MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

March 2, 2006

 

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on March 2, 2006, at 4:30 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida.  Present were:  Chair Helen Voltz, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Ron Pritchard, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, Assistant County Manager Ed Washburn, and Assistant County Attorney Christine Lepore.

 

 

The Invocation was given by Pastor Jack Deeds, First Baptist Church of Scottsmoor, Scottsmoor, Florida.

 

 

Commissioner Ron Pritchard led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

 

 

Assistant County Attorney Terri Jones distributed copies of a Settlement Agreement with Desiree Webber and Dianne Cullen; advised Ms. Webber and Ms. Cullen have 75 dogs in GU zoning; and commented on an Executive Session.  She stated the terms are to remove the dogs down to four by July 31, 2006; and if that is not accomplished, there will be a $100 a day fine backdated to December 8, 2005 and an immediate injunction will be allowed to remove the excess dogs. 

 

Discussion ensued on the deadline for appeal. 

 

Commissioner Carlson stated this is different than what she expected to come back; but it sounds like a good approach.  She noted Ms. Webber and Ms. Cullen are moving out of state. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Settlement Agreement with Desiree Webber and Dianne M. Cullen including provisions for reduction in the number of dogs from approximately 75 to four by July 31, 2006; $100 per day fine beginning on December 8, 2005, which will be abated as long as the plaintiffs remain in compliance with the Settlement Agreement; and if plaintiffs do not comply with the terms of the Agreement, there will be an immediate injunction.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Commissioner Pritchard advised of meeting with County Manager Peggy Busacca; and read aloud a statement as follows:  “The Board of County Commissioners has involved itself in areas where they should not tread.  The result has been an attempt to modify, regulate, inspire,
review, coordinate, engineer, inflict, administer, generally delay, and sometimes screw up with the best of intentions, all because we feel the need to get involved.  We have repeat agendas and a staff that is cautious, perhaps afraid to make professional decisions.  The Board cannot be all things to all people, and in that regard the Board needs to revisit its purpose and make adjustments necessary to once again operating as a policy-making body.  As the Chair of the MPO recently stated, ‘let’s have the engineers do the engineering.”  In order to restore common sense as well as a sense of purpose, I have suggested to Peggy, she request from staff and compile a list of the things that the Board needs to stop doing.  I’m concerned that unless we evaluate and stop our interference, our next step will be deciding what color you can paint your house.  As an example, we created a fence ordinance because we had warring neighbors and tried to fix their problem.  The result was a requirement for permitting.  Another example is flag stem lots.  We allow the creation of these lots and when the folks on the back lots create their driveway the elevation creates flooding problems on adjacent properties.  Now the County doesn’t inspect flag stem access, only the right-of-way portion, yet we get involved with fixing the problem we didn’t create.  We should have allowed the neighbors to settle their dispute.  Instead we have allowed the public to consider the Board of County Commissioners the court of less expense.  Well, it’s not less expense when it impacts everyone because people have civil issues.  The Board cannot be all things to all people.  Our involvement has created more problems and more work for County staff.  So where’s the benefit?  I’d appreciate Commission approval to have County staff review procedures and make recommendations to the County Manager that will enhance their performance, reduce the length of Board meetings, and provide the taxpayer with more bangs for their buck.” 

 

Commissioner Carlson stated she does not have any objection; the Charter indicates the Board is not to be too involved in day-to-day managerial efforts; and staff should be coming to the Board advising it has no say concerning certain issues.  She requested the County Attorney provide a written clarification on the provisions of the Charter.  Chair Voltz stated she agrees.

 

 

 

Chair Voltz stated there is an issue with one of the zoning items that has been delayed because there has been a lot of public input; it is the Levin property; and it will be coming on the April Agenda.  She stated the applicant requested RR-1; but they are going from RR-1 to PUD, which provides more flexibility and a better outcome.

 

Attorney Phil Nohrr advised of repeated continuations and changes in the application; and requested the Board  dismiss the pending application as they will submit a different application.  He stated there is a six-month waiting requirement; requested the Board dismiss the pending application and allow them to go ahead and file a new process in 30 to 60 days without having to wait six months. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to accept withdrawal of Algo Investments, Inc. (Z0511304) and Hampden Ridge Corporation (Z0507303)

zoning items from the April 2006 Agenda; and waive the six-month waiting period for reapplication. 

 

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Nohrr is requesting to withdraw the item from the April Agenda; with Mr. Nohrr responding yes.  Commissioner Scarborough advised the Board is waiving the six-month waiting period. 

 

Commissioner Colon stated this is not normal procedure; and the only reason this is happening is because the constituents of the area have been working closely with the applicant and he has involved the Commissioner’s office. 

