Planning Board - Regular Meeting

All right, we are ready to go. Okay, we'll call this meeting to order and I'd like to ask everyone to please put your phone on silent uh so there's no interruptions. We could all stand please for invocation and pledge of allegiance. Lord, we are meeting today to conduct matters of business. Guide our hearts and our minds in the spirit of fairness, right thought and speech. impart this prayer of wisdom upon our activities so that our affairs may reach a successful conclusion. Thank you for being our source of guidance today in Jesus name. Amen. Amen.

I pledge algiance 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. J. Roll call, please. Board member Langston, here. Board member Conne here. Board member Kiy here. Board member Overway here. Vice Chair Dooall here. Chairman Hagen here. And board member Hennings, let me know he will not be here tonight. Okay.

Ask the board if everybody's had a chance to read the minutes from the last meeting that we had. And if you did not see any errors in there, I did not. I'd like to entertain a motion for approval of the minutes of October 21st, 2025. I'll make a motion we approve the minutes. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose?

Motion carries. New business. We got three agenda items. Um, I'd like for the public to know that you'll get a chance to comment on the items. Uh, after the board discuss the item, uh, before we take a vote, I'll call for public participation. You have three minutes to state your concern. Yay or nay for the for the item and then, uh, come back to the board here and we'll vote on it. So with that, the reasonzoning application 406 Bob Little Road, Mr. Fry. All right. Good evening. Our first item is uh Mr. Jerry Steel is requesting a reszoning of the property at 406 Bob Little Road, which is at the intersection of Bob Little and Fourth Street. It's been sitting vacant for quite a while. Um, the request is to reszone it from R 6M, which allows mobile homes, to R5, which does not allow mobile homes. He plans on building some houses there. Um, what it does is it reduces the density from a 6,000 foot lot to a 5,000t lot. Seems to be kind of a trend. The smaller lots is what people are after nowadays. Um, in my opinion, it's a no-brainer. He's, uh, in the process of developing uh, Grand Oaks, which is right around the corner, coming along real good. Same development.

Okay. Mr. Steel is here tonight. It is my recommendation that this planning board convey a recommendation of approval to the city commission. Can I entertain any questions from the board?

I was looking at the map bill and um the property seems to be split up. I maybe I was reading maybe I was reading it wrong. The property has a ditch that runs through it. That is a it is a problem that the engineer is already working with are working on to address the ditch. I believe they're going to move it out to the fourth street right away. Um Shawn McNeel is the engineer working on it. Um he's literally working on it right now. So when it uh comes development order time, all that will be addressed. But it does kind of chop that little part on the south off. And it's water that comes from this area over here, makes its way to Martin Lake. I seen that. Well, we got some rain, but it's been dry. And uh I walked over there. I'm like, well, you know, I thought maybe that fence there was so people didn't fall off, you know what I mean? But I didn't see any water at the time, but that was last week. Um, and it's just the 406. Correct.

That's this lot right here. That's it. All right. That was I have another question. Um Um is the developer does does the developer own the property right now? He does. Um the the deed is recorded. It's still showing that Mr. Pierce owns it if you click on here. But this is a few weeks behind once it's recorded. It takes them a little while to update the the Cisco. Okay. So, this is the only property on that that'll be R5. Everything else is R6M. Currently, it's R6M right now.

I mean, yeah, but it's if we approve it, it'll be R5. That's the only place it'll be R5. Is that correct or not?

I'll turn on the zoning layer and we'll see. The yellow is multifamily. Appears that most of this area other than the multif family is R6M. And then the green is R8. And then from Highway 22, some of these properties going all the way back to Fourth Street are commercial.

Yeah. Does that answer your question. Yeah, I was just well if there's any other R5 property in the area.

Did anyone call about notices up? I have not had any calls. Well, Mr. Diaz talked to Lisa about it. It wasformational only. Um Mr. Diaz may speak later in a minute. He didn't talk to me, but he talked to Lisa.

Anything else, sir? Anything else from any board members for our call for public participation? I see none. So, I'll open up to a public participation concerning this item. Anyone in the audience wish to come up? Okay, I see none. So, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve the zoning change for 406 P drive from R 6M to R5. I'll second J. You take a roll call, please. Board member Overweight.

Yes. Board member Ki. Yes. Board member Carneahan. Yes. Board member Langston. Yes. Vice Chair Dooall. Yes. Chairman Hagen. Yes. Motion carries. All right. Next agenda item. Development order application for 325 Chamilleia Avenue. Mr. Pry again.

