sj051002

As another round of military-base closings looms, Tyndall Air Force Base officials and local military advocates are worried that a proposed housing development could give the base a black eye.

The St. Joe Co. wants to build 400 homes, a marina and a commercial "town center" on a 300-acre site between Tyndall and Mexico Beach.

The company has applied for an amendment to the county's comprehensive plan to increase the site's allowable density. Under current density limits, St. Joe could build only 18 homes on the land.

Last month, the County Commission voted to send the plan amendment to the state Department of Community Affairs for review - the first step toward approval.

But on Tuesday, after hearing from members of the Bay Defense Alliance and employees of defense contractor Applied Research Associates, the commission decided to reconsider its action at a public hearing on May 21.

St. Joe's proposed development would be built in the flight path of jets returning from training missions.

"Our aircraft routinely fly over this property at altitudes as low as 1,600 feet while recovering back from training missions," said Chris Karns, chief public

Base officials worry that the development would lead to noise complaints and that the complaints, in turn, could force a relocation or alteration of the base's mission.

"With the development of the property in question, we're concerned about military activity and noise issues involving future residents and the pressure that may be exerted on the base to restrict or change operations to

alleviate any perceived intrusion to the desired quality of life of these potential future residents," Karns said. "This is the essence of encroachment."

Encroachment, the term used to define non-military development near military bases, is one of the factors used in base-closure decisions, said Dave Artman, senior vice president of Applied Research Associates.

The next round of base closures is scheduled for 2005. Previous rounds were called Base Realignment and Closure, or BRAC. The 2005 round will be called the Efficient Facilities Initiative.

Artman said one reason Tyndall survived previous BRACs was the lack of development near the base.

"It operated its airplanes, dropped its drones and detonated explosives in isolation," he said. "We need to recognize the importance of this isolation and our responsibility to support this continued isolation."

Artman said several bases around the country have closed or changed their operations because of encroachment issues.

"... When (noise) complaints start stacking up, the only recourse is to alter the flying operations and offending testing," he said. "That is the way it always works. Encroachment always wins."

Artman said Bay County could not afford to lose Tyndall, which has an estimated $386 million annual economic impact.

"I would submit that it is very questionable that any development plans that St. Joe has for that entire parcel from Tyndall to Mexico Beach and from the gulf to the bay would ever begin to generate this level of income to Bay

St. Joe officials, meanwhile, dispute the notion that its proposed development would pose any threat to Tyndall, and say they would not undertake a project that they thought would threaten Tyndall or its mission.

"We want to do nothing that is going to jeopardize Tyndall," said Billy Buzzett, director of strategic planning for St. Joe. "We're concerned that we want to be a good neighbor with Tyndall."

Buzzett said the company complied with the county's comprehensive plan, which requires developments near Tyndall to lie outside zones defined in an Airfield Installation Compatibility Use Zone, or AICUZ study.

Those zones extend five miles out from the runway. The proposed development would be nine miles from the runway.

But Artman said the AICUZ study considered airplane noise alone, and did not take into account other missions at Tyndall, including an explosives test range just two miles from the proposed development.

"(St. Joe's) submission is incomplete on important issues: encroachment, consideration of Tyndall's missions and of course the potential negative impact in a BRAC process," he said.

And, he said, the AICUZ study was completed in 1994, before Tyndall was designated a training base for the F-22 Raptor, a louder aircraft than the F-15s that currently train at Tyndall.

"It did not address the F-22 mission," Artman said. "Given what we know today, that should be a primary issue to Bay County since that new airplane is coming next year."

St. Joe officials say their proposed development does not represent encroachment any more than existing development near Tyndall does.

"The same argument already exists for Mexico Beach proper," Buzzett said.

And William Harrison, a Panama City attorney representing St. Joe, said the most densely developed areas of Bay County are closer to Tyndall's runway than the proposed development site is.

"The highest population area of Bay County is within 91/2 miles of that runway and this area is outside that," he said.

"At Tyndall, we currently have no significant encroachment problems, and the Gulf of Mexico airspace provides us with superb and safe training," he said. "Any type of encroachment, such as the proposed St. Joe development, east of Tyndall, has a potential negative impact on our day-to-day operations and in the execution of our assigned mission."

Artman said encroachment can't be defined in precise terms of distance or number of houses.

It is not an absolute measure - six versus five miles, or one house or 10," he said. "It is a process that is relative."

Larry Dantzler, president of the Bay Defense Alliance, said encroachment is cumulative.

Dantzler said St. Joe originally proposed a much more intense development at the site, but scaled back its plans after discussions with base officials.

"St. Joe, to their credit, went back and redesigned the project," he said. "But even one house is a problem."

Several weeks ago, the Bay Defense Alliance contacted the state Department of Environmental Protection about the possibility of the state's buying the land from St. Joe.

Officials with the Division of State Lands have since contacted St. Joe, but those talks are in a very preliminary stage.

Buzzett said he hopes that the county will vote May 21 to send the plan to the Department of Community Affairs. That agency will consider compatibility issues as part of its review. The County Commission will make the final decision after DCA's review.

Buzzett said he believed an "objective review" would demonstrate that the proposed development would not have a negative effect on Tyndall.