 

Chair Voltz called for a vote on the motion.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Chair Voltz advised Assistant County Manager Ed Washburn’s birthday is on Sunday; and wished him a happy birthday.

 

 

 

Zoning Manager Rick Enos advised items VI.B.3, VI.B.5, VI.B.7, VI.B.10, VI.B.14, and VI.B.16 have been previously withdrawn; and there has been a request to withdrawn item VI.B.18. 

 

Item VI.B.3.  (Z0602103)  Maynard And Phyllis Owen’s request for change from AU to RR-1 on 2.57 acres, located on the north side of Panther Lane, west of Turpentine Road, which was withdrawn by the applicant.

 

Item VI.B.5. (Z0602105)  Coastal Properties, Inc. and Coastal Properties’ request for amendment to an existing Binding Development Plan (BDP) in an RU-1-11 zone on 50.64 acres, located west of the western terminus of Clear View Avenue, which was removed from the Agenda.

 

 

Item VI.B.7.  (Z0602201)  The item has been removed from the Agenda. 

 

Item VI.B.10.  (Z0602301) The item has been removed from the Agenda.    

 

Item VI.B. 4.  The item has been removed from the Agenda. 

 

Item VI.B.16.  (Z0509205)  Wing & Mary Ngo’s request for change from RU-1-11 to RU-2-15 on 1.68 acres located on the southeast corner of Worley Avenue and Banana River Drive, which was withdrawn by the applicant. 

 

 

Item VI.B.18. (Z0601501)  Chatchai Nakornprai and Arporn Nuampatom’s request for change from RU-1-9 to RU-2-15 on 1.37 acres located on the south side of Livingstone Lane, west of Wickham Road, which was recommended for denial by the Planning and Zoning Board.  The item was withdrawn by the applicant. 

 

 

Mr. Enos advised the Planning and Zoning Board recommended tabling Item VI.B.2 to April 6, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting; and there are several requests for items to be tabled.  He stated VI.A.4 has been requested to be tabled to April 6, 2006; VI.B.17 to April 6, 2006; VI.B.19 to April 6, 2006; and VI.B.21 to May 4, 2006.  Chair Voltz stated she does not want to automatically table VI.B.19.

 

Attorney Philip Nohrr stated Item VI.B.2 is the item that Commissioner Scarborough requested to be tabled.  Commissioner Scarborough clarified that Mr. Nohrr’s item is VI.A.2. 

 

 

Item VI.B.2.  (Z0602102)  Stanley L. Nitkowski, Jr.’s request for Small Scale Plan Amendment (06S.5) to change the Future Land Use designation from Residential 12 by Directive to Neighborhood Commercial; and change from RU-1-13 to RP on .396 acre, located on the east side of U.S. 1, north of Camp Road, which was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board to be tabled to the March 6, 2006 Planning and Zoning meeting and the April 6, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting, and the request for Small Scale Plan Amendment was withdrawn by staff. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table Item VI.B.2 to the April 6, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Item VI.A.4.  (Z0601202)  Siesta Mobile Home Park, Inc.’s request for change from TR-3 to RU-2-15 on 2.67 acres, located on the east side of Palmetto Avenue, north of S.R. 520, which was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board for approval. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table Item VI.A.4 to the April 6, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Item VI.B.17.  (Z0511307)  Irving & Bette Betrock’s request for change from SR with an existing Binding Development Plan (Z-10898) to EU with an amendment to the existing Binding Development Plan limiting the density to one unit per acre on 4 acres, located on the west side
of Highway A1A, north of Sea Dunes Drive, which was recommended for denial by the Planning and Zoning Board. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table Item VI.B.17 to the April 6, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.   

 

 

Item VI.B.21.  (PSJ60102)  Melvyn R. Yusem, Trustee’s request for a Small Scale Plan Amendment (06S.2) to change the Future Land Use map designation from PLNIP to Residential 6; and from PIP to RU-2-6 on 9.69 acres, located north of Curtis Boulevard and west of the FECRR, which was recommended for denial by the LPA and the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table Item VI.B.21 to the May 4, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

    

Chair Voltz called for the public hearing to consider recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Board made at its August 8, 2005, November 7, 2005, and January 9, 2006 meetings, as follows:

 

Item VI.A.2.  (Z0508109)  Forest Village Florida Group, L.C.’s request for change from TR-3 to RU-2-15 on 32.75 acres, located on the west side of Tucker Lane, south of S.R. 520, which was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board for approval with a BDP, limiting density to 266 units, and applicant amended request to TR-1-A. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the applicant has agreed to limit in the BDP to the current density. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item VI.A.2 as TR-1-A with a BDP limiting to current density.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Chair Voltz called for the public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Board at its meeting of February 6, 2006, as follows:

 

Item VI.B.1.  (Z0602101)  Ian Thomas Whitehurst’s request for change from GU to ARR on 1.02 acres, located on the west side of Satellite Boulevard north of Terri Lee Lane, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item VI.B.1 as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Item VI.B.11.  (Z0602302)  Robert L. Damiano and 5685 A1A, LLC.’s request for Conditional Use Permit for a Substantial Expansion of a Pre-Existing Use in an SR zone on .71 acre, located on the east side of Highway A1A, north of Harmony Place, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item VI.B.11 as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Item VI.B.13.  (Z0602402)  Brevard County Board Of County Commissioners, pursuant to Policy 15.3 of the Future Land Use Element of the Brevard County Comprehensive Plan, authorized administrative rezoning of 2.46 acres owned by Bobby Abraham and Wasim Niazi, from RU-2-10(8) with an existing Binding Concept Plan (BCP) to RU-2-4 and removal of existing BCP, located on the east side of U.S. 1, north of Viera Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item VI.B.13 as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

Item VI.B.15.  (Z0602502)  Carl R. And Heather L. Jodoin’s request for change from AU to SEU on 2.5 acres, located on the south side of Lake Washington Road, approx. .64 mile west of Clydesdale Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item VI.B.15 as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Item VI.B.20.  (PSJ60101)  Danilo Herrera’s request for Small Scale Plan Amendment (06S.1) to change the Future Land Use map designation from Residential 4 to Neighborhood Commercial; and from RU-1-9 to RP on 0.27 acre, located on the northwest corner of Adams Street & Balfern Street, which was recommended for approval by the LPA and Port St. John Dependent Special District Board with Binding Development Plan to prohibit backing onto any public road. 

 

Discussion ensued on the Binding Development Plan.  Mr. Enos advised there was a request for a BDP, but the issue will be covered by Land Development Regulations, so it is not essential. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item VI.B.20; and adopt an Ordinance amending Article III, Chapter 62, of the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, entitled “The 1988 Comprehensive Plan”, setting forth the First Small Scale Plan Amendment of 2006, 06S.1, to the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan; amending Section 62-501 entitled Contents of the Plan; specifically amending Section 62-501, Part XVI (E), entitled The Future Land Use Map Appendix; and provisions which require amendment to maintain internal consistency with these amendments; providing legal status; providing a severability cause; and providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Mr. Enos inquired if that is with or without the BDP; with Commissioner Carlson responding without. 

 

 

Item VI.B.6.  (PSJ60202)  Paul Dwayne Giles and Jerald M. & Vivian L. Baker’s request for change GU and AU to IN(L) on 14.75 acres, located on both sides of Amesbury Avenue, south of the western terminus of Falcon Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board with BDP stipulating that there be no school on the premises and there be a 20-foot setback from the east property line. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is any opposition to the item; with no response heard.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to approve Item VI.B.6 as recommended by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board with BDP stipulating that there be no school on the premises and there be a 20-foot setback from the east property line.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution proclaiming March 5-11, 2006 as Women in Construction Week.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

 

 

PUBLIC HEARING, RE:  TABLED ITEMS  (CONTINUED)