All right. So, not too far. Just just a little ways over here. It's the property is 3.5 and they also own Mr. Jack owns this parcel back here. Um, if you'll remember too long ago, he got it reszoneed to multifamily high density to allow this project to go through We call him Dr. A is a engineer of record. Um very simple design. It's essentially it's a multifamily complex. It's essentially a house. with a few or actually six other units. They're onebedroom units. Um, from what I understand, he plans on renting them to his employees. He runs a little a restaurant towards Tindle, the uh the Thai restaurant out there. I'm not sure the name, but he's the the owner of the chef there to

be the royal tie. He already has a pond that Dr. A utilized for the storm water. This kind of shows you this is an existing carport. Uh Mr. Jack plans on living here himself. multiple units on one parcel. It's actually two parcels, but one track of land requires it to be multif family. These are detached duplexes, total of seven with the six onebedroom units. Plenty of parking. It's not going to be a problem. The property's pretty large. Just basic. The units are going to be apparently there's a need for some small houses. The uh requirement for multifamily is they have to be at least 550 ft. These exceed that. Not by much. That's not a very big unit. And the total average has to be 750. The house that does average over 700 storm water is pretty simple. will all accumulate in this pond and then they're going to tie it into an existing drain box out on Chameleia with landscaping requirements met and

there's going to be playground area. It's it's just big enough to where he does is required to have 15% of it for open space. uh they were invited. This is just a drawing a detail on how the water will be done. This is more for our utilities guys than anything. Uh the water man is on the broader side of the road. So instead of doing several floors under the road, we're just going to do one large one with a 2 in manifold come off have the meters on here.

Why are they putting eight meters in for six houses? uh irrigation. Looks like he's got plans for two more houses going. That's why I'm wondering. He would have to come back for a development or he's This is only going to approve exactly what you're seeing.

Yeah. It shows eight years like eight houses instead of six. If you have any questions, I'll do my best to answer them for you. They were invited. I'm not sure why they're not here. Commissioner Briggs said there was going to be a problem with the roadway being large enough when we improve the multifamily. Is that issue been addressed and taken care You mentioned we have a minimum unit requirement, but they met that because they're going to have seven units on the property, which we'll get to that in a little while. We're going to try to remove the minimum unit requirement for multif family because everybody have asked why would we have a minimum? It doesn't make sense to me. I it makes complete sense to have a maximum for sure, but why have a minimum? But they have been I thought there was a I thought there was something about the roadway in the house is not not being wide enough with parking and Um, when Commissioner Griggs brought it up at the meeting after we approved this, I don't remember the driveway or THE SEE, they got plenty of room. These are not very big units. All this is going to be on private

property. City will not maintain or own any of it. Well, I'm glad to see the lots cleared up any cleaned up anyways. Yeah, I did notice that.

Any other board? You have a question? Yeah, I was just going to make a statement that I thought when he come before the commission that he was going to build units for his family to live in, not for rental. That's the whole just of going to the commission to get it approved for the multif family was he was going to do you know what I mean build stuff for his family to live in not to have rental units

and that that may be the case. I do know he mentioned his employees but whenever this is built we're not going to have any control on who who he rents them to. We just don't have that authority. So they can come say what they want to and get it approved and then do kind of backtrack and do what they want to. I think we should assume that he's going to rent them to whoever, not necessarily,

but having stranger. I mean, I know people are people, but you know, that might have affected the neighbors just a little bit differently had it been family versus, you know what I mean, just workers that come and go or, you know what I'm saying? That that's the kind of way I feel is it could have affected it. Well, there's a lot of commercial around there, too. So, this would be more of a family type thing versus AC right across the street is a giant commercial building. I don't even know what they do, but it's brick and it's got to be 30 feet high. And then you got the corner. Is the corner, Bill? Is that is that zoned uh commercial?

All this is commercial is zoned highway commercial, right? And then you got this huge building on the corner right across the street. Yeah. Um just saying this was originally a grocery store an Albertson's. Mhm. And it failed and now it is a condition storage. Right. Didn't didn't even work for an bingo operation. Do they do they try to do that? Yes, they had bingo in there after Albert. Yeah. So, uh now

and it's a storage unit there next to Walgreens. Has the homeowners at the at um 327 made any indication if they have any concern with it? He owns 327. I have not received any concerns. He owns 37 right here. Yeah. Yeah. I haven't received any concerns 377.

