Beulah Master Plan/Frank Reeder Road Widening Joint Public Meeting Tomorrow Night at Beulah Middle School

County Staff and the team from Sigma Consulting will be in Beulah at Beulah Middle School tomorrow night at 6:00 PM to host a meeting on two big District 1 projects:  

1.  The Beulah Master Plan

2.  Frank Reeder Road Upgrade from Triumph Gulf Coast

Citizens are encouraged to attend this informative session where the first draft of the long awaited Beulah Master Plan will be presented.

We will take questions from citizens on both projects and will take feedback into account as staff works to complete the Master plan over the next several months.

Discussion of Concurrency at Agenda Review Yields a Breakthrough

 

Click this video, above, to hear the Board's discussion this morning on Concurrency

At this morning's agenda review of the Board of County Commissioners, I requested a discussion about our land development code.

Specifically--I wanted a discussion of Concurrency, Transportation Mobility Fees, and/or Impact Fees.

We are the only large county in Florida without BOTH a half cent LOST tax AND some form of Impact fee to mitigate the impact of growth on existing infrastructure and public facilities.

Over the last ten years, we have seen growth that has been unbridled and it has created issues with traffic, stormwater, and school capacity at some schools.

Concurrency, had it been in place, could have helped ameliorate some of the issues with this growth.

Concurrency was always a state requirment for countys and school boards until 2011 when it was removed as a state requirement by then Governor Rick Scott to assist the state's recovery from the Great Recession.  When it was removed as a state requirement, the Escambia BCC inserted concurrency into the County Land Development code in 2011.  Two years later, in 2013, the BCC removed it from the LDC, in order to stimulate our area's economy that was still suffering impacts from the recession.

That's how we got where we now are, in 2024.

I brought concurrency to the board and traffic mobility fees three times since my last election, once in 2021 and twice in 2022.  I did not have three votes to support these measures at that time.

I brought it again today and have now gained solid support from my counterparts to have staff do some research on the issue and bring back recommendations for implementation.  

I was heartened to get the support--because we need to bring this back and more importantly--the people want it and the county needs it.  I'm glad we are making some forward progress on this.  More to come in the months ahead.

D1 Perdido Town Hall Monday, September 18th

I'll be hosting a town-hall meeting in Perdido on Monday, September 18th at 6:00 PM.

I have not yet selected and booked a venue, but I will this week and will announce it via a press release from the county's CMR department.

As I typically do, I will request relevant staff be present to discuss the wide ranging issues of concern for the folks that live and work in this area of District 1.  And I am open to adding topics as well, so anyone who would like to have focused discussions added to the agenda can offer such ideas by emailing them to District1@myescambia.com or by calling me directly at 850-293-1459.

Some initial topics of consideration/discussion at the town hall:

--Traffic and the Roundabout, including the recent study of it's performance and potential improvements

--Growth Management and better notification of residents prior to large developments being approved

--the timeline for completion of the multi-use path

--Homelessness and the implications on the community and how the county is working to address this issue

--creating more parking at the access points and providing additional access

--beach safety

--litter and roadway refuse collection

--Incorporation questions 

I'll also invite my counterpart elected officials from the State, ECUA, and School Board to attend and bring relevant updates.

More information to come shortly.

82nd Coffee with the Commissioner LIVE from the Beach Tomorrow Morning!

We will have our 82nd Coffee with the Commissioner event live tomorrow morning from Perdido Key Beach in District 1.  The event will take place live at 7:00 AM from the Perdido Key Chamber of Commerce's visitor center at 15500 Perdido Key Drive.

We will have county administrator Wes Moreno there to bring an update on county issues, Public Safety Director Eric Gilmore will be present to bring an update on public safety issues throughout the county and in Perdido Key, and our special guest for the day will be Perdido Key Area Chamber of Commerce President Tammy Thurrow.  We will discuss issues that are challenging out in Perdido--to include: traffic, growth, the Habitat Conservation Plan, Building Cap,  public beach access, beach signage, development, the coming tourist season, the roundabout, potential incorporation of Perdido Key, lifeguards, the Chamber's challenges being a state-line chamber and many other issues of concern from the assembled audience in the visitor's center conference room.

Watch online live and submit your questions in real time on my Facebook page at   www.facebook.com/CommissionerBergosh/. 

Approving Developments--Inside the Process Part I--Traffic Study

There is/was a 28.64 acre parcel of land at the foot of the Baars Bridge just north of Perdido Key that has been given a development order for the construction of 325 dwelling units total--to include luxury townhomes.

