CITY OF LYNN HAVEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING April 1, 2025 The Lynn Haven Planning Commission's Regular Meeting was held on Tuesday, April 1, 2025, at 5:30 p.m., at the Lynn Haven City Hall Meeting Chambers. Present: Aaron White, Chairman Joseph Ashbrook, Vice Chairman Stan Parron Erik Nolte Morgan Doolittle Kenny Murphy Robert Waddell Amanda Richard, Planning Director 1. Call to Order Mr. White, Vice Chairman called the meeting to order at 5:30pm. 2. Jeffrey Snyder - Comments to the Board Mr. Snyder addressed the board and stated that he learned from Mr. Waterstradt that sometimes items that are brought to the Planning Commission makes the City smaller and sometimes it makes the City bigger, but to make the City better by working together is best. He stated to trust the City staff, to vote with a conscience, and he wished the commission all the best. Mr. White stated that he attended the City Commission meeting on March 25th as a Planning Commission representative to provide dialogue regarding the Bay Breeze Shores development. He explained to the City Commission that the Planning Commission minutes were not approved at that time and would be at their next meeting. Mr. White welcomed Mr. Doolittle to Planning Commission. 3. Selection of a New Chairman Mr. Nolte made a motion to nominate Mr. White to serve as Chairman, Second to motion: Mr. Waddell On vote: Nolte: aye Waddell: aye Ashbrook: aye Doolittle: aye Parron: aye Murphy: aye White: abstained Motion passed: 6-0 Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page 1 of9 4. Discussion and possible selection of a new Vice Chairman Mr. White made a motion to nominate Mr. Ashbrook to serve as Vice Chairman, Second to motion: Mr. Doolittle On vote: White: aye Doolittle: aye Ashbrook: abstained Nolte: aye Parron: aye Waddell: aye Murphy: aye Motion passed: 6-0 5. Approval of Regular Planning Commission meeting minutes of January 7, 2025 Mr. Ashbrook made a motion to approve the minutes for January 7, 2025 Second to motion: Mr. Nolte On vote: Ashbrook: aye Nolte: aye Doolittle: abstained Parron: aye Waddell: aye Murphy: aye White: aye Motion passed: 6-0 6. Amendment to the Unified Land Development Code Section 6.05.15 Specific Parking Requirements for Major Recreational Equipment Ms. Richard stated the applicant is the City of Lynn Haven. The City of Lynn Haven City Commission is proposing to amend Section 6.05.15 of the ULDC relating to the requirements for parking and storage of major recreational equipment. Since Hurricane Michael there has been an increase in the number of recreational vehicles parked on driveways, which is currently not permissible under the current code. There are major violations of approximately 300 RV's parked in driveways, and the City Commission is looking at making the code more flexible. As this is an amendment to the ULDC the item needs to go to the Planning Commission first. The proposed amendment is to Section 6.05.15 ofthe ULDC and can be seen in the strikethrough version of the proposed draft Ordinance#1177 that was included in the agenda packet. Mr. Nolte stated he has concerns with Item 8 b. regarding the limit of one (1) needs definitions, does this apply to boat trailers, utility trailers, work trailers, etc. Ms. Richard stated the rear yard can still be utilized for parking. There was discussion regarding the length of driveways, time constraints, and the appearance of vehicles parking in front yards. In some subdivisions it is not permissible to have recreational vehicles on your property. Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page. 2 of 9 Mr. White asked if these items could be stored under a pole barn. Ms. Richard stated yes. Mr. Ashbrook asked if this item would go to the next City Commission meeting. Ms. Richard stated yes for the first reading by title only, and then the second meeting in April will be the Public Hearing. Public Comments Ms. Sheila Burho addressed the board and stated her comments about the number of violations and that the current violations for what we have are not being enforced. She spoke about the parking and appearance of vehicles parked in front yards and how that will make mudholes on properties. There are some properties that have numerous vehicles parked in driveways now, and what will properties look like if this is approved. There are too many gray areas in the proposed ordinance, there is a lot to consider, and not to do things nilly willy. Mr. Johnnie Beshears addressed the board and stated his concerns about the number of vehicles that would be parked on a property, and the visibility triangle. The City is not a HOA, and the current ordinance allows RV's on properties in the rear yard. Someone will be unhappy regardless of the decision made. Mr. Jeffrey Snyder addressed the board and stated that common sense should be used for what is permissible, and that there is teeth in the ordinance to enforce. The vehicles should be operational, licensed, not lived in unless there is a disaster. Mr. Waddell agrees with Mr. Snyders comments. Mr. Ashbrook stated that in communities with deed restrictions, and covenants, it is policed and fined, what can and cannot be a problem. Cannot please all, and an argument could be made on both sides. Needs to have teeth for the fines, but some people will pay the fine, and move on. This does not need to expand the problem, hold their