Item VI.A.1.  (Z0511403)  Tuckaway Lake Estates, Inc.’s request for change from AU to RU-2-15 on 19.69± acres located on the northwest corner of Barnes and Fiske Boulevards, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Attorney Rick Torpy, representing the applicant, introduced the Tucker family who own the property in question; and described the site, surrounding zoning, property annexed and rezoned by the City of Rockledge, and proposed development of 252 residential rental units.  He commented on the site plan, “big house” design, signage for Tuckaway Estates, additional buffering, other projects by the developer, and Bainbridge Companies.  He stated he provided the Board with a copy of a binding development plan; they have completed a traffic study and submitted it to staff; the applicant’s traffic engineers have met with staff to discuss the impact; and they all agree that approximately 25% of the trips generated by the project or 474 trips per day will have an impact on Barnes Boulevard.  He stated since the last meeting the City of Rockledge has taken action; and there is a moratorium pending on Barnes Boulevard that will come back to the Council next week.  He stated the issue is concurrency and what the project will do to Barnes Boulevard; there is agreement that if the current volumes of 23,500 trips per day are accepted on Barnes Boulevard, the project will just trip the threshold; but Rockledge did
its own study, and it shows the trips acceptable at 27,500, which would put the project slightly under.  Attorney Torpy stated they have attempted to find out the status of funding for the specific area of Barnes Boulevard, between Murrell Road and Fiske Boulevard; final plans have not been determined for what needs to be done to Barnes Boulevard; but he gets a clear understanding that Barnes Boulevard is going to be improved and widened because it is a major corridor for hurricane evacuation.  He stated between $4.5 and $5 million has already been designated for improvement of the road, specifically for engineering and right-of-way acquisition; and the total improvements will probably be $12 to $14 million.  He stated the binding development agreement is the result of talking to staff, the residents of Tuckaway Estates, and the engineers to try to come up with something that will allow the project to receive zoning approval, with the understanding they are not getting site plan approval and cannot move forward with construction.  He stated the two most significant items are the understanding that zoning does not imply consent to build the project; it will have to go through the process; and that may take a couple of years or more if the road has to be built before the County can permit the project.  He stated they understand they will be obligated to pay their fair share toward the cost of improving Barnes Boulevard under an appropriate cost share agreement; the cost share formula has not been completed yet by staff; but when it is completed, they will accept it.  He stated terms of the binding development agreement including agreement with Tuckaway Lakes Estates to provide perimeter landscape buffer across McLean Avenue, which will be a combination of fence, berm, and vegetation on both sides of the fencing; oak trees that are there will be left, or if damaged, will be replaced; the Tuckaway Lakes Subdivision sign will be replaced and maintained in perpetuity; the trash compactor will be located at the extreme east end of the project near Fiske Boulevard; permanent ingress/egress will be limited to Tuckaway Estates Drive; Tuckaway Estates Drive will be improved as directed by County staff; an extra lane will be built in the current right-of-way so traffic moving to the west into Tuckaway Estates will not be slowed or stopped by left-hand movements of individuals driving or pulling into the complex; a third lane will be constructed to allow right and left-hand turning movements; include rule in lease agreements that there will be no access to the lake, and if the rule is violated, lease
to be terminated; if privatized within 12 months of construction, will build entrance gate; and agreement to comply with Brevard County in terms of the road, including cost share, no vesting of trips, and making any improvements staff asks for as dictated by the site plan based on traffic.  He stated they would like to move forward with the zoning with the understanding of the need to resolve the concurrency and Barnes Boulevard issues before the project can be built.

 

Commissioner Carlson commented on traffic numbers; and requested Mr. Denninghoff explain the numbers.  Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff explained the numbers pertaining to Barnes Boulevard in the Murrell Road to Fiske Boulevard segment, acceptable maximum volume, existing traffic count, discrepancy, and total exceeding the maximum allowable traffic volume.  He stated the net effect is the project would trip the concurrency volume on the segment of Barnes Boulevard, between Murrell Road and Fiske Boulevard. 

 

Commissioner Carlson inquired if zoning can be provided with the applicant knowing he may not get a building permit for several years; with Assistant County Attorney Christine Lepore responding Administrative Policy 5 talks about adopted levels of service; the standard is to consider whether those levels of service have been compromised; and in this situation they are addressing that may be an issue, and are offering ways to alleviate the problem by agreeing to delay construction until issues have been resolved, which is a fair topic to address in the binding
development plan.  Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Board accepts the item, will it take it over 100% and what will be the next step; with Mr. Denninghoff responding affirmatively.  Mr. Denninghoff advised of the procedure if the road is at capacity, including denial of vesting of trips; situation with Barnes Boulevard; available funding for design, permitting, and right-of-way acquisition, but not enough to complete construction; and lack of cost estimate for construction.  Commissioner Carlson inquired if the binding development plan binds the County to a timeframe to allow development to occur; with Attorney Lepore advising it is one thing Attorney Torpy is suggesting.  Attorney Torpy stated page 3, paragraph 13 says, “developer/owner acknowledges that zoning does not constitute vesting of traffic concurrency”; page 4, paragraph 14 says, “developer/owner agrees that they shall contribute their fair share towards the required improvements for Barnes Boulevard, between Murrell Road and Fiske Boulevard pursuant to a formula to be determined by Brevard County staff as part of a cost share agreement”; and paragraph 15 says, “developer/owner agrees to make roadway improvements as required to Tuckaway Drive or Fiske Boulevard as determined by Brevard County Traffic Engineering Department based on specific site plan impact.” 

 

Discussion ensued on the binding development plan, no guarantee of development, conceptual picture of Tuckaway Lake Estates sign, privatizing subdivision, and location of gate.

 

Commissioner Pritchard inquired how the Board got in the business of binding development plans; with Attorney Lepore explaining binding development plans.   