This project was years in the making, and all the forms were submitted prior to this area becomming a part of District 1 after our once per decade redistricting that happened late last year (and went into effect 10 days after our vote on December 3rd).  

In October of 2021, prior to this area being in D1, the owner of the property applied to our Development Services Department for approval(s) to move forward with constructing this development.  The final approved development order was issued in early January (January 12th to be precise) of this year, less than 30 days after this area became a part of D1.  (I give this timeline to insure folks know it and do not believe incorrect information/misinformation that is being promulgated online by some with axes to grind over the way redistricting went down and other personal issues as well)

Bottom line:  I wasn't aware this process was underway during the redistricting process--most were not---except for the staff that was following existing rules, codes, and ordinances to process a bonafide development request which already fit within the allowable uses of our codes.

The parcel was/is zoned Commercial with a FLU (Future Land Use) designation of MU-S (Mixed Use, Suburban) which allows for such a development without going to the planning board.

The project did, however, go through the vetting required by the Land Development Code--which does include rigorous study of the potential impacts such a development will have on the adjacent area.

A five million dollar piece of property--It is my understanding from speaking with a different developer who "passed" on purchasing and developing this particular parcel--that"Yes, he [current owner] is paying tax on that land every year which is substantial, and he tried to generate revenue to offset this tax bill with various temporary business ventures he started, including adding a shaved-ice truck and even some slides for kids--both of which were not well-received by nearby residents."  He continued "so at some point to hold a property like that--it has to generate revenue to truly be an asset and not a liability--and thus this development."

Earlier this month, multiple residents contacted me in anger and frustration about this project.  Several came to our last public meeting. One individual asked if I would hold a townhall in Perdido so all the

Apartment Construction Catches Neighborhood by Surprise

Residents are concerned about a large apartment complex being constructed in Perdido--questioning whether existing traffic infrastructure can "handle" this influx of traffic

 In October of last year, a large parcel of property at the foot of the Theo Baars  bridge (which at that time was in District 2) was selected for the development of an upscale apartment community by its owner(s).

Paperwork was submitted with development services, and the process to approve the development was commenced.

This parcel, indicated above, was already zoned commercial so no rezoning notifications were necessary, nor was any action by the planning board.

The applicant submitted the appropriate plans, paperwork, and fees in order to receive an approved development order which was granted by the county in early January of 2022 (just a few months after this portion of Escambia County reverted to District 1)

So the neighbors did not see this coming for these reasons, and they--like me--share obvious concerns about traffic in this area that is growing.  Several have called me and/or emailed me with concerns.

So it is really two issues.  First issue is should a large construction project like this --even if a zoning change is not necessary-- be required to notify neighbors?  A case could be made that this could be a way to keep neighbors from being blindsided.  I'm in favor of initiating a standalone apartment ordinance to be added to the LDC as these developments are always, it seems, problematic for an assortment of reasons.

Second issue is traffic.  Can the roads handle the influx?

Part of the development review process looks at the capacity of existing roadways and a formulaic process (based upon existing traffic counts and capacities) determines if the existing roads can handle the estimated new load.  In this instance, it was determined by staff the existing roads could handle this development's impact(s) on the surrounding area.

NOW HERE'S THE GOOD NEWS:

There are a significant number of traffic improvements currently underway and/or slated for this area, to include:

--Roundabout at Johnson's Beach Road at Perdido Key Drive

--Intersection Improvements at Innerarity Point Road/Gulf Beach Hwy

--Multiple safety improvements on Sorrento--to include a light coming at Doug Ford Drive and Sorrento Road

--$2 Million in D1 LOST funding was just approved by the board last regular meeting for the PD&E for 4-lanes on Sorrento Road--which will potentially slice 5 years off of the horizon for completion of this vital project.

Read all about the $12 Million in D1 Infrastructure approved at our last meeting, here. (Big deal)

And if the small county roads that are adjacent to this new development need improvement for functionality--I'll get funding for widening/safety enhancements.

We constantly deal with the competing pressures of not allowing growth juxtaposed with the development community which want to build to address the  supply shortage of housing which leaves some residents with no viable, affordable housing options.  This is a constant struggle, and I know we have to do the best we can on infrastructure, which we will continue to do to the best of our ability.

But meanwhile, according to many experts including the latest PNJ Civicon expert, we in this area have not built enough to keep up with demand over the last decade----and this is the reason for high home prices and our rental rates which are in the stratosphere price-wise.