feet to the fire, and there are neighbors to consider. Mr. Obos stated that this ordinance mirrors that Panama City recently approved. There are too many violations, and code enforcement cannot enforce it as there are not enough code enforcement officers. Mr. Parron asked if golf carts would be included as he sees more ofthem than the other items, and should they be included on the list. Mr. Obos stated that they are not listed. Mr. Parron asked if they are not included, does that leave a loophole. Mr. Nolte stated he disagrees as the City is golf cart friendly. Mr. Murphy stated to stay with one (1) but some houses have larger yards than others and consider an application and permitting process for more than one (1). Mr. Ashbrook made a motion to approve the ULDC Section 6.05.15 Specific Parking Requirements for Major Recreational Equipment with conditions that the number ofvehicles, and definition of golf cart be considered, and a potential expediated process for additional vehicles, Second to motion: Mr. Doolittle On vote: Ashbrook: aye Doolittle: aye Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page 3 of9 Nolte: aye Parron: aye Waddell: aye Murphy: aye White: aye Motion passed 7-0 7. Request for Development Order - Arc of the Bay Parking Lot Expansion: Parcel ID#10872-000- 000; 1804 Carolina Ave Ms. Richard stated the applicant/owner is Arc of the Bay (St. Andrews /Bay Center). The agent is Chris Shortt, P.E.,/Richard Pfuntner, P.E., Dewberry Engineering. The project name is additional parking and Dry Retention Pond, and the requested action is Development Order approval. The property is located at 1804 Carolina Avenue. The parcel size is 3.44 acres, and the parcel number is 10872-000-000. The parcel has a Public/Institution Land Use. The project engineer, Mr. Pfuntner, was present to answer any questions. The reviewing engineer, Doug Crook, P.E., Panhandle Engineering, was present to answer any questions. Ms. Richard stated the applicant is requesting development order approval to construct additional parking to serve the Arc ofthe Bay, and a dry retention pond on the property along with supporting infrastructure improvements. The Site Plans have been reviewed and have been found to be in compliance with the City of Lynn Haven Unified Land Development Code, Technical Standards and Florida State requirements. Mr. White asked about the retention pond and the new infrastructure. Mr. D.T. Horton, P.E., Dewberry Engineering addressed the board and stated that the pond was sized to accommodate the existing facility and additional parking. Mr. White asked about the number of parking spaces. Mr. Horton stated there will be a total of thirty-eight (38) parking spaces. Public Comments None Mr. Nolte made a motion to approve the development order as presented, Second to motion: Mr. Doolittle On vote: Nolte: aye Doolittle: aye Ashbrook: aye Parron: aye Waddell: aye Murphy: aye White: aye Motion passed 7-0 Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page 4 of 9 8.1 Request for Development Order - Circle K Convenience Store with Fuel Sales: Parcel ID#11573- 000-000: 4628 Highway 389 Ms. Richard stated the applicant/owner is 390 Lynn Haven, LLC. The agent is Sandie Owens, MDM Services, Inc. The project name is Circle K Convenience Store with Fuel Sales and the requested action is Development Order approval. The property is located at 4628 Highway 389. The parcel size is 3.44L acres, the parcel number is 11573-000-010, and the parcel is vacant. The parcel has a Commercial Land Use. The project engineer, Mr. Daimian D. Leslie, P.E., MDM Services, Inc., was not present to answer any questions, however, Ms. Owens was present to answer any questions. The reviewing engineer, Richard Pfuntner, P.E., Dewberry Engineering was present to answer any questions. The traffic engineer was Mick Cleland, AICP, Columbia Engineering & Services. The reviewing traffic engineer was Vincent Spahr, P.E., RSP, Kimley Horn. Ms. Richard stated the applicant is requesting development order approval for the construction of a 5200 sq. ft. convenience store with seven (7) covered gas pumps, parking, driveways, utilities, and required landscaping. The infrastructure improvements for the proposed development was part of the Multi-Tenant Shared Infrastructure development order that was presented to the Planning Commission on August 6, 2024, and was approved by the City Commission on August 27, 2024. A traffic impact analysis was submitted and reviewed. Bay County has issued a Right of Way Use permit for the construction of a turn lane on CR389 South of SR390, and an Access Connection (driveway) permit. The stormwater will remain private. The Site Plans have been reviewed and have been found to be in compliance with the City ofLynn Haven Unified Land Development Code, Technical Standards and Florida State requirements. Ms. Sandie Owens, MDM Services, Inc., addressed the board and stated there will be two (2) turn lanes on 389. Mr. Ashbrook asked what will occur when and if390is a six-lane will bei the retention ponds be sacrificed, and will the stormwater ponds be relocated. Ms. Owens stated that the property owner would or will deal with that. Public Comments None Mr. Ashbrook made a motion to approve the development order as presented, Second to motion: Mr. Parron On vote: Nolte: aye Ashbrook: aye Parron: aye Waddell: aye Doolittle: aye Nolte: aye Murphy: aye