The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on January 28, 1999, at 5:30 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Truman Scarborough, Commissioners Randy O?Brien, Nancy Higgs, Sue Carlson, and Helen Voltz, Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca, and Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley.

The Invocation was given by Commissioner Randy O?Brien, District 2.

Chairman Truman Scarborough led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to appoint Ed Giers, 3190 N. Atlantic Avenue #217, Cocoa Beach, Florida 32931, to the Sheriff?s Citizens Jail Review Committee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to appoint Edward A. Kelly, 1236 Silver Lake Drive, Melbourne, Florida 32940, and Dr. Russell Minton, 876 Moorhen Court, Viera, Florida 32940 to the Sheriff?s Citizens Jail Review Committee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider zoning recommendations made by the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board on July 6, May 4, and November 2, 1998, and tabled by the Board of County Commissioners as follows:

Item 1. (Z9807401) Gomer and Victoria A. Mitchell?s request for change from AU to BU-1 on 1.85 acres located on both sides of U.S. Highway 1, north of Bonaventure Drive, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board with a Binding Development Plan (BDP) stating there will be no access from the property to Rockledge Drive; approved as BU-1 on the west side of U.S. 1 by the Board of County Commissioners; and the east side tabled to January 28, 1999 Board of County Commissioners? meeting for review of additional information from the owner.

2, 1998 PLANNING AND ZONING MEETINGS (CONTINUED)

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Mitchell talked to some of his neighbors who are in opposition to the BU-1 request and are still in favor of BU-1-A zoning.

Mr. Mitchell advised he only talked to the neighbors who are in the immediate area; and none of them are in objection. Ms. Carlson indicated there were 19 objections from previous meetings; and the concern of the neighbors is future use of the property. She inquired if Mr. Mitchell is only interested in opening an antique store; with Mr. Mitchell responding affirmatively. Ms. Carlson advised she will approve BU-1-A zoning with a Binding Development Plan, and inquired if Mr. Mitchell has a problem with it; with Mr. Mitchell responding yes. Mr. Mitchell stated he cannot have any displays outside on BU-1-A zoning, but he could with BU-1 zoning; and his neighbors were at the P&Z Board meeting and were satisfied because he agreed he would not be putting in a road from that property to Rockledge Drive.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 1 from AU to BU-1 with Binding Development Plan as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Binding Development Agreement.)

Item 2. (Z9805107) Port St. John Junior Chamber of Commerce, Inc., B. B. Nelson & Jack Moore?s request for Small Scale Plan Amendment (98S.5) that proposes to change the land use designation from Residential to Mixed Use District on the Future Land Use Map, a change from GU & AU to BU-1 and a CUP for towers and antennas (200 feet monopole on Block 1, Lot 2 only), on 7.97 acres located west of I-95 across the canal from the southern terminus of Homestead Avenue, which was recommended for approval by the CRG; the LPA recommended denial of the Small Scale Plan Amendment; the P&Z Board recommended denial of BU-1 and approval of the CUP for a 150-foot lattice tower as amended by the applicant; and the Board of County Commissioners denied the Small Scale Plan Amendment and denied zoning change from GU & AU to BU-1, tabled CUP for 150? lattice tower to the January 28, 1999 Board of County Commissioners? meeting, and directed staff to resend notification to those who attended the initial meeting for or against the item.

Chairman Scarborough stated it is his understanding that the question before the Board is in regard to the ordinance and what is required; Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley prepared a memorandum as to what the technical requirements are; and the small area plan is not relevant until it comes before the Board and is adopted.

Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley stated the Board needs to consider this item on the merits of what it has in place now. Chairman Scarborough advised the Board needs to look at Attorney Bentley?s memorandum.