 

Discussion ensued on appropriate items for binding development plan, interfering in other disciplines of the County, when Barnes Boulevard will be improved, moratorium on Barnes Boulevard from Murrell Road to Fiske Boulevard, funding for the road project, permitting issues, consideration of concurrency at every Development Order, conditional acceptance of permitting, redundancy, and notification to applicant of other issues.

Attorney Torpy commented on a previous site plan problem, ability to make plans, floodplain issue, and acknowledgements. 

 

Discussion on Board comments, addressing broader issues in binding development plan, level of input, and including the depiction in binding development plan.

 

Commissioner Colon commented on the Board getting appropriate feedback to insure everyone is on the same page, and Board, not staff, being responsible for decisions.  She advised she is comfortable approving the item. 

 

Commissioner Pritchard questioned the Board’s knowledge of gates, turnarounds, engineering, topography, hydrology, and all the other issues it is involving itself with. 

 

Commissioner Carlson advised paragraph 10 is missing a word; and recommended it say, “developer shall retain, relocate, or replace with similar or higher quality all oak trees along McLean Avenue.  If relocation is required the trees will be placed as close . . . .”  She requested comment from residents from Tuckaway Estates.

 

Don Paladino, representing Tuckaway Lakes Estates, commented on the process, addressing the residents’ concerns, and being part of the County; and voiced support for the project. 

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Paladino understands the feedback from Mr. Torpy and staff; with Mr. Paladino responding affirmatively. 

 

Chair Voltz read aloud a quote from Don Griffin, Planning Director of the City of Rockledge, “During the review of construction plans, we would ask that the developer help with the modifications of the Fiske and Barnes intersection as suggested by our consultant, Bussen-Mayer.”  Commissioner Carlson stated that is addressed in the binding development plan; and the Board  will see the binding development plan in the future. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve with BDP providing for perimeter landscape buffer across McLean Avenue; combination of fence, berm, and vegetation on both sides of fence; trees to be left or if damaged, to be replaced; Tuckaway Lakes Subdivision sign to be replaced and maintained in perpetuity; trash compactor to be located on extreme east end of project near Fiske Boulevard; limit permanent ingress/egress to Tuckaway Estates Drive; improve Tuckaway Estates Drive as directed by County staff; agree to build extra lane in the current right-of-way so traffic moving to the west into Tuckaway Estates will not be slowed down or stopped by left-hand movements of individuals driving or pulling into the complex; construct a third lane to allow right and left-hand turning movements; include rule in lease agreements that there will be no access to the lake and if that rule is violated, lease to be terminated; if privatized within 12 months of construction, will build entrance gate; and agree to comply with Brevard County in terms of the road, including cost share, no vesting of trips, and making any improvements staff asks for as dictated by the site plan based on traffic; and including all commentary.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Item VI.A.3.  (Z0601109)  Deanna J. Kokoszka and Ross L. Neubarth’s request for change from AU to RR-1 on 1.24 acres; and Small Scale Plan Amendment (06S.3) to change the Future Land Use from Residential 1 to Residential 2 and change from AU to SR on the remainder (total acreage 3.25 acres, located on the north side of Blacks Road, west of Indian River Drive and also having frontage on both sides of Indian River Drive, north of Blacks Road, which was recommended by the LPA and the Planning and Zoning Board for approval. 

 

Ross Neubarth submitted written materials; and advised he owns the western two acres of the property in question, which he is trying to rezone for half-acre lots.  He advised he is representing the owner of the remaining 1.24 acres, Deanna Kokoszka.  He explained the rezoning request, dimensions of the property, dimensions of the subdivided lots, meeting two units per acre zoning, and existing homesites in the area.  He commented on favorable traffic analysis, potable water and sanitary sewer analysis, no wetlands onsite, and property not being in a floodplain.  He commented on properties, zoning, roads, and existing houses surrounding the subject property.  He stated rezoning should be based on individual circumstance; the item was tabled at the last meeting to allow discussion; and requested the Comprehensive Plan be amended for this property. 

 

Howard DeBold; Larry Gold, representing High Point Homeowners Association; and Norman Lowry, representing Brookhill Homeowners Association, voiced opposition to the requested rezoning. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Lowry is objecting to all parts of the request; with Mr. Lowry responding yes. 

 

Beverly Sudermann, representing the Indian River Neighborhood Association, voiced opposition to the rezoning; and submitted paperwork. 

 

Lowell Loadholtz, representing Briarwood Homeowners Association voiced opposition to the requested rezoning.

 

Jacqueline Stevens voiced support for the zoning request. 