White: aye Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page 5 of9 Motion passed 7-0 9. Application for the Marina Island Overlay and Master Plan Ms. Richard stated the applicant owner is Marina Island, LLC. The agent is Andy Bales, Manager. Thej project name: is Marina Island Overlay District, and the requested action is Master Plan Overlay approval. The location is the old Fuel Depot property at the west end of 10th Street. The parcel size is 179 acres, and the property is vacant. The parcels have a land use of Commercial; Industrial; Low Density Residential. The owner ofthis property wishes to establish the Marina Island Overlay District on the former fuel depot property. This will be a walkable master planned community with a mix of residential, commercial, recreation, conservation, water facilities and marina. The developers would like to use flexible and innovative technologies and development strategies which would not strictly conform to all aspects of the City's Unified Land Development Code (ULDC). For this reason, they are applying for an overlay for their development to allow for more flexibility in design. They are not permitted to deviate from any aspect of the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan, or State and Federal requirements for things such as density, stormwater, etc., however, the overlay does allow them flexibility in things such as setbacks, street design, signage, etc. The overlay ordinance contains their development specifics for things that differ from the ULDC. Ifthe overlay and master plan are approved, the applications for Development Orders for development will be reviewed for compliance with the criteria set out in these documents. Where something is not covered by the overlay, it will revert to the requirements of the ULDC. Ms. Richard explained the development order procedure when the application along with engineered site plans, are received, the information is distributed to the Technical Review Committee (TRC) for review. The TRC committee consists of herself to review the planning portion, the infrastructure director reviews streets and utilities, the public works director reviews the water, sewer, and stormwater portion, and the fire inspector reviews fire safety, and an outside engineer also reviews the stormwater, drainage, etc., and thisi is not an application for a development order. Ifapproved, the development orders will be reviewed against this overlay and master plan. The overlay cannot override State and Federal requirements, and the ULDC contains City codes and technical standards. The master plan allows them to not conform to certain ULDC requirements, such as roads being the same as City standard, they tell us what they want, like walk paths, canals, and other items not in the ULDC they wish to do. So, this is specific to their project but if something is not addressed in the master plan, then it reverts to the City ULDC. The density and impervious surface ratio cannot be changed as they are Comprehensive Plan requirements. Mr. White asked about an overlay taxing. Ms. Richard stated that a development agreement is being worked on with the City, City Attorney and the owner, and that it is a thirty (30) year agreement. Mr. Obos stated the development agreement would be recorded and presented to the City Commission for two hearings. This project has been in the works for years, and impact fees would be addressed. Ms. Richard stated the development agreement only goes to the City Commission; it does go to the Planning Commission. Mr. Ashbrook asked ifthis would go through phases. Ms. Richard stated yes that each phase would go to the Planning Commission, and then to the City Commission, as development orders. Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page 6 of9 Mr. Nolte stated that he is an employee of a business that is west and butts up to this property, and that he consulted with the City Attorney and there is no conflict ofi interest. Mr. Andy Bales, Marina Island Manager, addressed the board and stated the Marina Island Overlay District would be a very exclusive community to include restaurants, parks, marinas, and residential. Ordinance #1031 addresses the marina. They are looking to enhance the community, not working against it. Mr. White asked when approved what would be the phasing. Mr. Bales stated that first would be the marina, there would be a cut in the causeway, there would be dry stack storage in the southern section. Phase One would be the west residential with three hundred single family homes, and ninety-nine low rise condominiums. Mr. Doolittle asked about the 10th Street cut. Mr. Bales stated that beyond the fence is not their property, and the causeway is at the bridge. Mr. Doolittle asked ifit would be pipes or raised. Mr. Bales stated pipes. Public Comments Robert Volpe, attorney with Holtzman Vogel ofTallahassee, addressed the board and stated that he is representing Merrick Incorporated, which is an industrial business west of the proposed development, Oyster Bar LLC. They are not opposed to the development; however, they have concerns about the master plan not having adequate buffers for the residential/industrial line. The mixed use land use could interfere with the existing industrial business as they are operating long hours, although they meet the City's noise requirement. They are looking for compatibility with the new