2, 1998 PLANNING AND ZONING MEETINGS (CONTINUED)

B. B. Nelson stated he is presenting to the Board all the necessary things it has requested, including the visual impact and technical necessities of the location; this is an application for a 150-foot lattice tower located south of Port St. John in Canaveral Groves, north of the proposed and under construction Canaveral Groves interchange; and presented photographs of the area
with the projected antenna which sits back from I-95. He noted the antenna will not be seen

from Homestead Avenue, which is one area of concern; the antenna would be located halfway between the St. Johns and Indian Rivers, between Highway 50 and S.R. 520; and it would cover all of Port St. John, Canaveral Groves, Titusville, TiCo Airport, Cocoa, S.R. 520, S.R. 524, S.R. 528, and out to the St. Johns River and down the Beeline, which is significant for traffic coming in and out. He advised the tower will be well south of any homes in the Port St. John area; presented an aerial photograph of the area, including the interchange right-of-way fence; stated right-of-way has been obtained by Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to extend Homestead along the fence; and the 150-foot tower would be at least 600 feet from the houses on Homestead Avenue. Mr. Nelson stated as far as technical necessity, he has Alan Dray, the President of Air Wire Net, Inc. of Melbourne, who will make a presentation regarding the technical necessity.

Alan Dray, stated his Company was formerly Wireless Internet Services of Florida; it is providing high-speed ban width, a local loop mechanism, for the County; his Company is the first in the State with a proprietary network management system that is unlike any other in the world; and its customers include Health First, Brevard County Library System, and the Brevard County School Board. He noted his Company is using one of Mr. Nelson?s other towers in the Rockledge area; his towers are located in nice, strategic locations; there is a six-mile radius around the tower in question; and given 150-foot of height, that is as far as coverage will go; and the Company will need to saturate the County in order to fulfill its requirements for the School Board and the Library System. Mr. Dray stated his Company services are located in the Viera Complex; it would be in the best interest of Brevard County to support Mr. Nelson?s request; and his Company would like to have the tower in this location.

Mr. Nelson stated they made special effort to get away from any close proximity to the runways at TiCo Airport by locating south of Port St. John.

Nicki Kisner, representing Canaveral Groves Homeowners, stated there are several obstacles to Mr. Nelson being granted a permit to erect the tower in Section 28; unless Mr. Nelson has a signed contract with a telecommunications company, they are dealing with speculation which is contrary to County ordinance; and there is currently no access to this area. She noted the residents of Port St. John are adamantly against extending Homestead Avenue into this area; if the Board grants Mr. Nelson?s request, it would be negating all the work of the committee appointed by it which is conducting a land use study of the area; and the committee?s recommendation at this point is to leave the area as it presently exists.

2, 1998 PLANNING AND ZONING MEETINGS (CONTINUED)

Mr. Nelson stated he provided the County with a Contract from the user; access is not a problem; Homestead Avenue is platted and recorded by subdivision record down to the boundary line of Canaveral Groves; the right-of-way south of there is being used now for a water line which feeds the western part of Port St. John and into Canaveral Groves off of Pine Street; and right-of-way has been obtained to give access to roads being cut off by the interstate system fence.

Commissioner Higgs stated she is unclear of a demonstration of necessity for that location for the user; in the past, the Board has had the opportunity from engineers to have the drawing showing the technical necessity for the tower at a precise location; and she is looking for that kind of information.

Mr. Dray stated he cannot tell the Board he has to have an antenna right there at that particular latitude and longitude down to the minute and second, but this general area is a good strategic location for his Company.

Chairman Scarborough inquired could the general area mean moving the tower ? mile one direction or another; with Mr. Dray responding affirmatively. Commissioner Higgs inquired how far one direction or another; with Mr. Dray responding without studying it, he would say up to one mile, and over one mile would cause his Company a problem with its other locations. Commissioner Higgs noted Mr. Dray cannot show the Board his Company?s network of antennas and how this fits in; with Mr. Dray responding most of the network is below this map and its northernmost point now is Cape Canaveral Hospital. Commissioner Higgs noted Mr. Dray cannot tell the Board that the tower has to go there or ? mile one side or the other of that particular parcel under consideration tonight; with Mr. Dray responding that is correct. Mr. Dray stated it is his judgment that there is not a better-suited spot within ? mile of this location.

Commissioner Voltz inquired how far is the proposed location from the Airport; with Mr. Nelson responding approximately two miles. Mr. Nelson stated his goal is to stay well away from the Airport runways and not interfere in any way; they are not trying to saturate the County in towers; they are trying to provide towers far enough apart and close enough to each other that they could communicate with each other; and that is what the Board is looking at here.