Any other questions? Different. Good. I'll open up to the public. Any public comments? I see none. So, I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion. We we approve the development order application for 325 Familiar Avenue. I'll second J. I have roll call, please. Board member Ki. Yes. Board member Conahan. Yes. Board member Langston. Yes. Board member Overway. Yes. Vice Chair Dooall. Yes. Chairman Hagen.

Yes. Motion carries. Approve. Okay, now the big one that's on the agenda tonight, comprehension plan amendment review. Um, I would like to give everyone a chance and and uh uh for the public, here's what I'd like to do with this review. I'd like to go by section, give everybody a chance once you you should have reviewed it. It's it's lengthy. um we give you a chance for each of the table contents in case there's something within that like a future land use element. there's something in there that you object to like say change whatever we can address that then and we'll go on through u it actually well 11 actually 10 and then we'll open up for public if they've had a chance review this document and then we'll come back and vote on it if I understand hope I got it straight but I think that would be appropriate since we're going through this section. Not trying to keep you here longer. I just there is some things I have myself and I rather hit them at the time that we hit the the sections. So with that, Bill, I'll let you at least do open comments to it

before we discuss it. It's it's time for us to update this and our our friend Mr. Random Greer here is a the planning consultant of choice in the area. So we have we're lucky to have him uh doing the revisions for us. So I'll turn it over to Ray and let him kind of take it from here. Okay.

So before we begin, I would like to just take a moment to give you a kind of a background of what we're doing, why we're doing it, what the comp plan is, what the land development regulations is. So the comprehensive plan is required by statute. Florida statute 163 requires every looks of government the state of Florida to have and maintain a comprehensive plan and it specifies all the elements you have to have and what the elements have to contain. So that's defined by Florida statutes. Every local government has to adopt one. The requirement began in 1990 and has been moving forward. Uh the legislators will they have amended chapter 163 almost every year. Sometimes it's every couple years. Sometimes it's significant changes. Sometimes it's not. But one of the requirements in chapter 163 is that local government maintain their planning horizon. Therefore, your comprehensive plan looks out. It's just what it is. It's a future land use. So comp plan is the big picture and then it's all implemented through the land development regulations and so the state oversees the comprehensive plan to amend the comp plan. It has to go to the the state of Florida Department of Commerce is the agency. Now the name of the agency that is the state land planning agency. So with that they require 163 requires that local government update their comprehensive plan evaluate it every seven years. So it's evaluated based on the census. The census is done every 10 years. So you begin your evaluation appraisal report process. Takes a couple years and by the time you're ready to update your plan, it's been 10 years. So the last time the comprehensive plan was updated was in 2010. And it was done through the air process and it took several years to go through that process and then update the plan. And I worked on it. I updated the plan, did the year also back at then and since

then the statute has changed several times. The last evalu evaluation appraisal report the city was up to date. They had a planning horizon that went out to 2025. So they met everything and they did not have to update their comp plan other than minor changes that occurred um over the last what seven or eight years. We've added like the property rights element. We've added little stuff to keep it up to date

until the next big update which is now. Uh the planning horizon does expire. It expires this month. End of this month it will expire the comp plan. Um of course now the statute changed from 10 years. Now you have to have 20 year plan horizon. So that's why you see a 2045 date set for the uh the new comp plan. So in doing the comp plan what basically what we have done is we've went through what I do I have a um a spreadsheet that has all the requirements for all the elements. I've been doing this for 30 years over 30 years and I've written hundreds of comp plans. I've done hundreds and thousands of acres of comp plan amendments. I've worked all over the state of Florida. I've worked for the state of Florida. I've reviewed comp plans. I've prepared them on both sides. I understand comp plans very well. And one of the things that I do is a lot of long range planning. So what we do is we take that spreadsheet and we go through the plan. We go through element by element and we go through what has to what has changed since the last update. What needs to be changed as you see there's dates that been marked through and that's been either changed and then the stuff that's no longer required we've taken out. And so a lot of the strike through the line and stuff that's been removed either is not necessary or no longer applies. And then of course we prepared the data analysis which is at the very end of the comp plan which is what sets the planning horizon forward. And then we've updated the complete map series to also map out the 2045. And in doing that you know there's changes Bill and his staff has has looked over it reviewed it. They've gave us back you know their comments. We'll incorporate those changes in. If y'all have comments or, you know, questions, we can incorporate those changes in. Also, um, it does, you know, a lot of people, they forget that it does have to meet statuto requirements. So, we can't take out everything there. You saying you there's stuff in there for a reason.