 

Ross Neubarth commented on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment adopted a year ago, not requesting high density, not receiving Beverly Sudermann’s email, attempt to speak to those opposing the rezoning, and lack of opposition at the last meeting. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough commented on the Small Area Plan, involvement of all neighbors, submittal of map by applicant depicting an anomaly, and building to create a pattern of smaller lots.  He stated it is unfortunate that everyone did not come together sooner; and he has tried to work with applicants; and commented on a plan by Clay Henderson.  He stated he had tabled this item so things could be worked out;  but there is so much opposition, that he is going to move to deny.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to deny Item VI.A.3. 

Commissioner Pritchard commented about the houses on Homburg Place, Blacks Road, and Briarwood; and stated he is failing to see the incompatibility with half-acre developments.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the map included with the Zoning package shows many larger lots; and commented on the aerial, undeveloped lots, and creating a pattern of a different nature than what could exist.

 

Discussion ensued on location of Briarwood Lane, area being an anomaly, Small Area Plan looking at many factors, other parcels developing at one-half acre, applicant’s unawareness of Small Area Plan, and affordability.

 

Commissioner Pritchard stated he cannot support the motion. 

 

Mr. Neubarth inquired if it is possible to change the zoning to one-acre lots; and advised he would have considered that if he had known the full extent of the Comprehensive Plan that was in place for the area. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated if Mr. Neubarth desires to do that, he would like to table the item. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson to table Item VI.A.3 to the April 6, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting.

Commissioner Colon stated the Small Area Plan was done a year ago; and inquired if the Board starts backing up just because someone comes before it, what is that telling all the people who worked hard on the Small Area Plan.  She stated it is important to stay consistent and support the decisions that were made. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated if Mr. Neubarth wants one-acre zoning, it is not a Comprehensive Plan  issue; with Mr. Enos advising that is correct.  Commissioner Scarborough withdrew his previous motion to table. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to deny Small Scale Plan Amendment.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table zoning request to the April 6, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Discussion ensued on protecting work that has been done, intent to hold meeting with applicant and interested persons in Commissioner Scarborough’s office, and looking at the Comprehensive Plan on individual basis. 

The meeting recessed at 6:32 p.m. and reconvened at 6:52 p.m.

 

 

 

Item VI.B.4.  (Z0602104) Michael and Margot Storc’s request for Small Scale Plan Amendment (06S.6) to change the Future Land Use designation from Residential 1:2.5 to Residential 1; and change from AU to RR-1 on 3.01 acres, located on the southwest corner of Palmetto Avenue and Pine Street, which was recommended for approval by the LPA and the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Commissioner Carlson inquired if this is consistent with the area, and is the request from AU to RR-1 and from one unit to three units.  Rochelle Lawandales, Lawandales Planning Affiliates, responded yes, in order to be consistent with the surrounding lots, it would take three acres and make them into one-acre lots just like the land across the street and to the west and south.  Commissioner Carlson stated her concern was based on staff’s comments about the issue with compatibility of AU with RR-1.  Zoning Manager Rick Enos stated the requested RR-1 would allow one-acre lots, which are very compatible with the existing nonconforming one-acre lots in the neighborhood; and it would still permit horses, but not allow any other agricultural uses other than horticulture, so it is reasonable.  Commissioner Scarborough stated it is unusual in the way it is developed.  Commissioner Carlson stated she does not have a problem.    

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Item VI.B.4 as recommended, and adopt an Ordinance amending Article III, Chapter 62, of the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County entitled  “The 1988 Comprehensive Plan”, setting forth the Sixth Small Scale Plan Amendment of 2006, 06S.6, to the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan; amending Section 62-501 entitled Contents of the Plan; specifically amending Section 62-501, Part XVI (E), entitled The Future Land Use Map Appendix; and provisions which require amendment to maintain internal consistency with these amendments; providing legal status; providing a severability cause; and providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Item VI.B.8. (Z0602202)  Merritt Island Land Trust, Inc. and Towne Development Of Island Pointe, Inc.’s request for change from BU-2 and PUD to all PUD on 11.61 acres +/-, located on the northwest corner of S.R. 520 and Myrtice Avenue, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Ken Ward, representing the applicant, advised of the request to the amended PUD to add 2.67 acres and build an 11-story building with associated parking for 66 condominium units and 10,000 to 14,000 square feet of commercial retail space.  He presented a visual depiction of the project; and commented on the existing project, expansion to mixed use commercial with a waterfront promenade area, increasing public access, MIRA, waivers, flexibility of Planned Unit Development, and project overview.  He outlined the waivers being requested, including open space and recreation, and breezeway and visual corridor.  He advised nine acres
of the 11.6 acres involved have already been approved; and presented a slide showing what is proposed.  He outlined additional waiver requests for accessory building setback for dockmaster facility and separation between pool building and building to the north. 