Chairman Scarborough requested the Zoning Official describe why there is a need for a waiver.

Zoning Official Rick Enos stated all conditional use permits for towers, if they exceed 35 feet in height, must have five times the height of the tower setback to residential; the closest residential zoning boundary to this site is approximately 200 feet away, although there is another 100 feet of a ditch right-of-way before it gets to residential; and they need the total distance of 750 feet, so they need a waiver of 550 feet to the 750-foot residential zoning classification. He noted if they do not do that, then they need the conditional use permit and show the technical necessity.

Chairman Scarborough stated because they need a waiver, they need to show technical necessity. Mr. Enos noted the applicant needs to show that there is no other practical location on which to place their equipment to cover the area that is necessary to be covered.

Chairman Scarborough passed the gavel to Vice Chairman Higgs.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to deny Item 2 for failure to meet the requirement of the Ordinance.

Mr. Nelson stated the tower would be 600 feet from the people on Homestead Avenue; the plat will clearly show where the antenna is going in the area; and they meet the requirements and have presented the technical necessity for this location. Mr. Enos responded the 200 feet is from the location of the site to the zoning boundary of the residential which is where it is measured; the extra 100 feet is a ditch between the closest residential lot and the residential zoning boundary; and since the distance is measured to the zoning classification and not the lot, that is why a waiver is needed of 550 feet from the 750 feet.

Vice Chairman Higgs stated she agrees that the technical necessity consistent with what the County has required in the past has not been demonstrated; and she will support the motion.

Vice Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Vice Chairman Higgs passed the gavel to Chairman Scarborough.

Item 3. (Z9811501) Daniel S. Platt?s request for CUP for alcoholic beverages on-premises consumption in IU zone on 47 acres located south of Eau Gallie Boulevard, west of I-95, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for a 3-acre tract to be determined prior to the Board of County Commissioners? meeting, and tabled by the Board of County Commissioners to its January 28, 1999 meeting.

Attorney Gonzalez, representing the applicant, stated there are approximately 180 acres of commercial development south of the flea market at the corner of I-95 and Eau Gallie Boulevard; they presented a preliminary site plan; there is an additional parcel there which would make it 200 acres; and the applicant is seeking a CUP on a three-acre parcel for consumption of alcohol on-premises. He advised the three-acre parcel and surrounding 197 acres are owned by the applicant; the question arose whether or not there are inconsistent uses of the surrounding property for purposes of on-site liquor consumption; and there are cattle in the surrounding area.

Commissioner Voltz stated the issue was not alcohol, but adult entertainment. Attorney Gonzalez stated the applicant does not intend to put adult entertainment on the three-acre parcel; he wants the opportunity to lease the bar; and the applicant will agree for purposes of the application to have no adult entertainment on the subject parcel if it is the only way he is going to get the CUP for alcoholic beverages.

Commissioner Voltz stated there is a house located on the surrounding property; and adult entertainment is not allowed within 1,500 feet of a residence. Attorney Gonzalez stated there are also 197 acres that is commercial venture; they do not want adult entertainment on the three-acre parcel; and the applicant is willing to agree to that.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 3 with the condition of no adult entertainment. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages

for Zoning Resolutions.)

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider recommendations of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board made at its public hearing on January 4, 1999, as follows:

Item 1. (Z9901101) Willow Lakes RV Park, Inc.?s request for change from AU to RVP on 18.87 acres located on the east side of U.S. Highway 1, north of Parrish Road, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 1 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 2 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 3. (Z9901103) 4 G?s of Brevard County?s request for change from GU to ARR on 1 acre located on the south side of Dyson Avenue, east of Satellite Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Item 3 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners O?Brien and Higgs voted nay.

Item 4. (Z9901104) 4 G?s of Brevard County?s request for change from GU to ARR on 2 acres located at the southwest corner of Christopher Avenue and Satellite Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Item 4 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners O?Brien and Higgs voted nay.

Item 5. (Z9901105) Dick Gregory?s request for change from GU to ARR on 1 acre located on the south side of Desert Sands Avenue, west of Satellite Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Item 5 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners O?Brien and Higgs voted nay.