And so, a lot of um, not only planning boards, but a lot of times the city commissions take I don't want that in there, but you have to have it in there. I'll be glad to give you guidance on that as we go through this. Um, and you know, and you can ask me questions, too, as you go through each element or however you want to do it, and I'll be glad to to address them and answer them. That would probably be appropriate for the board since he's got the background information. Uh, if anybody when we get to the sections, if you want to address that, if you don't mind, is that all right? Yes, sir. Jay, you see any problems there?

All right. Very good. and and also just to give you the time frame what goes on here. So this is transmittable. So this is a large scale land use amendment and it is a comp plan update. So it will go to the state, it will go to all the review agencies which is department of transportation, department of environmental protection, the water management district, um the school board, the department of education, everybody gets it including Bay County. Bay County will get a copy of it. It goes for review. So this is just proposed. After it leaves here, it goes to the city commission. If they vote to transmit it, we will send it to the state and all the review agencies. They will review it. They will provide us comments back and then it will come back to the city for adoption. So it's a multi-stage process on getting adopted. So this will be probably March sometime before it's adopted.

All right. Very good. appreciate that info. Um, the first section of the comprehension plan for 2045 is the future and land use element. Uh, any board member have any comments dealing with that particular session? Yeah, it says um medium density would be changed from um

seven units to nine units per acre. page one and again on page I believe it's um I forget where else in here but it's mentioned several times throughout here and I want I'd rather see that stay at um seven instead of nine. I don't know about anybody else. Um, under policy 1-2 paragraph 3. Yeah, I Yeah, I see what you found, but I don't. Yeah, it's actually 8.99 on medium density.

It's just rounding that. It's rounding it off. It says seven units per acre. Okay. 728. And then later on it says where's it back here?

Yeah. So what we did, we took I don't know where that did Steve. That was actually an original compound. Um so basically we just round it up. It was 7.99. We ran the eight and that 8.99. I don't know. I always wonder how Bill dealt with those point. No. No. And now it's going to be nine units per acre. Well, it's the 8.99. That's the 8.99's red line though. It's no more than Yes, it will be nine units from 8 N 8.99 to 9 units. And it takes out the minimum. Seven is the And I don't know where the minimum that doesn't make any sense either to have a minimum. I don't know where that came from

or how that got in here. I've asked everybody. Nobody can tell me why we have. So seven's irrelevant and 8.99 is rounded up to nine. Yeah, that will be the which is how it's been interpreted, didn't it? Ain't that how you all interpreted over the years? Yeah. Whenever I tell developers 8.99, they think I'm up. And and that lays the question I had too on the policy one point. six. Yeah. Well, you're showing 6.99. Why did you not round that one up?

Yeah. And that actually that was something that it that's actually something we missed, but we fixed that. Um, you did Bill and Lisa had pointed that out. So, we did fix that from their comments. Maybe that's what I was looking at. Yeah, we had I completely overlooked that policy. ALL RIGHT, LET ME SEE ANYBODY else on the first portion. So I do um just I I'm curious because on the background it states that this is required.

Um but then you know it states later that it shall be maintained and will the changes try to think how to ask this so it's not confusing. Um will change will changing it with the maintain allow changes as needed or is this something that it has to be changed as a whole or No you you can amend your plan at any time. Is that what you mean? Like yeah so you can amend any part of this.

Okay. at any time like anybody Bill sees something needs to be amended next month you can file an amendment to the plan you just have to go through the same process but it is the whole comp plan um you can amend one policy if you want you can amend one word if you want the local governments can amend their plan it used to be only twice a year but now you can local governments can do it as much as they want now okay what's statuto story required is that you keep the comp plan up to Okay. With a planning horizon that's 20 years. Okay. So, the required is 20 years. Yeah. Okay.