 

Sandra Natowich, member of the MIRA Board, spoke in favor of the project. 

 

Glenn Michaels submitted paperwork; and commented on lack of notification, additional units being sold, and proposed development. 

 

Commissioner Pritchard inquired which building does Mr. Michaels live in; with Mr. Michaels responding he lives in Rockledge, but owns units in the subject development. 

 

Discussion ensued on the site plan and notification. 

 

Chair Voltz inquired if Mr. Michaels is not in support of the rezoning request; with Mr. Michaels responding he is not. 

 

Amy Tidd, representing Partnership for a Sustainable Future; Antonio Rovira, representing East Merritt Island Homeowners Association; John Bell; and Mary Hillberg, representing the North Merritt Island Homeowners Association, expressed opposition to the rezoning. 

 

Ken Ward commented on four public meetings, notices, misconceptions about the project, traffic analysis, evacuation routes only being increased by three minutes, site plan issues, no height or

density variances required, payment of impact fees, project not being precedent setting, and requested waivers.  Mr. Ward explained how breezeways are calculated; and advised he is not asking to break any rules. 

 

Commissioner Colon commented on the unique area and MIRA not affecting any other part of the County.  She advised she supports the project; and explained why she is in support. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Ward said there was a traffic study; the Board received paperwork showing it is Level of Service F going over the Humphrey Bridge; and inquired if Mr. Ward submitted his traffic study.  Mr. Ward advised it was part of the report.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if staff has analyzed the traffic study; with Mr. Enos responding not to his knowledge, but there is not a concurrency issue on the property.  Commissioner Pritchard advised the information is on the laptop, and it was done February 2, 2006.  Commissioner Scarborough stated his question was not whether there was a traffic study, but whether there had been conversations with Traffic Engineering Director John Denninghoff.  Mr. Ward stated staff did the initial review, came up with a report, and he had a private traffic study that substantiated the same thoughts; but he had no private conversation with Mr. Denninghoff because he was unaware there was an issue. 

 

Discussion ensued on information not being provided to Traffic Engineering staff, inconsistent information, not knowing which information is true, level of service on different segment of road,
time of submittal of Mr. Ward’s traffic study, why study was not forwarded to Mr. Denninghoff, and Mr. Ward’s study being traffic impact analysis rather than concurrency analysis. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough recommended in the future traffic information be referred to Traffic Engineering staff; and advised he will not be voting in favor because appropriate staff has not reviewed the information. 

 

Commissioner Pritchard stated he does not disagree; all information should be disseminated and be accurate; and he does not like last minute submittals.  He stated all the data shows that the result is negligible in terms of concurrency; there is no school issue; all the other issues are not there; and there is even a negligible effect on hurricane evacuation.  He stated it is a unique property; and he would like to approve it with the waivers.     

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to approve Item VI.B.8 with requested waivers of open space requirements, breezeway and visual corridor requirements, accessory building setback for dockmaster facility, and building separation requirement for pool building and nine-story building to the north.  Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough and Carlson voted nay. 

 

 

Commissioner Scarborough expressed concern about the amount of traffic that will be put on S.R. 520; and stated it may be more than a matter of concurrency, but may be the magnitude of the traffic problems as far as safety. 

 

Commissioner Carlson stated she voted against it due to the extreme nature of the waivers and proximity to S.R. 520 and the future issues with transportation on that roadway. 

 

Item VI.B.9. (Z0602203)  Deven and Ann Marie Metzger and Donald K. (Jr.) And Christine C. Wood’s request for change from AU and RR-1 to all RR-1 on 1 acre, located on the north side of Craig Road, west of Friday Road, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. 

 

Charlene Shields and Evelyn Craig expressed opposition to the requested rezoning. 

 

Commissioner Colon inquired how large is Ms. Craig’s property; with Ms. Craig responding a little over an acre.  Ms. Shields advised her property is 1.2 acres.    

 

Donald Wood stated the property he owns is .73 acre; the property he is trying to rezone is .27 acre; and it is behind the other property.  He noted the .73-acre property is already zoned RR-1; he is trying to get the .27-acre property rezoned to RR-1; and he can build on the property because the requirement is 125 feet by 125 feet, and the property is 140 feet by 210 feet. 

 

Chair Voltz inquired if the two parcels equal an acre; with Mr. Wood responding yes.  He advised he needs one acre to build; he owns three-quarters of the property; and he has a contract to buy the other quarter-acre. 

