU SIR. YEP. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR BOBBY? I'LL JUST. IF YOU WANT TO WALK BACK, I'LL JUST ECHO THE KUDOS. I KNOW WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS WITH KEITH AND YOU EVER SINCE I GOT ELECTED AND TRYING TO GET THIS DONE UP IN THAT AREA. AND I REMEMBER THE NUMBERS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE COVID TIME. SO IT WAS THIS WAS FOR ONCE A PLEASANT SURPRISE IN THE OTHER DIRECTION, WITH THE BIDS COMING IN LOWER, AND NOW LOOKS LIKE WE'LL BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY TOUCH MORE PHASES OF THIS DUE TO THE LOWERING COST. SO ONE OTHER THING, JUST TO KIND OF CONFIRM FOR THE CITIZENS, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE GOING SEPTIC TO SEWER, WE'RE RUNNING THESE LINES. IT'S NOT GOING TO REQUIRE ANYBODY TO IMMEDIATELY COME OFF OF THEIR SEPTIC SYSTEMS UP THERE, IS IT? THAT IS CORRECT. IT'S NOT. SO IT'S GOING TO BE AVAILABLE. OKAY. BUT YOU'RE YOU'RE CORRECT WITH THE ADDITIONAL PHASES. WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT PHASE ONE B WHICH WILL ACTUALLY GO UP TO RISOTTO BEACH ROAD NORTH AND CAPTURE SOME OTHERS THERE. WE'VE GOT THE BID DOCUMENT THAT'S READY TO GO OUT TO BID PROBABLY WITHIN THE NEXT 30 DAYS. AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THE GULF CONSORTIUM AND RESTORE PEOPLE NOW TO GET THE FUNDING FOR THAT. SO I THINK IT'S THERE. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF US GETTING TO THE BID DOCUMENTS READY AND GET THEM OUT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. YOU BET. LAST THING. ARE WE DOING ANYTHING? MR. GIBBS AND I HAD A RESIDENT ASK ME, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY GOING TO SEND ANYTHING OUT TO US? ARE WE GOING TO SEND ANY NOTIFICATION OUT WHEN WE WILL START THESE PROJECTS? SO WE CAN LET THE PEOPLE KNOW IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WHEN WE'RE DOING IT? IT'S VERY EASILY DONE. IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'VE SCHEDULED YET, BUT WE CAN WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE DO DO THAT. I APPRECIATE YOU. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENT OR DISCUSSION AMONG THE BOARD? IF NOT, COULD I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE? SECOND. MOTION. AND SECOND, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. COMMISSIONER CARROLL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. PEACE. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER REDFIELD. [Community Development] YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT, NOW WE'RE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THIS IS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, MR. WAYNE PORTER, THIS IS POP 2024 0297, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. 3414 A STREET. THIS IS QUASI JUDICIAL, SO. FOLKS WHO ARE GOING TO BE SPEAKING ON THIS COULD PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE EVIDENCE YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. I DO. ARE THERE ANY? THING TO REPORT? I HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M GOING TO RECUSE. MY FIRM HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT ON THIS PROJECT, SO. OKAY. I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE LANDOWNER. I HAVE SPOKEN TO MISS KIM GILMORE, AND I HAVE SPOKEN TO MR. CHRIS CLUBS ABOUT THIS PARCEL. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCLOSURES FOR YOU, COMMISSIONER CROSBY? NONE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY. SPOKEN WITH NO ONE. WAYNE, IF YOU WOULD. I'M SO SORRY. EXCUSE ME. LET ME. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE STEWART FAMILY, I HAVE. YES. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS IS A PROPOSED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 61 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED AT 3414 A STREET IN THE UNINCORPORATED PANAMA CITY AREA. [00:10:02] THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE AREA AND DENSITY REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. THE PROPOSED PUD APPLICATION IS REQUESTING THAT THE FRONT BUILDING SETBACKS BE A MINIMUM OF 20FT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, AND THE SIDE BUILDING SETBACKS BE A MINIMUM OF FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICATION IS ALSO REQUESTING THAT THE MINIMUM ROAD FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS BE A MINIMUM OF 35FT FOR REGULAR SHAPED LOT AND 20FT FOR IRREGULAR SHAPED LOTS AND LOTS LOCATED ALONG CUL DE SAC. THE PROPERTY HAS AN R5, A MULTI-FAMILY ZONING. THE REQUESTED BULK REGULATIONS ARE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE R-1 SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, WHICH THE DEVELOPMENT IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THAT R-1 ZONING AS WELL. THE APPLICATION PROPOSES TO REDUCE THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY FROM 15 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE TO FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THE APPLICATION ALSO PROPOSED PROPOSES TO CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT AWAY FROM THE ENVIRONMENTALLY PROTECTED WETLAND AREA, AS WELL AS THE AREA MAPPED WITHIN THE FEMA FLOOD ZONES. MASTER SITE PLAN AND LOCATION MAP HAVE BEEN PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION. THE ACCESS WILL BE LIMITED TO A STREET. A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED ON OCTOBER 18TH, 2024 AND THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE BOARD CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE PROPOSED PLAN. UNIT DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY PUBLIC COMMENT PUBLIC FEEDBACK ON THIS ISSUE. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR WAYNE? JUST TO CONFIRM ON THIS, WAYNE. THE DENSITY AND EVERYTHING, THE WAY THEY'RE WORKING THIS, THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT MAXIMIZING WHAT THEY COULD DO IN THIS PROPERTY. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO QUESTIONS FOR WAYNE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OWNER'S APPLICANT. CARE TO COME FORWARD? MR. GREER, ONE OF THESE DAYS, YOU ARE GOING TO WEAR A TIE HERE, RIGHT? YES, DOUG. I WILL WEAR ONE FOR YOU. GOOD MORNING. I'M RAY GREER. MY ADDRESS IS 2910 KERRY FOREST PARKWAY, TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA. I AM THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, AND I'M NOT STANDING HERE IN FRONT OF YOU ASKING FOR MORE. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A 24 ACRE PARCEL THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR LESS. AS WAYNE HAD MENTIONED, YOU COULD EASILY DO 300 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX ON THIS PROPERTY. THIS PROPERTY IS IN A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD AREA. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. WHAT WE'VE DONE IS PREPARED A HUD TO ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISH, TO GET FROM THE R5 ZONING STANDARDS DOWN TO THE R1 ZONING STANDARDS. THE PUD WILL ALLOW FOR THE 61 LOT SUBDIVISION TO OCCUR. IT WILL ALLOW FOR A PORTION OF THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY TO REMAIN NATURAL. IT WILL PROVIDE FOR A WALKING TRAIL, AND THE SIDEWALKS BE LINKED TO THAT WALKING TRAIL THAT WILL OCCUR AROUND THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY. SO THERE IS ACTUALLY BENEFITS TO THE PUD OTHER THAN JUST CHANGING THE ZONING. I MEAN, WE'RE ACTUALLY DEVELOPING A VERY NICE SUBDIVISION IN THIS AREA. I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE. I DO HAVE ONE FOR YOU REAL QUICK. AND I KNOW THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY YOUR ITEM, BUT SEEING THAT YOU DO WORK WITH OTHERS AND EVERYTHING AND KIND OF THE GROWTH THAT'S COMING ALONG IN THE COMMUNITY, THIS IS MAINLY A STREET AND WITH SOME OF THE OTHER GROWTH AND EVERYTHING GOING FROM THE STANDPOINT OF INGRESS, EGRESS, YOU GOT THE RAILROAD TRACKS UP THERE AND EVERYTHING. HOW DO YOU SEE THIS AREA DEVELOPING AND KIND OF NEEDING A NETWORK OF ADDITIONAL ROADS AND EVERYTHING FOR MULTIPLE WAYS OF IN AND OUT FOR, FOR FIRE SAFETY, BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE WHEN WE HAD OUR FIRE A WHILE BACK, THIS IS KIND OF THE AREA WHERE THAT BEGAN. AND THIS IS A STEP TO BY REDUCING THE ACTUAL DENSITY THAT COULD BE BUILT THERE. I MEAN, IT COULD ALLOW FOR THREE TIMES MORE THAN WHAT'S ACTUALLY GOING IN. YEAH. AND IT IS A PROBLEM. I MEAN, JUST GETTING NEW CROSSINGS ACROSS THE RAILROAD IS A MAJOR ISSUE. JUST TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO GAIN THE ACTUAL CROSSING. YEAH. SO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE OUR EXISTING STREETS, BETTER CONNECT EXISTING STREETS AND UTILIZE EXISTING CROSSINGS IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR FUTURE AND FOR FUTURE PLANNING TO FOR THIS AREA. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS MATTER? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE. CONVERSATION AMONG THE FOUR OF US. ANYONE? DON'T HAVE TO. I MEAN, IF YOU WANT, YOU CAN ALSO JUST MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, OR I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I THINK IT'S A GREAT ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY. I THINK IT'D BE GREAT. ALL RIGHT. SECOND, GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL COMMISSIONER RAYFIELD. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. PEACE. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN MOORE. YES, [00:15:04] MA'AM. AND COMMISSIONER CARROLL ABSTAINS. NEXT WE HAVE WAYNE. ONCE AGAIN, WE HAVE PLD, PA 2024 0275 AND PL Z A 2024 0245. SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR 2716 CANAL AVENUE. AGAIN, THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL COUNTY ATTORNEY, SIR. ANYBODY ELSE IS PLANNING ON SPEAKING ON THIS MATTER? PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE EVIDENCE YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO ARE THERE ANY DISCLOSURES TO REPORT ON THIS ONE? I HAVE NO DISCLOSURE TO REPORT. I'VE SPOKEN WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND STAFF, SPOKEN WITH STAFF FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY, SPOKEN TO STAFF, PROPERTY OWNER AND A CONCERNED CITIZEN. I'M SORRY. AND MR. CLUBS, I SPOKEN TO STAFF. THE APPLICANT VISITED THE PROPERTY AND SAID ALL RIGHT THANK YOU. WAYNE IF YOU WOULD. THANK YOU. CHAIR, BEFORE I GET STARTED, I DID WANT TO POINT OUT AN ERROR ON THE STAFF OR THE MEMO. AT ONE POINT IN THE BODY, IT REFERENCES THE PROPERTY. BEING IN THE SOUTHPORT AREA, THAT'S OBVIOUSLY A MISTAKE. THIS IS IN THE UNINCORPORATED PANAMA CITY AREA, FORMER TOWN OF CEDAR GROVE. ON DECEMBER 17TH, 2024, THE BAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REQUEST TO CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY HALF AN ACRE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, AND TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY TO C1 NEIGHBORHOOD. COMMERCIAL SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2716 CANAL AVENUE IN THE UNINCORPORATED PANAMA CITY AREA. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND AFTER CONSIDERING PUBLIC COMMENT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO FIND THE PROPOSED LAND USE AND ZONE CHANGE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON CANAL AVENUE, WHERE THERE ARE COMMERCIAL USES AND ZONINGS EXISTING THAT EXTEND NORTH FROM HIGHWAY 230 FROM THE 231 CORRIDOR. THE PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE EAST BY PROPERTY THAT HAS A GENERAL COMMERCIAL LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION. THIS PROPERTY TO THE EAST, AS WELL AS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH, IS ALSO CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE APPLICANT. STAFF AGREES WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND RECOMMENDS THE BOARD CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, APPROVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND ADOPT THE ATTACHED ORDINANCES. WE DID RECEIVE SOME PUBLIC COMMENT IN WRITING BY EMAIL PRIOR TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THOSE WERE PROVIDED TO YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THE COMMENTS WERE GENERALLY, IN GENERAL, WERE OBJECTING TO INCREASED TRAFFIC AND NOISE IN THE AREA AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. MR. CHAIRMAN. YES, SIR. WAYNE, ALSO IN THE STAFF REPORT, IT TALKS ABOUT SAYS THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION IN THE ACCOMPANYING C-3 ZONING DISTRICT. ARE WE REQUESTING C REQUESTING C1? OKAY. THE REQUEST IS FOR C1 AS WELL. YES. OKAY. JUST MAKING SURE THAT IT IS C1. THIS IS GETTING INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD. ANY CONCERNS FROM STAFF? JUST I AND I'VE DRIVEN THE WHOLE AREA. I MEAN, THERE'S DEFINITELY COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IN THERE. THERE'S APPEARS TO BE SOME ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT ACCESS EASEMENT THAT IS PROBABLY A PLUMBING BUSINESS OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. I THINK IT SAYS THE TWO SEVEN, TWO SIX ON THE MAP THERE. SO THERE IS DEFINITELY COMMERCIAL IN THE AREA, BUT TYPICALLY IT STARTS AT THE BOTTOM AND SLOWLY WORKS ITS WAY UP. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE JUMPING A LITTLE BIT, JUST MAKING SURE THAT STAFF DOESN'T HAVE AN ISSUE, BECAUSE ALSO COMMERCIAL IS SUPPOSED TO BE ON COLLECTORS AND ARTERIAL. WELL YOU HAVE YOU HAVE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING LEGAL, EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USES. THIS PROPERTY HERE WHICH HAS A RESIDENTIAL ZONING, IS ACTUALLY A PLUMBING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, HAS BEEN THERE, I THINK, SINCE AT LEAST 2005. THERE ARE OTHER EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USES IN THIS AREA. THE APPLICANT FIRST CAME TO US AND INQUIRING ABOUT C3 ZONING TO CHANGE THIS TO C3. I ADVISED THEM AT THAT TIME THAT STAFF WOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT FOR APPROVAL. THEY LATER CAME BACK WITH THE C1 PROPOSAL AND AFTER LOOKING AT THE AREA AND ALSO WITH CONSIDERATION THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ANY ACCESS TO THE C3 PROPERTY HERE, AND THEY NEED SOME COMMERCIAL ACCESS TO THE NORTH SIDE. I'M SORRY, IT APPEARS TO BE AN ACCESS EASEMENT ON THE NORTH SIDE. THEY COULD NOT. ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHO WAS THE OWNER OF THAT ACCESS TO THAT EASEMENT TO GAIN LEGAL ACCESS. SO AND THE CITY REFERS TO IT. OKAY. WELL, WE'LL ASK THE APPLICANT. SO STAFF STAFF ADVISED THAT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR C1. OKAY. AND NO ISSUE WITH CANAL NOT BEING COLLECTOR ROAD OR. WE'VE HAD OTHER INSTANCES WHERE WE'VE HAD COMMERCIAL ZONING CURRENTLY HAS BEEN USED LIKE AS A LAY DOWN YARD. EVEN WITH THE ZONING [00:20:06] CHANGE, THAT WOULD NOT BE AN ALLOWABLE USE, RIGHT? DON'T YOU HAVE TO HAVE C3 FOR LAY DOWN? CORRECT. THE THEY THE PROPOSED USE GIVEN TO STAFF WOULD BE TO USE IT AS COMMERCIAL ACCESS, AND PERHAPS SET A OFFICE BUILDING ON IT, BUT IT WAS UNDERSTOOD TO THEM, AND STAFF ADVISED THEM THAT THE LAY DOWN PORTION OF THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE TO BE ISOLATED TO THE C3, A PARCEL. GOTCHA. OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. MR. CHAIR. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT THAT WAS MY QUESTION ALSO ABOUT THE C1. IF THEY'RE IF THEY ARE IN UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO USE IT FOR LAY DOWN YARD AND DO WHEN WE CHANGE TO C1 IS AN ALLOW ONE OF THE ALLOWABLE USES. JUST A ROAD TO A TO ANOTHER PROPERTY. OR DO THEY HAVE NO. THERE ARE OTHER USES THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED UNDER C1 ZONING. SURE. SO WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH ALL THOSE USES BECAUSE IT JUST KIND OF APPEARED LIKE THEY WERE ALREADY USING IT AS C3. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHY THEY WANTED TO USE IT, YOU KNOW, CHANGE IT TO C1, BUT THEY KNOW THEY CAN'T USE IT AS A LAY DOWN YARD FOR C1. ANY STORAGE HAS TO GO IN C3. IT ALSO HAS TO HAVE A 75 FOOT. RIGHT OF WAY TO GET IN THERE. AM I RIGHT ON THAT? I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IF IT'S GOING TO BE A PERMANENT EASEMENT TO THIS PROPERTY. DOES DO THEY HAVE TO JOIN? IN OTHER WORDS, DO THEY HAVE TO STAY TOGETHER BECAUSE DON'T THEY HAVE TO HAVE A 75 FOOT EASEMENT TO GET TO A C3? I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT REQUIREMENT. OKAY. I WAS LOOKING AT THEIR ROAD FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN ZONINGS. THAT'S JUST ON THE LOT SIZE. THAT'S JUST ON LOT SIZES THOUGH. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT WAS ALL I HAD, ROBERT. OF COURSE. ALREADY COVERED IT. WELL, I HAD A QUESTION. SO THE LITTLE DIRT ROAD THAT I GUESS IS JUST ON THE NORTH SIDE THERE IS THAT'S THAT'S THEIR ONLY ACCESS TO THE C3, RIGHT? I GUESS IT'S NOT REALLY A ROAD. IT'S A DRIVEWAY, IF YOU WILL. THAT ALSO ALSO LEADS TO THE PLUMBING PLACE THAT YOU REFERRED TO. AND SO IS THAT THE ONLY THAT'S THE ONLY ACCESS THEY HAVE CORRECTLY RIGHT NOW TO THE C3 LOT. IT'S THE ONLY VISUAL ACCESS THEY HAVE. CORRECT. SO THE TRUCKS WILL CONTINUE COMING EVEN IF TO THAT ACCESS THAT LOT, EVEN IF WE DON'T MAKE THIS CHANGE TO THE OTHER PARCEL. IS THAT CORRECT? SO THE USE OF THE C3 PROPERTY AS A LAY DOWN YARD DOES REQUIRE A DEVELOPMENT ORDER, WHICH THEY HAVE NOT SUBMITTED FOR AT THIS TIME. PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER WOULD BE FOR THEM TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE LEGAL ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY. SO IF THEY IF THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO GET ACCESS FROM THE NORTH, FROM WHOEVER OWNS THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY, THEN I GUESS THE ONLY OTHER OPTION WOULD BE TO GO THROUGH THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF TODAY'S DON'T CHANGE. SO I HAVE ONE MORE THING, SIR. JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE. SO THEY ONE OWNER OWNS BOTH PROPERTIES. NOW AT A LATER DATE WITH THE OWNER, BE ABLE TO SELL THAT ENTIRE PROPERTY AGAIN NOT LEAVING THAT EASEMENT TO THAT C3. OR WOULD THEY HAVE TO LEAVE THAT? HOW WOULD THAT WORK? THE OWNER COULD SELL EITHER ONE OF THESE PROPERTIES TO SOMEONE ELSE. AND IF THEY WANTED TO HAVE CONTINUED ACCESS, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME SORT OF ESTABLISHED EASEMENT AGREEMENT, I WOULD THINK. WELL, THE I JUST DON'T I DON'T GOTCHA. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WAYNE. THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT'S REP CARE TO COME FORWARD? AND YOU HAVE. YOU DIDN'T STAND TO BE SWORN, CHRIS. YES, I MISSED THAT, I'M SORRY. YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM. THE EVIDENCE YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. I DO. CHRIS. CLUBS, 1103 FORTUNE AVENUE, PANAMA CITY. I AM THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS PROJECT. AND OUR UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THOUGH WE DO HAVE ACCESS TO THE EASEMENT ROAD TO THE NORTH, WE COULD NOT ACCESS A. WE WENT TO FILE A DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND WE COULD NOT GET ACCESS THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL PIECE FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, SINCE WE DO NOT OWN THAT PIECE, WE ONLY HAD ONE OPTION AND THAT WAS TO CHANGE THE PIECE WE DO OWN WITH WITH PUBLIC ACCESS TO A ROAD TO COMMERCIAL IN ORDER TO GET OUR DEVELOPMENT ORDER. SO I DID TRY AND TRACK DOWN THE WOMAN WHO OWNS THAT. IT APPEARS SHE HAS DECEASED AND THE WHOLE PROCESS IS VERY CONFUSING. SO TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHO ACTUALLY OWNS IT [00:25:03] AND WHETHER THEY KNOW THEY OWN IT AND THEN INSPIRE THEM TO SUBMIT FOR A ZONE CHANGE WAS NOT THE OPTIMAL COURSE OF ACTION HERE. WE ARE AWARE THAT THE CURRENT TENANT IS USING IT AS A LAY DOWN YARD, AND WE ARE IN COMMUNICATIONS WITH THEM TO MOVE EVERYTHING OFF OF THIS PIECE. WE WILL ALSO BE FILING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER, AND EVERYTHING SHOULD BE EXACTLY AS WE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT. IT'S THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT. SO WE WILL CREATE AN ACCESS ROAD THROUGH THEIR. THEY MIGHT PUT A LITTLE OFFICE BUILDING ON THERE AT SOME POINT IN TIME. THAT'S KIND OF YET TO BE DETERMINED. BUT WE DO INTEND TO COMPLY AS THE CODE IS WRITTEN. THIS IS KIND OF A JOINT QUESTION. NOT SURE WHO'S GOING TO GET TO ANSWER IT, BUT IF THIS PIECE IS CHANGED AND THEY PUT THE ACCESS ROAD THROUGH HERE TO GET THE OTHER PIECE, CAN THEY MERELY JUST DO AN ACCESS AGREEMENT FOR THEM TO COME THROUGH THAT PIECE WITHOUT HAVING TO MERGE THE TWO PARCELS TOGETHER? BECAUSE IF WE DO ONE DEVELOPMENT ORDER, WE TYPICALLY MAKE THEM MERGE THE PARCELS. BUT CAN THEY JUST DO AN ACCESS? AND I ASSUME THAT'S WHAT YOU'D WANT TO DO IS JUST DO AN ACCESS AGREEMENT, JUST DO LIKE AN EASEMENT TO GET TO THE BACK. WE HAVEN'T CROSSED THAT BRIDGE YET, TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST WITH YOU. SO IF THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU'D LIKE THE PARCELS COMBINED, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT. BUT AT THE LEAST WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT IN ORDER TO MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER. I PERSONALLY DON'T CARE, BUT JUST IT GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY TO SELL TWO PIECES, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVE TO MERGE THEM IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT THAT WAY. OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP ANY RIGHTS. WE DON'T HAVE TO GIVE UP. HOWEVER, IT IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE A SOME FORM OF AGREEMENT IN PLACE OR THE BACK PARCEL WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A NEW DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND FIND THEIR OWN ACCESS AT A FUTURE DATE IF THAT BECAME AN ISSUE. AND IF THE PIECE TO THE NORTH AND I ASSUME THAT'S A CORRECT STATEMENT THAT THAT CANNOT BE USED FOR ACCESS TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE AN EASEMENT TO THE PROPERTY. I'VE NOT COME ACROSS THIS BEFORE. YEAH. IF THEY HAVE A LEGAL EASEMENT, OUR ACCESS TO USE THAT STRIP TO THE NORTH, THEN WE THEN THAT WOULD SUFFICE FOR HAVING EASEMENT TO THE C3 PROPERTY. OKAY. I'M ONLY BASING MY CLAIM THAT THEY DO NOT, BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S INFORMATION. SO AN EASEMENT IS AN EASEMENT IS AN EASEMENT. CORRECT. NOT A RESIDENTIAL OR A COMMERCIAL. IT'S AN EASEMENT FOR ACCESS. NOW, THERE MAY BE ISSUES. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS OR DRIVEWAY CONNECTION. THERE MAY BE ISSUES WITH A, YOU KNOW, COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY ON A PRIVATE EASEMENT SUCH AS THIS. THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR ENGINEERING DIVISION, BUT ASSUMING THEY CAN WORK THAT OUT, THEN THEY AND THEY HAVE LEGAL ACCESS IF HIS RESIDENTIAL OR NOT, BECAUSE IT IS AN â– EASEMENT FOR BASICALLY A LANDLOCKED PIECE. CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. ANYONE ELSE? YES. ARE YOU GUYS THINKING ABOUT PUTTING SOME KIND OF FENCE UP OR SOMETHING ON THAT CORNER? I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. IS THE ENCROACHING INTO THEIR RESIDENTIAL. AND WE AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CODE WOULD REQUIRE A FENCE TO BE INSTALLED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER PROCESS, AND ALL OF THAT WOULD BE ENGINEERED AND DONE TO CODE. OKAY. I WOULDN'T EXPECT ANYTHING. BUT THE BEST OUT OF THE FOLKS THAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH ARE GOOD PEOPLE, SIR. AND THAT WOULD ONLY BE ON THE SOUTH SIDE. CORRECT. WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE A FENCE ALONG AN EASEMENT, WOULD WE? ON THE NORTH SIDE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL, THE BUFFERING IS WHAT I'M REFERRING TO. THE LAYDOWN YARD WOULD HAVE TO BE SCREENED FROM PUBLIC VIEW. SURE. SO YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE THAT FENCE REQUIREMENT. AND THEN WHEN ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONING, THERE'S A 25 FOOT BUFFER AS WELL, EVEN TO THE EASEMENT THAT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE. I THINK THE EASEMENT HAVING THAT RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION YOU SEE ON THE MAP MAY BE A MAP ERROR. IT PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE A DESIGNATION AT ALL. SO WE WOULD LOOK AT THAT DURING THE DUE PROCESS AND MAKE THAT TRANSITION WORK. THE EASEMENT WORK AS AS BUFFER. SO HE WOULD CORRECT YOU KNOW, YOU ONLY WANT TO DO THE BUFFER ON THE SOUTH SIDE. IT IS A 30 FOOT EASEMENT. SO YES. PERFECT. THAT'S A LOT OF PROPERTY TO GIVE UP WHEN IT'S NEXT TO AN ACCESS EASEMENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I THINK I'M DONE. ALL RIGHT. WHAT ELSE? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS? OKAY. SEEING NONE. DISCUSSION AMONG THE BOARD. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA. WE'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK IN THE CEDAR [00:30:09] GROVE AREA, AND A LOT OF THIS IS LEFT OVER FROM CEDAR GROVE. THERE WAS A LOT OF WOULD CALL IT SPOT ZONING, KIND OF SPOT USES THAT WERE JUST ALLOWED. AND SO THIS IS PART OF THISERE ARE WAREHOUSES NEXT TO A MOBILE HOME NEXT TO A HOUSE, AND IT'S KIND OF SPORADIC IN THIS AREA. AND IT IS GENERALLY GROWN TOWARDS THIS. AND HOPEFULLY THEY CAN USE THE ACCESS EASEMENT TO GET TO THE BACK PIECE. AND THEY CAN JUST DEVELOP THE OTHER PIECE WITHOUT PUTTING A ROADWAY THROUGH IT IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. THAT WOULD BE GREAT FOR THEM. OUT. MAKE MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. COMMISSIONER. KAREL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. RAFAEL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER PIECE. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. NEXT. WE'VE GOT. A 2024 0148 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ADOPTION. GET THE GOOD STUFF NOW. YEAH. 188 PAGES OF SOME INSOMNIA. WAYNE. ONCE AGAIN, INTO THE BREACH. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. ON AUGUST 20TH, 2024, THE BAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REQUESTS FROM FROM STAFF TO REVISE THE BAY COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO FIND THE RECOMMENDED PLAN AMENDMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. ON SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2024, THE BOARD VOTED TO TRANSMIT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR REVIEW. THE FTC REQUIRES THAT COMMUNITIES EVALUATE THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS EVERY SEVEN YEARS. STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND RECOMMENDS THE REVISIONS PROVIDED IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE ENCLOSED. THE LAST EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT, OR ER, WAS FINALIZED IN 2016. FOR THIS ER, BAY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION HAS COORDINATED WITH BAY COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION, UTILITY SERVICES DIVISION AND THE HOUSING DIVISION TO PROVIDE AMENDMENTS TO REVISE OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES AND TO ADDRESS OUTDATED OR REDUNDANT LANGUAGE AND UPDATE REFERENCES TO STATE LAWS AND CODES. HIGHLIGHTS OF THESE REVISIONS INCLUDE. AMENDING THE SUBCHAPTERS IN CHAPTER FIVE TO ADDRESS UPDATES IN INFRASTRUCTURE REGULATIONS, UPDATING THE LOCAL AND ARTERIAL ROAD INVENTORY, UPDATES TO THE WATER SUPPLY PLAN. UPDATES TO CHAPTER EIGHT TO INCLUDE MORE DETAILED AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES, AND UPDATES TO THE COUNTY'S POPULATION PROJECTIONS. ADDITIONALLY, THE STATE RECOMMENDED THE COUNTY ADOPT SOME LANGUAGE TO MEET NEW STATE REGULATIONS ADDRESSING FLOOD THREATS AND SEA LEVEL RISE, AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR PROVISIONS OF PUBLIC WASTEWATER COLLECTION IN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE BOARD CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. WE DID NOT HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM THROUGH THE PROCESS. MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD. YES, SIR. I WAS EXCITED TO GET THIS A GREAT TIME READING IT. WAYNE, I SENT YOU AND STAFF MY LIST OF COMMENTS. I'VE SPOKEN WITH MR. CURLING ABOUT SEVERAL OF THESE. THE ONLY REAL ONES THAT I SAW AN ISSUE WOULD BE ON PAGE 311 FOR YOUR PORTION. THERE'S MORE FOR UTILITIES. BOBBY GETS TO COME UP AND EXPLAIN SOME OF THOSE WE HAVE. AND I KNOW THAT THE COMP PLAN SUPERSEDES THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO WE PUT OUT WHAT OUR RESTRICTIONS ARE, AND THEN WE CAN MAKE THEM STRICTER AS WE ADOPT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. BUT WE HAVE A ZONING CATEGORY OF C FOUR IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT ALLOWS AN 80% ISR VERSUS THE LAND. THE COMP PLAN ONLY ALLOWS 75%. SO I GUESS WE GOT TWO OPTIONS. WE CAN INCREASE OUR COMP PLAN TO 80%, OR WE CAN DECREASE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. IT'S PROBABLY EASIER TO DECREASE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BUT WHAT'S OUT THERE? I JUST DON'T KNOW. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE SOMEONE, YOU KNOW, NOT NONCONFORMING USE IF WE DON'T HAVE TO. AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION HAD TO DO, WE'VE GOT SOME HEIGHTS THAT ALLOW 50FT, BUT LAND DEVELOPMENT 35. IT'S OKAY. IT'S SUPERSEDES. IT ALLOWS FLEXIBILITY. BUT THE OTHER ONE IS LIKE PLAZA COMMERCIAL. WE DON'T HAVE A CATEGORY FOR PLAZA COMMERCIAL. I GUESS WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ONE. WOULD IT JUST FALL INTO ONE OF THE GENERALS? RIGHT. PAUL PLAZA COMMERCIAL ZONING WOULD REQUIRE A GENERAL COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION. OKAY. THAT WOULD FALL. GENERAL PLAZA COMMERCIAL JUST PROVIDES A SORT OF MID LEVEL INTENSITY OF [00:35:04] COMMERCIAL USES BETWEEN THE C1 AND THE C3 ZONING DESIGNATIONS. OKAY, WHAT ABOUT THE C4 AND THE 80% ISR THAT'S EXCEEDING WHAT OUR COMP PLAN ALLOWS? I AGREE THAT THAT WHAT'S IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SHOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. FOR SURE. I'M NOT I WASN'T A PART OF WHEN THAT BECAME AN EFFECT. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO STAFF IS IN THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW OF JUST LIKE WE DID WITH THE COMP PLAN, GOING THROUGH OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND CLEANING, CLEANING IT UP, AS IT WERE. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE, I, I INTEND TO ADDRESS IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO CHANGE THAT TO 95% MAX. SURE, THERE WAS NOTHING ELSE ON YOUR PART. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF DATES THAT WERE IN THERE. PAGE 325. IT REFERRED TO CONSISTENT INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY WITHIN TWO YEARS BY JANUARY 2012. I ASSUME WE'VE DONE THAT. WE CAN TAKE THAT LANGUAGE OUT. I SEE THAT ONE. ON WHICH PAGE? PAGE 325. UNDER INFRASTRUCTURE WE'RE IT'S WITHIN TWO YEARS. BY JANUARY 12TH. YES. WE CAN UPDATE THAT. THAT HAS BEEN A THAT HAS BEEN PLAN HAS BEEN ADOPTED. YES. CORRECT. OKAY. AND WE CAN WE CAN UPDATE THAT BEFORE WE TRANSMIT. I THINK THE REST OF MINE ALL FALL INTO THE WATER CATEGORY. SO I'LL HAVE TO ASK BOBBY A COUPLE QUESTIONS WHENEVER IT COMES. OTHERS MAY HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS. I THINK THE ENGINEER'S STILL GOT THE FLOOR. YEAH. I THINK I CAN TRY AND ANSWER YOUR BEAUTIFUL UTILITY QUESTIONS. OKAY. IAN CURLING, I'M THE DIRECTOR FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. YES, SIR. SO, SECTION 3.5, IN THE WATER SECTION, THERE ARE SOME POPULATION DATES OR POPULATION NUMBERS. AND THEN THERE ARE SOME PROJECTIONS THAT ARE. I WISH WE HAD THEM UP ON THE BOARD. YOU'VE GOT COPIES AND I'VE PROVIDED ALL Y'ALL COPIES OF THIS. I THINK IT'S THE SECOND PAGE IN YOUR BOOKLET. SO IT REFERS TO YOUR SCRATCHING OUT 2025 PUTTING 2035. BUT THE TABLES HAVE 2035 AND ALL THE DATA SCRATCHED OUT. AND SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS DON'T SEEM TO MATCH WITH THE PROJECTIONS. YEAH. SO I SPOKE WITH UTILITIES JUST TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT WHERE THOSE NUMBERS CAME FROM. THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO COME FROM THE NORTHWEST. WATER MANAGEMENT SUPPLIES WATER SUPPLY PLAN. SO WE HAVE A COPY OF THAT THAT'S BEEN APPROVED AND ADOPTED. WE'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE SURE THOSE NUMBERS MATCH. AND THAT LAST LINE OF DATA WHERE EVERYTHING STRUCK OUT WILL OBVIOUSLY FILL THAT IN AND THEN MATCH THE PARAGRAPH TO MATCH THOSE NUMBERS. SO THIS TABLE WILL GET UPDATED 100%. OKAY. AND THEN BELOW THAT WE TALK ABOUT 9500 CUSTOMERS. IS THAT OUR CURRENT. THAT IS CORRECT. AS OF AUGUST OF LAST YEAR OKAY. AND WE TALK ABOUT ALL THE CITIES THAT ARE REGULATED WHERE DOES TEND TO FALL INTO ALL THIS. SO BOBBY MAY ANSWER THAT QUESTION BETTER THAN I CAN, BUT WHAT HE'S TOLD ME IS THAT TYNDALL DOES NOT FALL UNDER. IF YOU READ THE SECOND LINE OF THAT SENTENCE, THE FDEP LICENSE AND REGULATED CONSECUTIVE SYSTEMS, TYNDALL DOESN'T FALL UNDER THAT CATEGORY, WHICH IS WHY THEY'RE NOT LISTED. OKAY. SO IF THEY'RE DOING EXPANSIONS OUT THERE, WHO SIGNS OFF ON THEIR APPLICATIONS? I'LL LET BOBBY ANSWER THAT. I DO NOT KNOW. JUST THEY HAVE A WATER SYSTEM OUT THERE. AND I KNOW THE GULF COAST CO-OP USED TO RUN IT, AND I ASSUME THEY STILL DO. YOU'RE CORRECT. THEY DO. STILL THEY DO STILL RUN THAT. WE DO NOT SEE ANY APPLICATIONS THAT COME FROM THAT ORGANIZATION TO US. SO THEY'RE NOT LISTED HERE, AS IAN MENTIONED, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT A FDEP REGULATED SYSTEM. WE JUST HAVE A SEPARATE MASTER METER FOR THEM. WE DO HAVE A SEPARATE MASTER METER FOR THEM. I CAN GET THE FLOWS AND INSTALL THAT INFORMATION IN HERE, BUT WE JUST HAVE TO PUT AN ASTERISK BY IT. BUT YES. THANK YOU. SO. WE HAD AN ERROR. WE LISTED SIX INCORPORATED CITIES. WE'LL FIX THAT. WE'VE GOT SEVEN. USED TO HAVE EIGHT. SO YOU USED TO HAVE EIGHT. ALMOST HAD NINE. OKAY I THINK THAT TAKES CARE OF ALL MY CONCERNS. AND ALL THIS IS GOING TO GET UPDATED PRIOR TO SENDING IT BACK FOR ADOPTION 100%. OKAY. YEP. WE GOT A COPY OF THAT WHEN IT'S YES, I LOVE NIGHTTIME READING. WE WILL PROBABLY ONCE IT GETS UPDATED, WE'LL WAIT FOR THEM TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT EVERYTHING [00:40:05] WE'VE SENT THEM IS KOSHER. THEY DID HAVE SOME COMMENTS WHEN THEY SENT IT BACK TO US THE FIRST TIME, WHICH IS WHEN YOU GUYS HEARD IT BACK IN, I THINK, OCTOBER. WE SENT IT UP TO THEM. THEY SENT US SOME COMMENTS. WE'VE MADE THOSE CHANGES. ASSUMING THEY ACCEPT IT, THEN WE'LL REPRINT THEM AND WE WILL GET A NEW COPY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, SIR. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ELSE? UNDERSTAND WHAT ROBERT JUST ASKED? MY APOLOGIES. ACCEPTED. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT DISCUSSION AMONGST OURSELVES OR MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND. ALL RIGHT. GOT A MOTION? A SECOND, IF YOU WOULD. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. COMMISSIONER CARROLL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. RAFAEL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER PIECE. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD MAKE ONE MORE REQUEST. YES, SIR. RESPECTFULLY, THE STATE REQUIRES A TEN DAY CALENDAR RESPONSE TO THIS ADOPTION. I HAVE TO SEND THE STATE THIS INFORMATION WITHIN TEN CALENDAR DAYS. SO I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT ALL THE SIGNATURES AND SEALS BE EXPEDITED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE ON THE ORDINANCE, BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF WHAT I HAVE TO SUBMIT TO THE STATE. SO THAT WOULD BE YOURSELF, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND THE COUNTY CLERK. THANK. DO WE NEED TO AMEND THE MOTION AND EVERYTHING TO ADDRESS AND FIT THAT? REQUEST? TRACK ME DOWN. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. NEXT WE'VE GOT WE'RE NOW ON TO. LDR. PL LDR 2024 0289 LDR CHAPTER 13 AMENDMENT. HELLO AGAIN WAYNE. THANK YOU SIR. ON DECEMBER 17TH, 2024, THE BAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REQUESTS FROM STAFF TO REVISE CHAPTER 13 OF THE BAY COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO FIND THE RECOMMENDED TEXT AMENDMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. THE STAFF IS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION THAT REVISE CHAPTER 13 TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT PROVIDES DEVIATIONS TO FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS WHEN RECOMMENDED BY PUBLIC SAFETY AND OR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS. THE LANGUAGE ALLOWS STAFF DISCRETION IN APPROVING THESE DEVIATIONS, WHILE ALSO ESTABLISHING TERM LIMITS FOR THE APPROVED APPROVALS DEVIATIONS. STAFF AGREES WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND RECOMMENDS THE BOARD CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND ADOPT THE ORDINANCE. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING THIS ITEM, AND AGAIN, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OTHER THAN ROBERT. THIS ONE WAS STRAIGHTFORWARD. WELL, SORT OF SORT OF. I HAVE ONE QUESTION AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TIME TO BRING IT UP, BUT. LET ME JUST ASK YOU A QUESTION. IF HOW DOES THE SHERIFF, IF SOMEONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH THEIR FENCE HEIGHT, LIKE LET'S SAY AT MY HOUSE WHERE PEOPLE JUST WANDER UP INTO MY YARD AND TRY TO RIFLE THROUGH MY CAR OR KICK THE DOOR INTO THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR THINKING THEY'RE AT SOME HOUSE THAT THEY'RE NOT. WE HAVE SOMEWHAT OF A VAGRANT PROBLEM WALKING UP AND DOWN NORTH LAGOON AT TIMES, SO I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO HAVE MY GATE IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE, OR MY FENCE IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE AT AT LEAST A SIX FOOT HEIGHT, AND IT COULD BE AN OPEN FENCE, BUT JUST FOR SAFETY SITUATIONS. SO WITH THAT BE THE TYPE THING THAT SOMEONE WOULD BRING TO THE SHERIFF? OR IS THIS JUST FOR A COMMERCIAL TYPE SETTING OF. I'M JUST NOT REAL SURE HOW I READ IT IN, BUT I'M NOT CERTAIN THAT I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND HOW IT WOULD WORK. THE IMPETUS WOULD BE IN SITUATIONS I JUST EXPLAINED THE RECENT SITUATION I BELIEVE WE HAD BETWEEN TWO NEIGHBORS WHO WERE QUARRELING, AND THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT WERE GETTING SEVERAL CALLS TO COME OUT AND KEEP THE PEACE, AND THEY MADE THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT HAD REQUESTED OF THE COUNTY TO IN ONE WAY TO THEY THEY FELT IN ONE WAY IN ORDER TO SUBDUE THE SITUATION IS TO ALLOW A HIGHER FENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS. IT WOULD BE. A SITUATION THAT'S PARTICULAR TO THAT SORT OF THING. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A GENERAL ACCEPTANCE OF, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE CALLS THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. I DON'T FEEL SAFE. I THINK I NEED TO HIRE FENCE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO HERE. WE'RE LOOKING FOR MORE SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF CONFLICT BETWEEN TWO NEIGHBORS AND THAT SORT OF THING. SO I GUESS I HAVE AN EXTREME CONFLICT WITH SOMEBODY THAT JUST WALKS UP IN MY YARD AND WANDERS AROUND. SO I DON'T I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US BE ABLE TO MAYBE DEFINE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. ALL OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE A [00:45:06] SIX FOOT FENCE, AND I'M CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO BREAK THE RULE. AND ONLY, YOU KNOW, PUT A SIX FOOT WHEN THE RULE IS FOUR FOOT. BUT ANYBODY CAN LEAP OVER A FOUR FOOT FENCE. AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE TIME MAYBE GET THIS PASSED, BUT I'D LIKE TO BRING IT BACK TO DISCUSS AS I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. NO, GO AHEAD. AS WE AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, FOR THE PREVIOUS ONE OF THE PREVIOUS ITEMS, WE'RE IN THE PROCESS NOW OF GOING THROUGH OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO LOOK AT. NEEDED REVISIONS. WE CAN CERTAINLY AS WE'RE DOING THAT, LOOK AT SOME CHANGES TO THAT REGARDING THE, YOU KNOW, THE FENCE HEIGHT, THE GATE HEIGHT, THAT SORT OF THING. THANK YOU. I'LL BRING IT UP THEN. THANK YOU SO MUCH. EXCUSE ME. ANYONE ELSE? I WILL SAY WHEN THIS IS CAME OUT OF MY DISTRICT, IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SHERIFF AND SEVERAL OF THE DEPUTIES THAT ARE UP THERE IN THAT AREA AND WITH SEVERAL DIFFERENT CITIZENS, AND INTO WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, THIS IS AN ARROW IN THE QUIVER FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SOME EXCEPTIONS AND BE ABLE TO DO THINGS, AS YOU SAY, TO DE-ESCALATE SOME SITUATIONS. THAT GOT PRETTY DICEY THERE AT POINTS IN TIMES. AND SO I APPRECIATE YOU AND BRIAN WORKING ON THIS WITH ME AND BEING ABLE TO BRING THIS FORWARD, TO BE ABLE TO GIVE THE SHERIFF AND HIS DEPUTIES WAYS, TO BE ABLE TO HOPEFULLY DE-ESCALATE CERTAIN SITUATIONS THAT WERE IN, IN THE DISTRICT. SO JUST THANK YOU. I WANT TO PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE Y'ALL'S WORK ON THAT, AND I APPRECIATE IT. AND I KNOW THE SHERIFF DOES AS WELL. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER. ANYONE WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT REGARDING THIS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SEEING NONE. CAN I GET A MOTION? MOTION. ALL RIGHT. WE'VE GOT A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND SECOND MOTION IN A SECOND. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL COMMISSIONER RAFFIELD. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CARROLL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. PEACE. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. [County Attorney] YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. LAST THING. WE HAVE COUNTY ATTORNEY REVISIONS TO CHAPTER TWO OF THE BAY COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES. MR. CHAIRMAN. COMMISSIONERS, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS IN THE BEGINNING OF REVIEWING ALL OF OUR ORDINANCES TO IDENTIFY ANY CONFLICTS OR INCONSISTENCIES OR OBSOLETE PROVISIONS OR THAT SORT OF THING. AND CHAPTER TWO WAS THE FIRST ONE WE WENT ABOUT TO TACKLE. AND WE WHICH IS A CHAPTER THAT ADDRESSES ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES, THAT HAS A PROCUREMENT CODE, IS IN THERE PROVISIONS ABOUT SURPLUS PROPERTY, PROVISIONS ABOUT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND COUNTY ATTORNEY. AND WE FOUND A FEW ITEMS THAT WHERE. THAT WE NEEDED TO ADDRESS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE ORDINANCE. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOW THE ORDINANCE REFERS TO THE DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY AND HOW HER JOB TITLE IS DESCRIBED IN THE AIR CODE. SO WE FIXED THAT. THERE'S A PROVISIONS IN THE WE HAVE A SECTION THAT DEALS WITH THE CHIEF CORRECTIONAL OFFICER THAT STILL REFERS TO THE OLD CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA. SO WE CORRECTED THAT. AND IT HAD PROVISIONS THAT WERE JUST MIRRORS OF EXISTING STATE LAW. SO WE REMOVED THE PROVISIONS THAT WERE REPETITIVE OF STATE LAW. AND THERE IS A PROVISION, WE HAVE A PROVISION ERROR CODE THAT WE REFER TO COLLOQUIALLY AS THE ZONE OF SILENCE OR THE CONE OF SILENCE. RULES ABOUT ASKING PEOPLE WHO ARE SEEKING PROCUREMENTS THAT WILL HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD TO. COMMUNICATE WITH THE STAFF THAT IS PURSUING IT, BUT NOT TALK DIRECTLY TO COMMISSIONERS AND THE DOLLAR THRESHOLD WE HAD IN THERE WAS INCONSISTENT WITH THE DOLLAR THRESHOLD WE HAVE FOR ITEMS THAT COME BEFORE YOU. SO WE CORRECTED THAT. I THINK THAT ABOUT COVERS IT. WE THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF A LONG PROCESS. WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED CHAPTER THREE. CHAPTER THREE AND A HALF. CHAPTER FOUR. AND SO IT WILL TAKE ABOUT A YEAR [00:50:10] AND A HALF TO GET THROUGH ALL THE CHAPTERS OF THE, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, BUT THAT THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF THAT. QUESTIONS FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. SEEING NONE. THIS IS STILL PUBLIC HEARING ANY ONE FROM SEEING NONE. I GET A MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. MOTION AND MULTIPLE SECONDS. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL COMMISSIONER. PEACE. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CARROLL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. RAFAEL. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. THAT CONCLUDES THE REGULAR [PUBLIC COMMENT (Open to any issue)] AGENDA. WE NOW MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS IS OPEN TO ANY ISSUE. WHICH CITIZEN BELIEVES THAT THE COMMISSION HAS AUTHORITY OVER. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. GOOD MORNING SIR. GOOD MORNING SIR. I MAKE SURE MY LEGS ARE GOING TO SUPPORT ME HERE. SONNY READ, 6412 KEMP ROAD, YOUNGSTOWN, FLORIDA. AS SOME OF YOU KNOW, I AM THE CHAPTER LEADER FOR THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY FOR BAY COUNTY. OUR GROUP IS TEAMING UP WITH THE REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS. RLC WE'VE GOT A RALLY TOMORROW TO SUPPORT A ORDINANCE THAT WE'D LIKE TO GET PASSED OR A MOVEMENT THAT WE'D LIKE TO GET PASSED. BILL OF RIGHTS, SANCTUARY FOR BAY COUNTY. NOW, I APPRECIATE THERE'S BEEN THREE OUT OF FIVE COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE RESPONDED TO OUR REQUEST FOR A MEETING, AND I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. IF THE OTHER TWO HAVE ANY TIME AT ALL FOR THE NEXT, I GUESS IT WOULD BE TOMORROW AND FRIDAY MORNING. LET US KNOW AND WE'D LOVE TO MEET WITH YOU, EVEN IF IT'S ONLY FOR 15 MINUTES INSTEAD OF HALF AN HOUR. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR FOR YOUR RESPONSES. AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO TAKE THIS A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO THANK MR. LIEBREICH FOR THE HELP THAT HE GAVE US LAST YEAR. THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT I WAS NOT AWARE OF ON SOME OF THE LAWS, AND HE HE MADE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTOOD EVERYTHING ON THAT. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. OTHER THAN THAT, I KNOW WE CAN'T INVITE EVERYBODY TO OUR RALLY TOMORROW BECAUSE OF THE SUNSHINE LAW, BUT I'M GOING TO LEAVE SOME FLIERS UP HERE FOR YOU ALL, AND I'LL LET YOU DRAW STRAWS, MAYBE TO WHO CAN ATTEND. AND THAT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU COULD. I'D REALLY APPRECIATE IT. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND YOUR CONCERN AND YOUR ATTENTION ON THIS MATTER. APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, MR. SIMON. THERE SHOULD BE ENOUGH HERE FOR EVERYBODY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. FOR THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE CARE TO SPEAK? NAME AND ADDRESS? FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. BARBARA HOLCOMB, 2724 SOUTH PLEASANT OAK COURT, PANAMA CITY BEACH. CLAIRE IS IN MY DISTRICT, IS MY DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, ROBERT BILL. BOB WORKED WITH YOU GUYS LONG TIME AGO IN ENGINEERING. GOOD MORNING. AND IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU AS I'M HERE ABOUT OUR ANIMAL LAWS. OUR CODE, FOUR SECTIONS, 41 TO 43. WE HAVE A CAT PROBLEM. AND I THINK YOU ALL KNOW THAT WE DO. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS DO BECAUSE YOU MAY NOT HAVE THEM IN YOUR AREA. I HAVE TRAPPED 64 CATS ON MY PROPERTY IN THE LAST TWO YEARS. WE HAVE A PROBLEM. WE ARE ALLOWING RESCUES AND FOSTERS TO PULL FERAL ANIMALS OUT OF BAY COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL TO JUST BE DUMPED OUT IN THE STREETS WHEN THEY'RE DONE WITH THEM. FERAL CATS ARE NOT ADOPTABLE, AND I'M SORRY THEY SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BE PULLED BY ANYBODY. MY DOG HAS HEMORRHAGIC GASTROENTERITIS BECAUSE CATS COME TO MY PROPERTY. AFTER MICHAEL, I HAD TO LEAVE FOR FIVE YEARS SO MY PROPERTY COULD BE REPAIRED. IN THE MEANTIME, THE FOSTERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THEIR CATS ROAMED EVERYWHERE AND JUST PEED EVERYWHERE ON EVERYTHING. I HAD [00:55:02] TO TAKE DOWN ALL MY DECKS AND REPLACE WITH CONCRETE TO TRY TO CAT PROOF MY PROPERTY. BECAUSE THERE IS NO VACUUM EFFECT LIKE THESE RESCUES TELL YOU, IT IS THE SCENT OF OTHER CATS BEING ON YOUR PROPERTY THAT ATTRACTS THEM. AND I HAVE PUT IN A LOT OF WORK ON MY HOME, AND I HAVE BEEN DOXED CAT PEOPLE HAVE TRESPASSED ON MY PROPERTY, I'VE PUT CAMERAS UP, THEY'VE COME AND TAKEN THE LIGHT BULBS OUT OF THE FRONT LIGHTS SO THAT THEY WON'T. THEY THINK THEY WON'T BE SEEN ON MY CAMERAS. AND THIS IS WRONG. YOU ARE ALLOWING. FROM WHAT I'VE UNDERSTOOD, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO GAVE PERMISSION TO HAVE FERAL CATS PULLED FROM BAY COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL. AND THAT'S WRONG. THERE IS HUMANE EUTHANASIA AND WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW THESE ANIMALS TO ROAM WHEN MY DOG GETS SICK. YOU'RE NOT PAYING MY VET BILL OF $600, AND I HAVE SEVERAL OF THEM. IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, MY DOG HAS ALMOST DIED THREE TIMES BECAUSE OF EATING CAT FECES IN MY YARD. BECAUSE AFTER MICHAEL, ALL THE CATS WHEN WE MOVED BACK HERE AT NIGHT, YOU COULD COME HOME AND CAT EYES EVERYWHERE AND SOMETHING'S GOT TO BE DONE, BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO BE THE BAD GUY IN THIS FOR PROTECTING MY FAMILY FROM HEALTH HAZARDS. THANK YOU. I THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND I HOPE THAT THE CODE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO WORK ON, ON FOR, THAT YOU WOULD ALLOW A LOT OF PUBLIC INTO THIS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE? COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT. NO REPORT, YOUR HONOR. ALL RIGHT. COUNTY MANAGER, NOTHING FROM STAFF, MR. CHAIRMAN. ALL [CHAIRMAN & COMMISSIONER COMMENTS] RIGHT. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER. COMMENTS. START ON MY RIGHT WITH COMMISSIONER CROSBY. I HAVE NOTHING, ALL RIGHT? COMMISSIONER HATFIELD. I JUST WANT TO GIVE A BIG KUDOS OUT TO THE HALF SALES TAX THAT WAS USED THIS PAST WEEK OR ACTUALLY THIS WEEK IT WAS RELEASED. BUT TOMMY SMITH ELEMENTARY, MAYOR BROWN, THESE SCHOOLS RECEIVED $3 MILLION FROM THAT HALF CENT SURTAX. AND FINE ARTS CENTER, MOSTLY THE CAFETERIA FACILITIES RUTHERFORD HIGH SCHOOL, SPRINGFIELD ELEMENTARY, HIGHLAND PARK ELEMENTARY THESE JOBS WERE DONE BY THAT AND THAT IS A WIN FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO GREAT JOB TO EVERYONE THAT HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THE HALF CENT SALES TAX. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER PEACE. YES, SIR. I HAVE THREE THINGS. FIRST, I ONLY HAD TWO. BUT LET ME ADDRESS THE CAT STATEMENT HERE. FIRST OFF, I HAVE NO RIGHT TO DO ANYTHING WITH CATS WITHOUT THIS BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS VOTING ON WHAT TO DO ON CATS. I HAVE NEVER TOLD ANYONE TO RELEASE 64 CATS. WELL, I'M HAPPY TO SPEAK WITH YOU AFTER THE MEETING ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THAT IS 100% INCORRECT. OKAY, SO I'M NOT SURE WHERE YOU GOT THAT FROM, BUT I LOVE TO GO STRAIGHT TO THE SOURCE OF THE INFORMATION AND GET THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT SO THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, GET THAT TO YOU. THAT'LL BE GREAT. WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL IF YOU WANT TO WAIT AFTER THE MEETING FOR A FEW MINUTES, THEN WE WILL CERTAINLY TALK ABOUT ABOUT THIS PROBLEM. AND IT IS A PROBLEM. OKAY. I ALSO THINK WE HAVE A PROBLEM WE HAVE IN THE PAST, AND I THINK WE STILL DO WITH SMALL SUBDIVISIONS LIKE LITTLE MAYBE STRIPS OF LAND THAT PEOPLE MAY HAVE THAT ARE LEFT OVER THAT THEY WOULD THEY WOULD WANT TO BUILD MAYBE 5 OR 6 STRUCTURES ON IT, WHETHER THEY BE TOWNHOUSES OR CONDOMINIUMS OR SOMETHING. THEY DON'T REALLY FALL INTO A SUBDIVISION CATEGORY, AND THEY DON'T. THEY JUST IT'S LIKE A NO MAN'S LAND. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US JUST MAYBE START SOME DIALOG WITH STAFF ON HOW WE COULD LOOK AT THESE SMALL SUBDIVISIONS. RIGHT NOW, THE CUTOFF IS THREE HOUSES AFTER THREE. I DON'T KNOW IF WE REALLY EVEN CALL IT A SUBDIVISION. I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT TO CALL IT, BUT WE'RE RUNNING INTO A PROBLEM NOT ONLY WITH THESE SMALL PROJECTS, BUT WE ARE REQUIRING PEOPLE THAT DO SUBDIVISIONS AND NEW PROJECTS TO [01:00:01] PAVE A PORTION OF THE ROAD AND TO DO TRIP TESTING AND TESTING OF THE ASPHALT TO SEE HOW MUCH LIFE IS LEFT IN THE ROAD. SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SEE US IF WE, YOU KNOW, IF NO ONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH IT, JUST MAYBE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE CAN TAKE SOME OF THESE SMALL PIECES OF PROPERTY AND HAVE A DIFFERENT CATEGORY OF SOME SORT FOR THEM, INSTEAD OF THROWING THEM INTO A MAYBE A CONDOMINIUM PROJECT. I THINK ANYBODY THAT'S FAMILIAR WITH 718 KNOWS THAT IT HAS NEW RULES. THIS YEAR IT WAS ALREADY COMPLICATED FOR SMALL BOARD OWNER OWNER OPERATED BOARDS TO FIGURE OUT HOW THEY DO THINGS LEGALLY, AND I HATE TO SEE EVERYONE FALL INTO A WHOLE CONDOMINIUM STATUS OF GETTING THESE LITTLE SMALL PROJECTS DONE. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY, IF NO ONE HAS AN OBJECTION TO IT, I'D LIKE TO JUST ASK STAFF TO MAYBE LOOK AT A DIFFERENT WAY WE COULD TAX SOME OF THESE SMALL PORTIONS OF LAND. ROBERT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I WILL MOVE ON TO MY THIRD MY THIRD THING HERE. I'VE GIVEN EVERYBODY A ONE OF THESE LITTLE HANDOUTS. IF YOU COULD GRAB THAT. I HAVE BEEN INVITED BY LIEUTENANT COMMANDER TED COOPER, US NAVY, RETIRED TO BRING YOU A PROPOSAL ON A WHAT HE AND I THINK IS A GREAT BIRTHDAY PRESENT FOR THE NAVY. SO THE NAVY, IF FOLKS ARE NOT FAMILIAR, IS HAVING THEIR 250TH BIRTHDAY PARTY ON A BIRTHDAY, OCTOBER THE 13TH, 2025 NAVY BASE 80TH ANNIVERSARY. ON SEPTEMBER 2025, THE NAVAL SUPPORT ACTIVITY PANAMA CITY BEACH HAS A HUGE IMPACT ON PANAMA CITY, PANAMA CITY BEACH, THE ENTIRE BAY COUNTY. IT AMOUNTS TO MORE THAN 600 MILLION ANNUALLY IN ECONOMIC IMPACT. YOU CAN SEE FROM THAT FIRST PAGE WHAT WHAT ALL IT DOES PROPOSAL TO THE COMMISSION TODAY IS TO RENAME A PORTION OF THOMAS DRIVE, NAVY BOULEVARD, PANAMA CITY BEACH, FLORIDA. THE. THE ROAD WAS NAMED THOMAS DRIVE IN THE BEGINNING FROM AFTER A MR. GILLIAM THOMAS. HE BUILT PANAMA CITY HOTEL IN 1935, AND HE WAS THE FIRST TO AGGRESSIVELY MARKET TOURISM. AT THAT TIME, MOST OF OUR LOCALS WERE INVOLVED IN JUST FARMING, AND HE LATER MERGED THIS INTO PANAMA CITY BEACH, LONG BEACH AND EDGEWATER, BUT KEPT THE NAME PANAMA CITY BEACH. SO HIS LEGACY GOES BACK. STARTING IN 1935, WE FELT LIKE THAT THE ROAD THAT GOES EAST AND WEST ALONG THE BEACH IS CERTAINLY THE MAIN TOURIST CORRIDOR OF PANAMA CITY BEACH AND SHOULD REMAIN, YOU KNOW, AS IT IS, THOMAS DRIVE. BUT THERE IS A BENEFIT OF REDUCING THE CONFUSION ABOUT THE PORTION OF THOMAS DRIVE AND BUSINESSES THAT ARE LOCATED ON THOMAS DRIVE. IT IS, I THINK, AN HONOR FOR US TO GIVE THE US NAVY THIS DESIGNATION OF TURNING THIS, CHANGING THE NAME OF THIS ROAD. YOU CAN GO BACK AND SEE THAT WE HAVE DONE SOME RENAMING OF ROADS AS FAR AS MEMORIAL DRIVES, BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RENAMING THIS ROAD FOR PERMANENT, A PERMANENT NAME CHANGE, LIKE RIDGE ROAD IS NOW RICHARD JACKSON BOULEVARD. THE CURRENT THOMAS DRIVE IS MARKED ON THERE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GOING FROM 98 DOWN TO THE CURVE THERE AT AT NEWBIES. AND IT WOULD REQUIRE SOME ADDRESS CHANGE FOR SOME BUSINESSES ALONG THERE. AND WE DO HAVE TWO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED ON A ON A ADDRESS CHANGE AFTER THE RENAMING, I THERE ARE OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE BEEN NAMED. PENSACOLA HAS A NAVY BOULEVARD TO NAS PENSACOLA AND MILLINGTON, TENNESSEE. NAVY ROAD IS THROUGH NSA MID-SOUTH, SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY. AND I DO HAVE SOME [01:05:02] SOME BACKUPS HERE. ALL THE MAPS ARE HERE, AND I JUST WAS WONDERING HOW THE BOARD FELT ABOUT THIS, AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ASKING STAFF TO START THE PROCESS OF RENAMING THIS ROAD. ANY COMMENTS FROM US? I DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO IT. IT'S I MEAN, IT HAS TAKEN THIS LONG FOR SOMEBODY TO COME UP WITH IT. I MEAN, I'M GLAD YOU ALL WORKED ON THIS. I MEAN, THIS, I THINK IS A BIG MILESTONE. IT'S EXCITING TO SAY THE LEAST. AND THE NUMBERING WILL PROBABLY REMAIN THE SAME FOR THOSE ADDRESSES. I ASSUME JUST THE NAME FROM THOMAS TO JUST A GREAT NAME, NAVY BOULEVARD. I MEAN, IT'S JUST IT'S PRETTY EXCITING AND IT'S A IT'S JUST A GREAT BIRTHDAY PRESENT FOR THE NAVY. AND WE, WE HOPE TO BE ABLE TO ROLL IT OUT DURING THE FESTIVITIES THAT MAYBE BOB CAN SPEAK ON. A LITTLE BIT OF THAT ARE COMING UP AND OR WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY'RE EVERYTHING IS COMING UP. SO MAYBE I'M JUMPING THE GUN A LITTLE BIT ON THAT, BUT I WOULD LIKE PERMISSION FROM Y'ALL OR A VOTE FROM Y'ALL TO GO AHEAD AND LET'S LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT, MOST PEOPLE KNOW WE HAVE TINDALL, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE JUST DON'T REALIZE WE HAVE A NAVY BASE. AND IF YOU HAVE NAVY BOULEVARD THAT REALLY THROWS OUT THERE THAT, OH, MAYBE THEY DO HAVE A NAVY BASE. YEAH. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION. THANK YOU. SECOND IT. ALL RIGHT. MOTION AND A SECOND IF YOU WOULD, COMMISSIONER RAFAEL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER CROSBY. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER. CAROL. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER PIECE. YES, MA'AM. CHAIRMAN. MOORE. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, COMMISSIONER CAROL. YES, SIR. SO, GOING BACK TO I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY YOUR TIME REGARDING THE SUBDIVISIONS AND SMALL. I'VE HAD THE SAME CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. LIEBERT IN THE PAST ABOUT HOW DO WE CREATE THESE LOTS WITHOUT CREATING ROAD RIGHT OF WAYS. AND I THINK THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES, WHETHER IT'S A PUD PROCESS OR, I AGREE, CONDOMINIUMS THAT HAS REALLY COMPLEX ON A SMALL PIECE OF PROPERTY AND VERY EXPENSIVE. SO BUT IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE COULD GO, YOU KNOW, IT'S A CONVERSATION WITH WAYNE PLANNING COUNTY STAFF BUT AND LEGAL THAT MAYBE A PUD PROCESS IS THE WAY WE CAN DO IT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE AN OPINION OR NOT OR WANT TO WAIT. WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION LATER. BUT SO MY SENSE OF THINGS IS THAT THE, THE PRESSURE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY REGARDING THE SMALL SUBDIVISIONS COME INTO PLACE BECAUSE WE HAVE ONE SIZE FITS ALL, FITS ALL RULES THAT APPLY TO, YOU KNOW, MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS AND ALSO ONES THAT MAY ONLY INVOLVE 5 OR 10 UNITS. AND. I THINK IT'S A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO REEXAMINE WHETHER ALL THE RULES THAT WE HAVE THAT APPLY TO REGULAR SUBDIVISIONS IN TERMS OF ROAD WIDTHS AND, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SETBACKS AND OTHER THINGS, MAYBE, MAYBE THOSE CAN BE LOOSENED FOR SMALLER SUBDIVISIONS. SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF ABOUT CREATING SOME PROCESS FOR, FOR SMALLER PROJECTS THAT TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. WELL, IT ALLOWS CREATIVITY. IT'S THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL THAT HAVE DONE OVER THE YEARS, AND THEY WERE ALLOWED TO BASICALLY NOT CREATE PROPERTY LINES. AND YOU CAN JUST KIND OF TAKE THE HOUSES MIX. I MEAN, IT IT ALLOWS A LOT OF CREATIVITY, BUT I'M GLAD TO SEE THE DIALOG MOVING FORWARD. SECONDLY, AFTER LAST MEETING, I TOLD A QUESTION REAL QUICK ON THAT STAFF MENTIONED EARLIER IN THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE COMP PLAN, ABOUT AMENDMENTS TO THE. I GET THE SENSE THAT THIS IS A TIMING ISSUE, BUT I DON'T WANT TO PUT WAYNE ON THE SPOT. BUT YOU KNOW, IF THE BOARD IS WISHING FOR US TO MAYBE PRIORITIZE THIS SECTION OF THE LDR FIRST IN THAT REWRITE, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO DO, OR DO YOU WANT US TO TAKE IT UP IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF LDR REVIEW AND CHANGE? WELL, WE'RE GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH THIS LDR PROCESS. I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT SPEEDED UP. WE'VE GOT WE'VE GOT PROJECTS THAT ARE TRYING TO PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO GET THEIR PROJECTS DONE RIGHT NOW. THEY HAVE SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON PROPERTY AND, YOU KNOW, THINKING THEY COULD DO SOMETHING, MAYBE THEY COULDN'T, OR MAYBE IT'S THEIR FAULT FOR NOT READING THOROUGHLY. BUT I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE HAVE NOT JUST GOT ONE, BUT WE'VE GOT SEVERAL THAT COULD FALL UNDER THIS PRETTY RAPIDLY. AND [01:10:06] I'D LIKE FOR US JUST TO HAVE A RULE SO THAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO. DIS CREATE SOMETHING ON THE FLY. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT COME FORWARD QUICKLY. ALL RIGHT. AFTER OUR LAST MEETING, I INVITED EVERYONE TO COME OUT TO MEXICO BEACH. THE BEACH RENOURISHMENT HAS STARTED AND IT IS AN AMAZING PROCESS. THEY'RE GETTING 150, 150FT OF BEACH. SO YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO VISIT MEXICO BEACH. LOTS OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR FOOD AND JUST GO ENJOY THE BEACH OVER THERE. ARNOLD BOYS SOCCER THIS MORNING. THEY ACTUALLY ARE PLAYING IN THE FINAL FOUR AND THEY WIN THIS ONE. THEY'RE PLAYING TO DEFEND THEIR STATE CHAMPIONSHIP. SO I WANT TO WISH THOSE GUYS LUCK. THIS WEEKEND WE HAVE MARDI GRAS. SO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE IN THE SAINT ANDREWS AREA AND GET STUCK IN TRAFFIC, STAY AWAY. BUT IF NOT, GO ENJOY. THERE'S PARADE FRIDAY, SATURDAY AND SUNDAY. SO JUST ENJOY YOURSELF AND BE CAREFUL. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.