The only other comment to the section that I personally have and it's only a comment. It's not a a yay and nay situation, but when we're dealing with transient friendly development and multimodal facilities and things uh and I have brought this up to the commission before a while back, but as we develop these these uh bus stops, I'll just call it trolley stops, whatever you want to refer to as we get to devel developing Callaway. I would like to see personally pull offs for the transits um to allow a safer boarding unboarding of the bus as you got traffic. You see this county growing, you see our city growing and that's good. Uh but before long tend to parkway may become a sixlane highway. I know that's farfetched in a joke right now, but anyway, um the traffic is is getting horrendous out there. So to me, if you've got a chance to make that happen uh in the comprehension plan and at least future development, just a recommendation, two cents worth.

Yeah. And it's and you know honestly that is something that really needs to happen and but it's very hard because it's of course in DFT right away. It is it is but it is something that the NPO can do and of course city Callaway has one of their commissioners who sit on the NPO right but it is something I think should be brought up. It is done in a lot in in a lot of cities where they've had to go back and implement because you actually block a lane with a bus especially when it's a fullsize bus having to stop and see done it. Yeah, I mentioned that too in case we expand the service in Callaway other than just Tinder Parkway or 98. Hopefully we can do that.

That's very good point. Okay. And I'm done with section one. Anybody else on transportation element policy 1.5? It says um yeah may choose to satisfy all transportation by contributing or paying to just see them pay for it. I mean it says they can contribute to it. Yeah. and in the city to transportation. You look like a little

so previously uh concurrency was done through for transportation through proportionate fair share and then later it was removed from the statute and it allowed local governments to basically strike the concurrency options. They can either have none but they have to deal with traffic somehow or implement a different way. The city of Callaway has done u impact fees to pay for transportation. So with impact fees, you do an impact fee study, you have to identify, you know, where that money will go. And so every development has to pay into the impact fees, has to pay impact fees, and that money goes into a pot that gets put in for improvements to define roads inside the city. That's how the city has chosen to to deal with concurrency.

But this is giving them an option out of that, right? If they pay for the the improvements theirelves, And it's up to the city. It's up to the city how that is mitigated.

Any other comments on that section? Transportation. Still on the first section. Just on the first section. No, the transportation is the second part. Oh, I'm sorry. I jumped ahead of section. What? What area? I still I still had a couple questions on the I'm sorry. Go ahead. You fill them in. I'm sorry.

So on page nine, they took out a public school capacity as part of the consideration for the large scale applications and stuff. Um is there a reason why we took out the public um school capacity? Um because I'm just I guess I'm curious because I would think that the schools in the area would be affected by you know the large scale um developments that do come in and so we definitely need you know a place for the children to go to school and and is that just going to fall on the school board?

No. So the school concurrency that was enacted uh through Senate Bill 360 15 years ago. It became a requirement. It's been something that actually the state had worked on for years here and they they got it into a comprehensive plan. The first part was you had to do an analyical agreement. Every local government did an analytical agreement with the school board so they could work together and plan together. So Bill when he has large scale land use amendments he shares them or in developments he shares them with the school board. So that is still a requirement and every local government had to adopt them. They all have them local agreements with the school board including the city of Kellaway. And then in 2010 with Senate Bill 360 part of that Senate Bill 360 was school concurrency. So it then required every local government to have a school element that had to be put into the comprehensive plans and had concurrency that was tied to it. So this all of it was mitigated and dealt with through the school board. So in 2018 they struck it. They took that part out. Uh there was a lot of there's a lot of complications to that statewide implementing with the local governments, the counties and the school board on the school concurrency. So the legislators end up taking that out. So it's no longer requirement. But what still is so the school concurrency stuff got strict, you know, this struck out through the comp plan. We removed that element. We've been removing them every time we update the comp plan. It's no longer required. No longer a required element. Correct. So we've removed it, but the inocal agreement remains. And so you'll see policies in here that have to remain to address the local agreement.

So bill still coordinates with the school board. The school board is still involved in the large scale developments as required by statute. On page 10 on 5.3,

it says that the city may consider implementing economic incentives designed to attract new businesses specifically in the retail ecotern tourism industries. Um, when they say implementing, I'm assuming that the city would be the one to come up with the incentives and pick and choose what businesses they would offer incentives to. Mhm. Okay, that is correct.

I'm done section one. Good to

on transportation elements. Any questions on that? I'm not sure section one more. Okay. Um on objective eight, it says um service map in order to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. What what map are we talking about there? It's the urban service area. So, it's the service area of the city. Okay. There's a map that has the the service area that the city has agreed upon with the county to service.

Yeah, it's in the the map series. Which map are we? I'm not sure which map we're talking about. It's map 10. City of Cal. Okay.