75th Coffee with the Commissioner this Wednesday Morning on Facebook Live---All About Growth Management and Zoning

Join us this Wednesday, August 10th, for our 75th Coffee with the Commissioner live on Facebook.  We will have Administrator Wes Moreno and Public Safety Director Eric Gilmore giving updates on the county and public safety, respectively, and as our special guests we will be joined by Development Services Director Horace Jones and Andrew "Drew" Holmer, Division Manager, Development Services. We will talk with Drew and Horace about upcoming developments, how the county's development process works, and how this county department works in conjunction with the planning board and the board of county commissioners to implement the land development code.  This is one area of governance that receives a lot of scrutiny and many citizen complaints, so I look forward to the discussion and having a lot of answers to citizen questions and complaints.  

We will start at 6:30 live on Facebook at www.facebook.com/CommissionerBergosh/ as is always the case--residents are encouraged to participate and send questions to via the comment feature during the livestream or by sending questions in advance to district1@myescambia.com or by calling the D1 office at 850-595-4910.

Development Fees---or Sales Tax Surcharge? Or Both?

 I will be discussing bringing back concurrency to the BCC's Land Development Code at our next committee of the whole meeting.  There have now been several articles in the news about this, including this one from the PNJ today which discusses the new state law limiting impact fee year over year percentage increases, as well as Santa Rosa's challenges to implementing Impact Fees there.  The last couple of paragraphs capture some of my thoughts on these fees and how I envision them working here in Escambia County.

I do not support impact fees--I support concurrency as an alternative to them.  

Concurrency is smarter, more targeted, and I believe an overall better solution.

Now, developers and homebuilders do not like any form of impact fees, nor do they like concurrency.

One of the arguments against ANY additional concurrency or impact fees being levied on Escambia County builders that I have heard a lot is that "Escambia county already has the one-cent sales surtax" that can be used for infrastructure.  So why make the builders pay more?  Is the rhetorical follow-on question.

So, I looked statewide at how other counties handle this---especially the counties that also collect the discretionary sales tax like we do.   And a couple of interesting facts stand out.  

#1---99% of Florida Counties already collect some form of discretionary sales tax like our 1 penny LOST....99%!! or 66 of 67 counties. (Citrus County is the lone county in Florida that does not collect local option sales taxes on purchases----yet ironically they DO collect impact fees on developments...)

#2---of the counties that already collect a local option sales tax----a full 57% ALSO collect Impact fees to help pay for the costs of growth and infrastructure the growth demands.

So the argument that we already have LOST and therefore we don't need any other funds to offset infrastructure challenges of growth simply does not hold water.  That argument is not persuasive.  See the breakdown, below.

Concurrency?

 

As I stated in a recent meeting, and as I prominently featured in my NEXT4Escambia plan as I ran for re-election last year, I will be bringing the topic of concurrency forward at an upcoming meeting for discussion among my peers on the Board of County Commissioners.

As a local school board member here for 10 years , I supported the concept of concurrency and voted for it on several occasions until it was watered down to a point that it was ineffective and meaningless--at which point I voted against it on principle.

I have no idea, whatsoever, where my counterparts on the BCC stand on this isssue--so at the first meeting where this is brought the topic will be brief, factual, historical and then I'll attempt to ascertain from my peers what their appetite is for moving forward with having staff bring recommendations.

This initial discussion will likely occur at the first meeting in May.

Jim Little from the PNJ called me about this topic about a week ago, and we had a really good conversation.  His article derived from that discussion is online today and will more than likely make it to the printed paper in the next few days.  It is a good article and captures the essence of our discussion.

I agree with those in the homebuilding community who believe that we can do more with the LOST funds we already have (for which they lobbied and assisted in campaigning for when the referendum(s) were put before the voters)--and it is for that reason and others that I generally oppose impact fees across the board for the county in favor of intelligent, well thought-through concurrency. (Although I will support impact fees and an enhanced MSBU/and or a TIFF on our soon to be developed OLF-8 property---as it now appears it will be largely retail and residential which will reduce our opportunity for and the size of a Triumph Gulf Coast jobs grant).

So we shall see where the concurrency discussion goes in May.  It may be something that sparks interest or it may just fizzle......

Inside the DPZ Co-Design Emails and Text Messages Part II: DPZ's Drinking Game?

A trove of emails and text messages has been turned over to the county from our consultant DPZ.  The history of the issues with the master-planning effort for OLF-8 was posted in part I.

I'm going through the emails and texts over the next several evenings and I will do a series of posts on what I find.