Attorney Leonard Spielvogel, representing the applicant, distributed two brochures to each Commissioner showing the intended occupant of the property, B. J. Wholesale Stores, and a packet, including a location map showing where the property is located, and an assessor?s map which depicts the proposed property and indicates the zoning that surrounds the property. He advised the packet also includes a binding site plan which exists against the property; it provides for 237 dwelling units and 30,000 square feet of office; and the property owner could develop that today and not require any further zoning for that development. He stated they are
proposing to do away with the site plan and come up with a binding development plan that is

more appropriate to the community; and the binding site plan that exists today does not make allowances for environmental concerns or buffering of Plumosa Street. Attorney Spielvogel advised there is commercial on three sides and part of the fourth side of the proposed property; the primary concern was the single-family residences on the west side of Plumosa Street and how to minimize the impact on those homes; and that is what the applicant focused on. He stated a study was conducted on each of the residences on the west side of Plumosa Street that would be impacted by the project; they met with the residents; and the applicant has made a real effort to minimize the impact on those homes and compensate the residential homeowners for the impact that still results from the facility and the project. He noted the homeowners were present at the P&Z Board meeting; some of them spoke in favor of the project and no one spoke against it; and the commitments made to the homeowners are not meant to be empty words. Attorney Spielvogel stated the binding development agreement is included in the packet; and the commitments to the homeowners are incorporated in such agreement, which includes a 42-foot buffer along Plumosa Street, a six-foot berm, and trees and shrubs on top of the berm. He noted the binding development agreement talks about opaque screening; and the applicant will do more than County Code requires concerning what they are putting on top of the berm. He advised Plumosa Street is experiencing transitional zoning; there is some BU-1-A zoning on the street already; the west side of the street in time will change the zoning to either BU-1-A or RP; and the Zoning Department agrees such zoning is coming. Attorney Spielvogel stated Lisa Smith, an environmental biologist, is present to answer any questions; her advice to him was that what the applicant is doing has only a positive effect; the runoff from the project will be treated before it enters the Sykes Creek Lagoon; they will remove exotic plants and trees, including Brazilian pepper and Australian pine, from the site; and they are going to impose a conservation easement on the eastern-most lake. He noted one of the concerns was whether or not there were any special species that would be displaced; Ms. Smith found none, with the sole exception of raccoons; there are many raccoons on the property; they eat the eggs and chicks of blue herons and anhinga; and the raccoons will not be hurt, but displaced which will enhance the opportunity for survival of the birds. He advised the wetlands are only 5.3% of the total project; the binding development plan limits the construction to 110,000 square feet; and Exhibit 6 is a letter from Rhonda Pieper-Schmitz, traffic consultant, who concluded that the proposed project would generate 521 more daily trips, but 144 less morning peak hour trips than what would be generated under the existing binding site plan. He noted there have also been concerns expressed from property owners in Hampton Homes located on the north side of Merritt Avenue regarding traffic through the subdivision; people have been taking a short cut going up Hampton Way and cutting over to Needle Boulevard in order to get to North Courtenay Parkway; they have been exceeding the speed limit; it is a law enforcement problem; and they asked their consultant to provide suggestions as to what might be done to help the situation, which his client would pay for. Attorney Spielvogel stated Scott Nickle, Project Manager with Bussen-Mayer Engineering Group, is available to respond to any questions; and there was unanimous recommendation for approval from the P&Z Board and Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency.

George Lewis, representing the applicant, stated he has been a licensed real estate broker in Florida since 1971; when looking at the property in question, there would be some loss in value for single-family residential; however, he determined by studying sales on Plumosa Street in the past few years, there were two properties that sold as single-family residence; one property sold that had been converted from single-family residence to BU-1-A; and that property sold for approximately twice the value of the two homes that sold as single-family residence. He noted it shows him the commercial zoning on Plumosa Street is probably the highest and best use for the property; and while the single-family residents are affected as residential property because people do not want to move into that type of environment when there are other places they can purchase, it is not affected in a negative way by this project, if it is to be commercial property, BU-1-A or Residential Professional on the west side. Mr. Lewis stated they discussed it with the homeowners and they seemed reasonably assured that the facts they had given them were correct and this probably would not affect them negatively, as most of them believe at some point they will want to go commercial of some type.