So that area, so you see the city boundary, then there's that green area. So the county and the city have a agreement that the city, that's their service area that they can service. So anything in there basically when you look out long range, it becomes the areas where the city would grow, where they would provide utilities and could annex inside that area. The county and the city have agreed on that. So that would be the future growth area of the city and as probably many aware of the city has utilities in a large portion of this area currently.

Okay, that was it. My questions on the section. Anything else? I have a couple questions as far as the transportation. Okay. On page 16 on 5.2 or removing the requirement for Bay County Sheriff's Office to compile accident data by location. So, yeah, we basically rewarded this. So, we struck the part and then re rewarded it where now it says use accident data compiled by the Bay County Sheriff's Office. I mean, they and I know they come and give the updates. I know they give the commission like every month on the calls and everything.

Well, right. Yeah, because they just started giving the details of, you know, like what intersection and stuff like that. Um but it's basically instead instead of saying required basically we're saying we're going to use that data that they they already inquired because they are of course you're pleased for but does that give them the option to not provide it or no I mean I think that I mean that's not what how this is worded but that actually is a different agreement that the city and the the sheriff has that doesn't have anything to do with this policy. Okay. I mean, they have an agreement for the policing of the city of Callaway, between the city and the sheriff's department.

I just wanted to make sure that it was going to do away with getting, you know what I mean, the detailed information because I mean, I think it's important for this, you know, for the safety of the city and Oh, no. Definitely not. So, that's a very good question.

And then my last question is going to be on page 17 under 5.6 six about it's stricken that the city will work with the Baytown trolley. I know that they were kind of talking about that um as far as to increase bus routes and service and I think I guess I with it being stricken I mean does that take away with with trying to have the bus routes for Callaway will it affect anything or

so basically these policies were put in here. This was when really that Baytown trolley was beginning back in the 2010. So basically now the Baytown trolley is under the NPO and of course you have a every city has a commissioner who sits on the NPO. So this has been addressed. This is the reason we took it out. This already happens. This happens now between the NPO and the local governments. the everything the road planning the bus the whole now what's called bayway you know Bayway so all that has been solidified and that's why we've removed these policies that's already been taken care of

and I understand that they're working with them and stuff but you know I don't want an instance to come up and go oh well you know it's not in the ordinance you know what I'm saying it's not written in the ordinance because you know that's never happened. You know what I'm saying? Oh, it's not in writing or if it's not in our ordinance or anything like that. So, that's why I was just concerned about about the relationship with the trolley being removed out of the ordinance.

Yeah. And this actually that is part of a different agreement between the NPOS's and the city and and all the cities. It's all the cities in Bay County and the county that work with the NPA and how that board is made up. It's a whole different process from this comp plan. This comp plan doesn't dictate that part of it. Yeah, cuz I I attend those meetings as well. So, and like I said, I I have witnessed over last 30 years a lot of people walking Cherry Street to go to the bus stop on Yes. the Parkway. So, absolutely. Maybe someday in the future we can extend that to help them out.

Hopefully with the sidewalks it'll help a little bit keep them off the a little ways off the road as far as safety. All right. Anything else? Anyone on that section?

Clear. We'll move on to housing element. The only question I had I noticed you had some dates December 31st, 2027 to complete some some things within this area. Is that I'm just curious why that date was picked because it would give us enough time to to get a couple of these things. Some of this stuff needs to be done we're going to have to do, but it's going to take coordinating with the city Bill and his staff on some of these other items. Okay. And so what we did, we put enough time in there to accomplish those. Very good.

And some of it's LDR updates that's tied it, you know, and so we we're going to and I'll talk about after we're done with these nine elements, but there's going to be some changes to the comp plan and the LDRs that we're proposing that's going along with this update. Okay. Any board comments on that section?

Next section is recreation and open space elements. And I will say on this good previsit the recreation open space element the changes that occurred has occurred in the last six to seven years with the recreation open space element is the level of service is no longer required. Um you have to have the element but you don't have to have level of service. uh the city has decided to keep the level of service um and maintain it for what it is. And then the city of course as y'all know has a significant amount of of parks way more than a lot of other locations. Question. Do we have a recreation advisory committee?

We used to. Says here you establish one. policy 2.2. I didn't know maybe leisure service was tied into that or what. Just just a point I noted. I know we used to. We'll check into it. Jay, you remember to look into

Yes. You can make it to planet board and attempt to Oh, well, you know, the word establish is is kind of mandate as far as I'm doesn't have a date. It'll be established. THAT'S GOOD. YEAH. Any anyone else want to comment on that section before we move on?