	The News Herald by Kendall Middlemas Friday, May 10, 2002 Tyndall sees development threat (Photo: The proposed development by the St. Joe Co. of this beachfront area of land between Tyndall Air Force Base and Mexico Beach, background, could affect flight operations at Tyndall. As another round of military-base closings looms, Tyndall Air Force Base officials and local military advocates are worried that a proposed housing development could give the base a black eye. The St. Joe Co. wants to build 400 homes, a marina and a commercial "town center" on a 300-acre site between Tyndall and Mexico Beach. The company has applied for an amendment to the county's comprehensive plan to increase the site's allowable density. Under current density limits, St. Joe could build only 18 homes on the land. Last month, the County Commission voted to send the plan amendment to the state Department of Community Affairs for review - the first step toward approval. But on Tuesday, after hearing from members of the Bay Defense Alliance and employees of defense contractor Applied Research Associates, the commission decided to reconsider its action at a public hearing on May 21. St. Joe's proposed development would be built in the flight path of jets returning from training missions. "Our aircraft routinely fly over this property at altitudes as low as 1,600 feet while recovering back from training missions," said Chris Karns, chief public affairs officer for the 325th Fighter Wing at Tyndall. Base officials worry that the development would lead to noise complaints and that the complaints, in turn, could force a relocation or alteration of the base's mission. "With the development of the property in question, we're concerned about military activity and noise issues involving future residents and the pressure that may be exerted on the base to restrict or change operations to alleviate any perceived intrusion to the desired quality of life of these potential future residents," Karns said. "This is the essence of encroachment." Encroachment, the term used to define non-military development near military bases, is one of the factors used in base-closure decisions, said Dave Artman, senior vice president of Applied Research Associates. The next round of base closures is scheduled for 2005. Previous rounds were called Base Realignment and Closure, or BRAC. The 2005 round will be called the Efficient Facilities Initiative. Artman said one reason Tyndall survived previous BRACs was the lack of development near the base. "It operated its airplanes, dropped its drones and detonated explosives in isolation," he said. "We need to recognize the importance of this isolation and our responsibility to support this continued isolation." Artman said several bases around the country have closed or changed their operations because of encroachment issues. "... When (noise) complaints start stacking up, the only recourse is to alter the flying operations and offending testing," he said. "That is the way it always works. Encroachment always wins." Artman said Bay County could not afford to lose Tyndall, which has an estimated $386 million annual economic impact. "I would submit that it is very questionable that any development plans that St. Joe has for that entire parcel from Tyndall to Mexico Beach and from the gulf to the bay would ever begin to generate this level of income to Bay County each year," he said. St. Joe officials, meanwhile, dispute the notion that its proposed development would pose any threat to Tyndall, and say they would not undertake a project that they thought would threaten Tyndall or its mission. "We want to do nothing that is going to jeopardize Tyndall," said Billy Buzzett, director of strategic planning for St. Joe. "We're concerned that we want to be a good neighbor with Tyndall." Buzzett said the company complied with the county's comprehensive plan, which requires developments near Tyndall to lie outside zones defined in an Airfield Installation Compatibility Use Zone, or AICUZ study. Those zones extend five miles out from the runway. The proposed development would be nine miles from the runway. But Artman said the AICUZ study considered airplane noise alone, and did not take into account other missions at Tyndall, including an explosives test range just two miles from the proposed development. "(St. Joe's) submission is incomplete on important issues: encroachment, consideration of Tyndall's missions and of course the potential negative impact in a BRAC process," he said. And, he said, the AICUZ study was completed in 1994, before Tyndall was designated a training base for the F-22 Raptor, a louder aircraft than the F-15s that currently train at Tyndall. "It did not address the F-22 mission," Artman said. "Given what we know today, that should be a primary issue to Bay County since that new airplane is coming next year." St. Joe officials say their proposed development does not represent encroachment any more than existing development near Tyndall does. "The same argument already exists for Mexico Beach proper," Buzzett said. And William Harrison, a Panama City attorney representing St. Joe, said the most densely developed areas of Bay County are closer to Tyndall's runway than the proposed development site is. "The highest population area of Bay County is within 91/2 miles of that runway and this area is outside that," he said. Karns said existing development does not pose a threat to Tyndall. "At Tyndall, we currently have no significant encroachment problems, and the Gulf of Mexico airspace provides us with superb and safe training," he said. "Any type of encroachment, such as the proposed St. Joe development, east of Tyndall, has a potential negative impact on our day-to-day operations and in the execution of our assigned mission." Artman said encroachment can't be defined in precise terms of distance or number of houses. It is not an absolute measure - six versus five miles, or one house or 10," he said. "It is a process that is relative." Larry Dantzler, president of the Bay Defense Alliance, said encroachment is cumulative. "The more you put in, the more encroachment is there," he said. Dantzler said St. Joe originally proposed a much more intense development at the site, but scaled back its plans after discussions with base officials. "St. Joe, to their credit, went back and redesigned the project," he said. "But even one house is a problem." Several weeks ago, the Bay Defense Alliance contacted the state Department of Environmental Protection about the possibility of the state's buying the land from St. Joe. Officials with the Division of State Lands have since contacted St. Joe, but those talks are in a very preliminary stage. Buzzett said he hopes that the county will vote May 21 to send the plan to the Department of Community Affairs. That agency will consider compatibility issues as part of its review. The County Commission will make the final decision after DCA's review. Buzzett said he believed an "objective review" would demonstrate that the proposed development would not have a negative effect on Tyndall.