development. They are requesting to add a condition to require protecting the industrial land with adequate buffers, and to ensure that Arthur Drive to the south that is used by trucks and heavy equipment is preserved. Mr. Joe Tannehill addressed the board, distributed an informational brochure about the business, and reviewed his family history. He stated that there are about 150 employees, and they make weigh machines that are sold worldwide. The company stated in 1978 and there are some employees that have been there 47 years. Heis not here to stop the development but does not want to be effected by them. He has no complaints about the overlay master plan, except the residential is too close to the industrial. The Lynn Haven noise ordinance is to be within seventy-five decibels at the fence. This is an industry that works 24 hours a day and there are workers making noise at 2am. There is no buffer detail in writing, and he is looking for assurances. Mr. Robert Volpe addressed the board and stated that he spoke with the City Attorneys office today for language and conditions for the overlay or compliance to protect the industrial land use buffers and to protect and maintain Arthur Drive as is it a public road, and the developer can take care of upgrades to the road, possibly. Mr. Obos stated that late this afternoon there was a consensus of the language for the buffer widths to be 20' in the Marina Island property perimeter. This change in the language does not have to come back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Ashbrook asked if both parties agreed. Mr. Obos stated yes. Mr. Bales stated that the scale ofthe master plan sketch makes it appear that the houses are closer to the property line than they are. There will be natural development, a nice area with significant buffers and sound devices to not encroach on the industrial park side. Having buffer language will not be an issue for them as they cannot sell ifthere is noise, and Arthur Drive is not at capacity. They are looking to work together to have no difficulties for Marina Island or the industrial park. The 20' buffer makes sense with devices. Mr. White asked what the actual distance was. Mr. Nolte stated that from west to east it was 150'. Mr. White asked about the road maintenance, and ifthat is the developers responsibility. Mr. Bales stated that the roads will be deeded to the City for the Rails to Trails, and there will be a trailhead at the water. Mr. Obos stated the roads must meet City code. Mr. Ashbrook asked if this would be a gated Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page 7 of9 community. Mr. Bales stated no. If the roads do not meet City technical standards, then no the City will not take over and maintain them, they will remain private. When the development order is submitted, a plat is also submitted, and in the dedications on the plat, it is indicated which roads are public or private. Mr. Jim Prater addressed the board and stated he is a member of the Friend of the Lynn Haven Bayou. As a homeowner he is excited for this development, and most neighbors are also excited. Mr. Beshears addressed the board and asked if the east property of the entrance on Tennessee Avenue is that included. Ms. Richard stated yes that it is low density residential. This goes to the City Commission for a first reading, and at the second meeting there will be a public hearing and DPZ will be giving a presentation. Mr. Doolittle asked about the land to the east that is owned by FSU, whether there were any comments or concerns from FSU. Mr. Bales stated that there is an access easement agreement. Mr. White stated that the smallest lot is 14', and that it could be common area. Mr. Parron asked about the large property and with the existing neighborhood, what will the traffic be like with two thousand homes, which will be at least two thousand cars on 10th Street. Ms. Richard stated that a traffic impact analysis was submitted for the whole development that was reviewed by Kimley Horn, and their representative will be present at the City Commission meeting. A boulevard will also be constructed for traffic as an ingress/egress, with rails to trails. When the development order is received the traffic will be looked at. Mr. Parron asked if that would be for each phase. Ms. Richard stated yes at each phase. Mr. Parron asked ift the City is ready for a project this large with the water and sewer. Ms. Richard stated this is not a development order application, it is the master plan with a thirty (30) year development agreement. Mr. Obos stated the City has been involved with this for at least ten (10) years and the capacity is addressed in the development agreement, and they are prepared for upgrades. Mr. Ashbrook made a motion to approve the development order for the Marina Island master plan conditioned upon a buffer: requirement between Marina Island and the adjacent industrial properties, Second to motion: Mr. Waddell On vote: Ashbrook: aye Waddell: aye Nolte: aye Parron: aye Doolittle: aye Murphy: aye White: aye Motion passed 7-0 City Planner's Report Ms. Richard thanked the members, and everyone for attending the meeting. Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page 8 of9 With there being no further business or discussion, the meeting adjourned at 7:00 pm. Aaron White, Chairman prepared by Vicki Harrison Planning Commission April 1, 2025 Page 9 of9