Okay. Uh infrastructure element. I think we should have something in here about lift stations. Cannot smell.

No comments. We'll move on to the conservation element.

I do have a question. I'm sorry. Okay.

I do have a question on that one. um on the policy 1.2 on page 24 I guess it said UM about 90% you know of the existing treatment capacity for the sewer system then Callaway will develop and implement an expansion program. I guess I'm kind of curious of why you would wait till 90% to to kind of have a to to develop a plan, you know, if you're at the 90% capacity and it would be allocated. It'd be to increase the allocated demand. You have to start planning by statute a local you know local government who operates in and which is Bay County military and the cities because they're all part of the military plan at 75% once you reach 75% you have to start planning to increase that plan and so this policy has always been held at 90% to increase the allocated amount which is the amount you're allocated each local government's allocated a certain amount to the military So it's 75% not 90.

Well 75% is when you have to when they have to plan to upgrade the plant. So Military Point sewer plant would have to be the wastewater treatment plant would at 75% they would have to begin planning for the upgrades to which they already are. They're working on upgrades now the military plant long range improvements out there. Well then what does it mean by develop? If it says development implement I mean is developing is whenever they build it or start to no this is so do what they need to do

the plant operates they have a capacity for the overall plant. So that plant they have they have to operate that and when it reaches 75% is when they would expand the plant or plan for it which you know they are today. This policy is actually you have an allocated amount. So you you're allocated the city of Callaway through an analopee agreement with Bay County and the other cities are allocated amount. So if you were to reach that amount, you would need to increase that amount that you're allocated from the the plant would have to have the capacity, but it's your allocated amount that you would then begin coordinating with the county on the increase. So, you're saying if we had 10% allocated to the city treatment plants and we used 9% of it, then we'd have to renegotiate it or what?

Well, you would if you're reaching your allocated amount, the city would need to be coordinating with the county to increase it for future. Last I heard, we're at 64% of our allocated amount. We're in good shape. There's 300 houses going next door. See, is that before or after they build all the the developments have been approved? We we've burned up some of that, but I I haven't heard lately with the percentages, but that was not that long ago. I want to say about a year and a half ago. I know we've had a lot of

But the good thing is, I mean, the county is um looking at improvements to Military Point to expand and increase that plan. You good? Good. Okay, we'll move on to the next section then. Uh, conservation elements. There's any comments there? I didn't have any. comments. The next one is a coastal management. No comments there. We're running to the intergovernmental coordination element. I will point out that the page number is incorrect on this.

Yeah, thank you. Bill had mentioned that and that that would be my fault. It says page 45. put on that and that that has been overdated also that it's those little things that'll get you. Hey, I checked I checked that myself and I numbered this

and no other comments in the capital improvement element. Lot of deletion on that one. No comment on that one. And then the next one is totally deleted with the uh public school facility elements and the reason for that deletion.

It's as I've mentioned earlier, it's no longer required. So they took it out of 163. Okay. And as I mentioned before, the so the school element that was required, this element was required to put in your fee, put in your comp plan 15 years ago. They removed this, but the interlocal agreement still remains. So the city has an interlocal agreement with the school board that is in effect and there's policies throughout this comp plan that I actually address. I know throughout earlier school boards and things had been mentioned. Yeah. And that's those are required by statute.

Okay. Uh, next session, private property right elements. That's a short half page

and that was an element that was added 2019. Um, the legislators added, somebody lobbyed to get this put in to the confl ever local government had to adopt. It's the shortest argument, the shortest requirement. Every state of Florida had to adopt THIS and then we went through and updated all the comprehensive map series, the future land use map series. We updated all of them with current data from both the state and the county and DOT for the road maps and the NPO to also not only address district 3's level service but also what's in the NPO the long range transportation plan the 2045 long range transportation plan that the NPO has. Uh the question I have is the city of Kellaway 2045 comprehension plan data analysis still a part of the comprehension 2045 comprehension plan

one document it is not no it it I put it in as one document so you wouldn't have two okay I just want to make sure yeah it won't it will not be adopted it has to be transmitted with the comp plan to support it but they they this used to be required to be adopted But now they no longer have to be adopted. And so we have to make sure I put this in here so to make sure it does not go in the ordinance. When we adopt at the final, we don't want this in the ordinance, but it has to be transmitted to the state. Okay. So there's it's just for our viewing. Uh no comments or anything.