And there are serious issues that need to be discussed about this issue and they will be discussed.  

But I found a couple texts early on this weekend that were somewhat amusing.  So I'll post them next.  I hope I can keep from "spitting out my Guacamole.."

This exchange, these two texts above, was interesting.  

They come out seemingly complimentary as they watch our meeting and comment along like some strange version of Mystery Science Theater 3000- but then they devolve into laughing and giggling.  One member suggests it is some kind of a drinking game and another talks about getting "sober."  It's weird.  We are all taking this seriously--is DPZ and their team?

Is This OLF-8 Master Plan Actually an Opportunity to Get Growth's Impacts on Infrastructure Right?

I don't support it, But if we must accept thousands of additional residential units on OLF-8 in Beulah--I believe we should charge Impact Fees on OLF-8 specifically and exclusively---to offset the burdens on infrastructure and schools such high-density, high-intensity, urban-style residential will create.

As we stumble toward the end of the excruciating, apparently non-impartial, Rube-Goldbergesqe "effort" to finish the OLF-8 Master Plan----a question comes to mind that is worth asking.  Is this relentless, unending, concerted and orchestrated push for massive, additional residential development in Beulah on OLF-8 specifically---is this actually an opportunity to get growth's impacts on Infrastructure right as it pertains to what we allow on OLF-8?

One of the reasons I ran for this job in 2016 was because I saw the rampant, uncontrolled residential growth in Beulah that was permitted that swamped our schools and overwhelmed our infrastructure.  It was allowed to continue unfettered by the county because the state got rid of concurrency in 2011, and the County did likewise in 2013--stripping the concurrency provisions from the Land Development Code (LDC) in that year.  And then, the residential development floodgates opened in Beulah and we are seeing the resultant condition:  Schools overcrowded and traffic and stormwater infrastructure overwhelmed.

This is why I have funded the $300,000.00 effort to master-plan the greater Beulah area--a process that is moving forward.  It is also why I spent 13 months with a 9-member committee the county impaneled at my request to get community feedback about the best way to master plan this greater Beulah area--precincts 43, 68, and 5 (and subsequently the new precinct 114 in Beulah as well).  This "Greater-Beulah" contract has been awarded--and the work will commence soon.  More to come on that later.

And this is why--if we are now going to "approve" thousands and thousands of new residential units forced on us, constructed on OLF-8 at the behest of the "opinion" of DPZ and their influencers within the NFCU coalition--we ought to implement impact fees on any such residential construction contemplated on OLF-8 if we are legally allowed to do so.  We should do it because our infrastructure cannot take it without upgrades and the only Beulah elementary school is hundreds of students over capacity already.

To summarize: we don't have the infrastructure to support 60 DU/AC and the concomitant 1000's of housing units this would produce on OLF-8--so I am arguing against allowing this at all. 

Commercial development and jobs projects would build slowly, over years and decades--allowing for the infrastructure to build to match. If residential is permitted however--the private sector would swoop in and build apartments, townhomes, and condos faster than you could say "abracadabra" and we would be further gridlocked within 8-10 months. Residential builders are aggressive, determined, relentless and FAST. (They are not FDOT project managers struggling for years to finish two-lane blacktop projects…)

So----- If I must accept any residential on the field (which we do not need), I will argue for impact fees for this one geographic area, OLF-8, if legal to do so--in order that this massive residential influx if allowed will have to pay for the impacts to the school board and also for the road widening on Frank Reeder Road that simply cannot support this MASSIVE residential infusion of building.

The Pathstone Development on 9-Mile Road will not Connect to Klondike for Day to Day Commuters....

Pathstone is a massive mixed-use development that is being planned for Beulah just south of 9-Mile Road--across from the Navy Federal Credit Union Campus.  Some neighbors feared this development would hook into Klondike Road for southbound egress.  This is not happening.

This view of the southeastern portion of the proposed Pathstone Development shows a 50' Public Emergency Access Easement (highlighted in yellow) that will be included with the development.  This easement will connect Pathstone to Klondike Road but it will only be utilized in emergency situations by emergency vehicles..the gate will be locked and only first responders will have the key

Numerous  residents  that currently live off of Klondike Road have expressed to me their concern that the massive development coming in just to the north of them will dump traffic onto Klondike Road--a road that simply could not handle this sort of an increased load of traffic.

I have confirmed this week that the Pathstone mixed-use development will be utilizing the soon to be 4-lane 9-Mile Road exclusively for ingress/egress of residents and visitors.  There will be no "day to day" commuter traffic diverted downward through this development and on to Klondike Road.