 

Commissioner Colon inquired what is the total; with Mr. Wood responding one acre. 

 

Discussion ensued on depth and width of property, amount of property needed to build, consistency, configuration of the property, and one home on one acre.

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to approve Item VI.B.9 as recommended. 

 

 

Commissioner Scarborough commented on the size of the strip of property, meeting legal requirement as opposed to meeting the intent of the law, and acquiring unusable property to meet the legal requirement.  He stated there is a point where he would not vote for the motion, but in this case, it is close enough that he can vote for it. 

 

Chair Voltz called for a vote on the motion.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Item VI.B.12. (Z0602401)  Falcon Realty Development Corporation’s request for Conditional Use Permit for Alcoholic Beverages for On-Premises Consumption in an IU zone on 0.055 acre, located on the southwest corner of Business Center Boulevard and Commercial Drive, which was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board for approval. 

 

*Commissioner Colon’s absence was noted at this time.

 

Commissioner Carlson stated the Elks are planning to move; and inquired how long the group will need the CUP, as it will stay with the property.  She inquired if the Board can put a time limit, or include as a condition of the CUP that if the Elks move, the CUP will go away; with Attorney

Lepore responding affirmatively.  Commissioner Carlson stated the church in the area had some concerns.

 

Attorney Philip Nohrr, representing the applicant, advised they need 60 days; they will be back in front of the Board in April 2006 for the new location; and if it is approved for the new location, they hope to be moved by the end of April 2006.  He requested the item be continued for 90 days.  He commented on the new location. 

 

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Board can extend the CUP for 90 days; and stated in 90 days, if the Elks are not there, the CUP will go away. 

 

Discussion ensued on tabling item for 90 days versus extending CUP. 

 

Commissioner Pritchard inquired since the Board can make the condition that the CUP will expire when the applicant moves, why does it want to extend.  Mr. Enos stated a zoning action is not associated with the owner; but the Board can put a time limit on it.  Attorney Lepore stated it is cleaner to put a specific time limit as opposed to saying when the applicant moves because things could change. 

 

Commissioner Carlson suggested extending 60 days; with Attorney Nohrr advising that may be too short.  Commissioner Scarborough suggested 120 days. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to extend the Conditional Use Permit for 120 days.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously; with Commissioner Colon not present for the vote.

 

 

*Commissioner Colon’s presence was noted at this time.

 

 

Item VI.B.19.  (Z0601307)  American Dream Homes International, Inc.’s request for change from BU-1 and BU-2 to RU-2-6 on 10.51 acres located on the west side of U.S. 1, north of Shell Pit Road, which was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board for denial. 

 

Chair Voltz inquired if the applicant is requesting the item be tabled. 

 

Albert Lagano, representing American Dream Homes International, Inc., responded yes; and advised after the Planning and Zoning meeting, they went back to the architect and requested some other alternatives that would be less than what they were proposing.  He stated they would still need the zoning change possibly; and once they get that, they plan to talk to the Grant community and others.

 

Chair Voltz stated that is not what the letter says, which is that the developer desires to speak and present documentation but is unable to do that because he is sick.  Mr. Lagano advised the developer is in the hospital.  Chair Voltz inquired if the developer was at the Planning and Zoning meeting; with Mr. Lagano responding no.  Chair Voltz inquired why the developer would need to be present tonight; with Mr. Lagano responding they were hoping to have the materials from the architect to present to the Board.  Chair Voltz presented an advertisement dated August 19, 2005 for the project, which was long before the Board discussed anything; and advised the land was illegally cleared.

 

Lisette Kolar expressed opposition to the rezoning. 

 

Commissioner Carlson inquired based on the illegal clearcutting of the property, has the property owner been given a violation.  Ms. Kolar stated she believes they have.

 

Del Yonts expressed opposition to the rezoning. 

 

Mr. Lagano advised of the history of the property, clearing of property by former owner, Department of Environmental Protection violation, and fine paid and mitigation done by former owner to resolve matter.  He noted that is what delayed closing on the property and submittal to the Board. 

 

Commissioner Carlson inquired who is responsible for the ad; with Mr. Lagano responding the ad was placed last summer when the property was under contract, but the closing was delayed. 

 

Discussion ensued on DEP issues. 

 

Chair Voltz noted the Planning and Zoning Board unanimously recommended denial.    

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to deny Item VI.B.19 as recommended.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chair Voltz stated the property needs to remain residential. 

 

 

 

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 8:06 p.m.

 

 

 

                                                                        _____________________________________

HELEN VOLTZ, CHAIR

                                                                        BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

ATTEST:                                                         BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

 

_____________________

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

   

          (S E A L)