Yeah, it's for support of the elements. It's required by statute, but you have it. You just don't adopt it. Very good. Um, anyone in the audience would like to comment to what we just discussed? I see none. Okay. And thank you members for your comments. They're really good and uh for bearing with me in the time to go through each section. With this, I will entertain a motion.

Motion switch. We need to we need to get a bill something to take to the commission. So for the comprehension plan for 202. Okay. J roll call, please. Board member Carteran. Yes. Board member Langston. Yes. Board member Overway. Yes. Board member Ki. Yes. Vice Chair Dooall. Yes. Chairman Hagen. Yes. And with that, I will adjourn the meeting. We need a a motion to adjourn, don't we? Yes, we do. Yes, we do.

Can I say something before we Yes, sir. But we won't adjourn. I'm sorry. Go ahead. So, the other part of this that I wanted to mention you and I didn't want to do it in the beginning because it's kind of it gets kind of confusing. So, I don't know how many y'all are aware of. I came and did a presentation back in 18 19 and then back in 20 on the Tindle joint land use study.

So I worked with the county to prepare the tendle joint land use study which is the joint land use study analyzes it's paid through the department of defense. It analyzes everything outside the fence. So it focuses back on the community how the military base impacts the community and how the community impacts the military base. And then it looks at ways to work together and to make those impacts less and be able to have, you know, a base that's continues to grow and the mission continues and the local governments can continue to grow. They find common grounds and we work it through, you know, any impacts both ways. What how Tindle impacts the community and how the community impacts Tindle. So that study makes recommendations. Part of the recommendations was the update to this comp plan. uh because without an updated comp plan that doesn't help the base if your comp plan's not up to date. And in addition to it, we had um overlay districts to implement for Tindle. And what it is is coordination elements to coordinate certain stuff. Tendle has a couple of areas that is affected by Callaway that can be affected by Callaway and continue growth whether it be you know frequency spectrum whether it's height with their imaginary surface areas for their their runway their takeoff and approach zones and then of course Parker has the higher potential zone. It that does not go into Callaway but Callaway does have the other uh flight areas and frequency spectra areas. We have written those overlay districts and those overlay districts were in this comp plan up until a few months ago and you're going to see them again. We're going to bring them back. But something happened with the legislators last session and they passed uh what is called House Bill 180 and it's targeted for three hurricanes. It's Milton, Debbie and Alen that happened in 2024.

And so any local agreement who declared a state of emergency during 2024 for either three of those hurricanes are subject to this Senate bill. What this Senate Bill 180 does is it does not allow a look agreement to adopt anything in the comp plan or land regulations that's more restrictive than what was there in 2024. So we can't implement those overlay districts until that bill is resolved. It expires in 27 2027. I've been told there's legislators going to work on it to get the northern part of the state out of it. But regardless, that's still going to be another year. So, Department of Defense paid for the comp plan to be updated. They paid for those overlay districts. All of this will go, not only will we send this to the state, it's all so going to department of fence. And those overlay districts have already been submitted to them, but we will bring them back and bring them back. will put them back in your comp plan after Senate Bill 180 is resolved. And they're literally I have a comp plan now where they Department of Commerce, it went into effect in July and and they started throwing comp plans out starting in September, October. We I have one that was that they basically deemed non-adopted and threw it out over a level of service for sewer because it was more restrictive than what was previously adopted.

And so they're they're in a bad position. You know, they they didn't want this, but it complicates things on comp plan updates. So, we have to make sure we don't have anything more restrictive in there. I appreciate that info. But that'll be just the overlay district will be transmitted at that time, not

Nope. We will bring the overlay districts back when that when Senate Bill 180 is resolved and um it will also have LDR changes. It has some comp plan and LDR changes. And what we were going to do is those dates we pushed off for the LDR. We were going to make those changes and stick them in the LDR at the same time. We were all going we were going to do all this together, but with House Bill 180 we were prevented us. So I didn't want to tell you that up front because it's it gets confusing. Appreciate that. Yeah. Thank you very much for uh explaining. Thank you and thank you for I mean that's very impressive.

Most local governments don't spend the time just did. Okay. Uh I will entertain a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor say I. I. Thank you, Jay. No worries.