Rhonda Pieper-Schmitz, Motorist Design, submitted a package to the Board showing a photograph of the area with the cut-through for North Hampton Way; stated they are proposing potential improvements to help deter the situation, whether it be from traffic by the proposed development or the people who are traveling the road now; and some suggestions include putting in rumble strips, posting no right on red sign at the Merritt Avenue and Plumosa Street signal, and having patrol and enforcement during peak hours a couple of times a week. She advised the existing peak hour traffic on North Hampton Way at the intersection with Merritt Avenue is 150 peak hour trips in the major direction and 108 in the minor direction; and the roadway has a capacity for 600 to 800 peak hour trips, so it can accommodate any additional traffic with regard to capacity.

Paul D. Lewis, Jr., Daniel Jay Barber, and Doug Robertson, advised of their support for the proposed project.

Ruth Ganter expressed her opposition for the proposed project; and advised of problems trying to get out of her driveway due to traffic congestion on Merritt Avenue, and raccoons on her property.

Chairman Scarborough inquired are the raccoons displaced or trapped and transported to a location where they are protected in a wildlife area.

Lisa Smith, Smith Environmental Services, responded typically when a development is done, those types of species are displaced; trapping them is doable, but is a question she would have to ask Attorney Spielvogel and his applicant; raccoons are not a species put on a conservation area as they are a primary predator; and normally raccoons are displaced as they adapt well to the urban environment.

Attorney Spielvogel stated they have inherited some problems from the County; when it put in the borrow pit or retention area at the corner of Plumosa Street and East Merritt Avenue, it may have displaced some animals; Ms. Ganter has a problem today concerning the traffic in front of her home, but the proposed project did not create the problem; and when Merritt Avenue was widened, the County condemned some of Ms. Ganter?s property and took a substantial part of her front yard. He noted his applicant looked at the possibility of paying for a circular driveway for Ms. Ganter; if they are causing an impact on someone, they want to make it right; but there is not enough room in Ms. Ganter?s front yard to provide such a driveway. He noted perhaps they can address the timing on the traffic light and try to adjust it so Ms. Ganter has an opportunity to get out of her driveway; when Ms. Ganter pulls out of her garage, she is practically in the right-of-way; and hopefully compensation was taken care of when the County condemned and widened Merritt Avenue. Attorney Spielvogel stated the solution is to either acquire another piece of property so Ms. Ganter has some flexibility with a driveway or hopefully, she was compensated.

Commissioner O?Brien inquired if Ms. Ganter has problems with the raccoons coming back to her property from the proposed project, can she contact Attorney Spielvogel?s client and have them trapped at that time and brought back to the proposed property. Attorney Spielvogel stated raccoons are predators, and he does not know if he wants to commit to putting them on someone else?s property; and possibly Animal Control can help. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if Attorney Spielvogel?s client would be willing to put monument signage at the ingress and egress of Plumosa Street, more landscaping on Merritt Avenue than what is included on the present plan, work on getting no right turn on red heading west on Merritt Avenue and onto Hampton Way and no right on red at the end of Needle Boulevard and onto Courtenay Parkway, and perhaps on a quarterly basis, they would get together with the Sheriff?s Department and compensate it to settle some of the traffic problems if they are still rampant on Hampton Way.

Commissioner O?Brien stated he needs to put on the record that he had a conversation with Attorney Spielvogel and Mr. Lewis this afternoon concerning the item.

Commissioner Carlson inquired what is the requirement of trees in the parking lot; with Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca responding one tree per every 10 spaces. Commissioner Carlson inquired can additional trees be put in the parking area for cooling affects.

Chairman Scarborough stated Merritt Avenue is a major street; what concerns him are two of three entrances are on Plumosa Street; and inquired to what extent does the applicant anticipate the traffic will be coming off of S.R. 520 or Merritt Avenue and using Plumosa Street as the primary entrance to B.J.?s Wholesale. He noted there may be an immediate need to do improvements to Plumosa Street; and inquired what role would the developer play.