I was asked the following hypothetical question by a concerned resident that lives nearby.  "What if the Pathstone developers purchase a piece of property that already connects to Klondike--could this allow them to build a road through to Klondike that would allow traffic from Pathstone on to Klondike?  The answer, which I received from county staff today, is that such a scenario--if it were to come to pass--would not be approved by the county's road staff.  Klondike, as it sits, cannot handle the additional traffic.  There will be a roadway connecting Klondike to the southern portion of Pathstone--but it will be gated and locked and only utilized in emergency situations and only by Fire, EMS, or Sheriff's Office personnel.

450 Completed Surveys have been Received Thus Far

The citizen survey regarding growth management and development in the greater Beulah area, being conducted by UWF's Haas Center on behalf of the NW District 1 Advisory Committee, has passed an important milestone as of this Wednesday.

As of Wednesday, 450 completed surveys have been received by the center.  This is significant as the survey attains a much greater level of statistical validity when it surpasses 400 individual responses. (story continues below)

Notices like this one above will go out electronically this week to residents in the greater Beulah area, soliciting their input and participation in a citizen's survey on growth management in this area of Escambia County

According to Amy Newbern, the Haas Center coordinator of this survey, another round of emails requesting citizen participation will be sent out early next week.  She reports that the postcards that were sent out last week elicited a "very good" response from citizens, and that the email to be sent out early next week will attempt to get a few more completed surveys.

She anticipates the survey will close by August 4th.

Read more about the NW District 1 Advisory Committee here

Read more about this survey here

How it Happened, Part III: How Beulah Exploded

Several factors led to the exponential growth of the northwest portion of District 1 over the last decade.....

The exponential growth out in the Northwest portion of District 1 and Beulah has had several causes.

I discussed them in parts one and two of this series.

This area is the home for a growing contingent of employees at what has become one of our county's largest employers, Navy Federal Credit Union.

Navy Federal Credit Union has been an absolute grand-slam home run victory in our community from just about every metric from which one utilizes to measure the success of an economic development project.  Once completely built-out over the next three years--this company will support $500 Million yearly in annual payroll, and will have made an economic impact in our area of $5 Billion dollars.

This has been a huge success story for Escambia County, Pensacola, and our region.

But it has put a lot of stress on the community of Beulah.

With Beulah's relatively close proximity to the interstate, and with an abundant supply of land that sellers were willing to part with-this area became a magnet for the home builders.

In 2011, coming out of one of our nation's worst recessions, the legislators in Tallahassee passed the Growth Management Act of 2011 which essentially ended the state requirement for local government concurrency;  at that time, as a member of the Board of Education in Escambia County--we had negotiated Interlocal Agreements with Escambia County, Pensacola, and the city of Century. I voted against the Interlocal in 2008 because I felt it was too lenient on the builders 

But Tallahassee legislators wanted to take down some of the regulatory hurdles of government in order to stimulate growth in the then-sluggish housing sector to help Florida's economy.

Concurrency was a method for orderly growth that mandated that builders and developers plans had to be reviewed by the county, city, and school district to insure the contemplated developments were in areas that had the infrastructure necessary to accommodate such development.  Not exactly like an impact fee--this method induced building where infrastructure was already sufficient and mandated certain requirements be met before building could be completed in areas where the infrastructure was not sufficient.

Like impact fees--builders did not like the burdensome and often costly concurrency requirements.  It served to limit growth where builders wanted to build to maximize profit.

After the state did away with the requirement for concurrency in 2011, the Escambia county commissioners at that time moved concurrency over to the county's Land Development Code (LDC) and kept it in force locally--albeit for only a short period of time.  A few years later, in 2013, after several new commissioners joined the board, and after the county and the nation moved out of the recession and as our economy improved rapidly locally--a new comprehensive plan was adopted by the commission. The direction was given to "do away with concurrency in the land development code, so as not to have any local standards to be applied to builders more burdensome than what was required by the state" according to a staff member with whom I spoke that was at the county at the time.

So now, with no impact fees locally and with no concurrency requirements to meet--the pendulum had swung strongly in the favor of the home builders and the developers starting in 2014---subdivisions were planned and platted, and we have what we have seen now out in the Northwest portion of District 1.

By the time I took my seat on the Escambia BCC at the end of 2016, the Beulah area was inundated with planned subdivisions, condominiums and townhomes in the planning pipeline--because there were minimal requirements to meet in order to get these sorts of developments approved.  No impact fees, no traffic or school concurrency requirements, and a land development code that savy builders knew very well how to navigate successfully.

And this is where we are in 2019.  This, combined with what I discussed in part I and II, is how it happened.

In my next entry on this subject, I will discuss ideas for fixing this issue going forward--now that we know what the problems are....

How it Happened, Part II

This is what the zoning map for the Northwest portion of district I looked like prior to 2015.  In speaking with county staff--the impetus at the time the decision was made to simplify and consolidate the zoning designations--- was to not diminish the property rights or zoning rights of existing property owners.  So, when we went from this zoning, below,

There existed a panoply of zoning designations for properties located in the Northwest Portion of Escambia County's District 1 prior to 2015.  After 2015--these designations were consolidated.  The plan was to not diminish the property rights of existing land owners while simultaneously simplifying the zoning designations.  This change in 2015 was a contributing factor in the out of control growth of this section of District 1

to what the zoning districts look like today, below, we now know what the thought process was that drove the decision making.  This is, below, what the zoning for this same section of District 1 looks like today.

Today's current zoning in District 1 is much less complex than it was before 2015.  This was done by the board deliberately in an attempt to streamline the zoning designations while simultaneously NOT taking any rights from, nor diminishing, property rights from existing area property owners....

The decisions were driven by noble intentions--e.g.--not diminishing existing property owners' rights.

Unfortunately-----this well-intentioned, well-meaning strategy also led to the conditions that we are seeing today in Beulah.

Growth that is out of control.

Below is a table describing, in detail, the "before and after" zoning designations and changes.

A quick read of these will illustrate, very quickly, the conditions by which the growth was facilitated by this well-intentioned action.

What we see today in 2019 is a result, in part, of this change.  See the before/after zoning changes below....

How it Happened, Part I

Beulah has grown exponentially over the last 10 years.  "How has this happened?" is a question I am hearing a lot.. so we are looking at all the reasons and factors that have led to where we are today with the growth in Beulah...

I attended a community meeting on Saturday in Beulah.

The subject of the meeting was another subdivision being contemplated out in this fast growing community of Escambia County--and more importantly--what the impacts of this new subdivision would bring to the existing residents.

As the meeting began, the developers unrolled construction drawings illustrating the vision for the subdivision off of Hurst Hammock Road.  Several residents had questions about the impacts on drainage, the wetlands, and traffic.  Many wanted to know where the retention ponds for this development would be placed.

Several asked rhetorically--"When will enough be enough?"

"When will "they" say we don't want or need any more subdivisions out here?"

"And how did this area's growth get so out of control anyway?" was a recurring question we heard from the assembled group of about 15 nearby residents.

The answer to these questions requires that we look back in history and also that we look at some votes that have been made by the county over the last 10 years.

Everyone knows that growth is happening and that economic forces and the economy drive the market for housing--- which is the catalyst for growth and for impacts on the existing infrastructure of a community.

But growth is inevitable--here in Escambia County and in America as a whole.

We will get into some of the specifics of this in follow-on posts...

Getting Facilities Plans Right Part IV: Where is the Growth in Escambia Actually Happening?

The attached map is a portion of the approved/proposed developments, totaling nearly 1,400 new single family homes, planned for the Beulah area (south of I-10 and north of or parallel to Mobile Highway)  over the next 12-24 months.  (This diagram does not include the nearly 300 additional home-sites in Nature Trail that have yet to be built, nor the 400 that are currently already constructed or under construction.) 

"Beulah" he said simply.  "Beulah is where the growth is right now, and it is accelerating."  The engineer was quick to respond to my question about where the growth is in Escambia County right now.

His answer was incredibly fast and his opinion is reliable and relevant--he is one of the busiest Engineer/Site Planners in the County.

During a lunch I had with this individual downtown last week, I wanted to ask this question of him, as an apolitical, un-biased professional who is intimately familiar with the current growth patterns throughout the county.

Of course I had my suspicions already as to what his answer would be, as I live in Beulah right across from NFCU;  I drive these areas all the time, I have met with and spoken to various leaders from NFCU about their expansion to this area, and we have all read this article from Pensacola Today late last year.

So my concern with the current, recently altered plan to build a middle school in Beulah, but not an elementary school or k-8 facility, continues to escalate.  I'm not sure we are making the best decision.

Beulah elementary is swollen to the point that it is over 1000 students right now---and with the students generated when 1400 additional units are completed in Beulah (the majority of which will be built south of 9-mile road), any relief garnered by Beulah  by re-locating 300 or so students from