Chairman Scarborough noted the Board will come back to Item 6 after Attorney Spielvogel discusses the aforementioned issues with his client.

The meeting recessed at 7:37 p.m. and reconvened at 7:46 p.m.

Item 7. (Z9901301) James R. Peo and Nicholas A. Peo?s request for CUP for Aquaculture-Case II in RR-1 zone on 2.46 acres located on the west side of Highway A1A, south of Aquarina Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Zoning Official Rick Enos advised the applicant has requested the item be tabled.

Commissioner Higgs stated it has been the procedure of the Board to table items when the applicant has requested it; and the Board has allowed those speakers present to address the item.

Max Taylor requested the item be tabled for two months as he will be out of the country; and stated his biggest concern is the environmental impact that has not been fully discussed.

Carol Draper voiced her objection to the tabling of the item.

Rebecca James, Earl Slattum, and Pamela Acevedo advised of their opposition to the proposed request for a CUP due to the environmental impacts, decreased land values, and noise pollution.

Commissioner Higgs stated she met with the Mrs. Woodford and the residents concerning the CUP request. Commissioner Voltz advised she also spoke with Mrs. Woodford who showed her maps and explained what they are trying to do. Commissioner Carlson advised she had a meeting with the Woodfords who explained to her aquaculture in general.

Commissioner Higgs stated she lives approximately one mile from the parcel in question and is one of the residents in the area; and she will move to table the item until April 8, 1999 to allow the applicant to meet with the residents of the area.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to table Item 7 until April 8, 1999 Board of County Commissioners? meeting to allow the applicants to meet with residents of the area. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 8:16 p.m. and reconvened at 8:23 p.m.

Attorney Spielvogel stated his client will provide for monument signage on Plumosa Street only, add trees in the middle of the parking lot, and if Ms. Ganter has problems with raccoons during the period of construction, they will respond to it; and they will pay the Sheriff?s Department up front for a deputy to provide patrol periodically for a period of three years to alleviate speeding that may result from the project.

Commissioner O?Brien stated Attorney Spielvogel?s client is willing to put up one deputy four times a year for three years along Hampton Way, Alabama Street and that general area to try to alleviate the speeding and abusive driving privileges that may occur from the project. Attorney Spielvogel advised he will contact the Sheriff?s Department for a dollar amount to be paid up front, and request the Department provide the patrol.

Commissioner Voltz inquired who is going to keep track of when a deputy goes out there; with Commissioner O?Brien responding probably the Hampton Homeowners, and perhaps the applicant can get an agreement from the Sheriff?s Department saying it will provide the patrol.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 6 as recommended by the P&Z Board for 110,000 square-foot building, and additional conditions of monument signage on Plumosa Street, trees in the middle of the parking lot, notify Ms. Ganter when construction will begin and respond to any raccoon problems she may have during that period, and pay the Sheriff up front for a deputy to patrol every quarter a year for three years to alleviate speeding that may result from the project.

Chairman Scarborough inquired what is the percentage of traffic the applicant anticipates would end on Plumosa Street as opposed to Merritt Avenue. Attorney Spielvogel responded they will meet concurrency and will not change the level of service on Plumosa Street or Merritt Avenue. Chairman Scarborough stated there may be traffic that will use Plumosa Street as the primary entrance, and inquired is it the primary entrance; with Attorney Spielvogel responding the primary entrance is on Merritt Avenue. Chairman Scarborough inquired is Plumosa Street capable of handling that traffic; with Attorney Spielvogel responding affirmatively.

Commissioner Carlson stated on the information of trips from existing zoning and trips from proposed zoning, there is a 7,000 trip generation difference; with Zoning Official Rick Enos responding there was a change because of the reduction in square footage of the building, and the recalculation indicates the traffic generation will be reduced from 9,000 to approximately 5,100.

Commissioner O?Brien stated he would also like to direct Traffic Engineering to erect no right on red signs at the corner of Merritt Avenue and Hampton Way traveling west and at the end of Needle Boulevard traveling onto Courtenay Parkway.

Commissioner Higgs stated she would be reluctant to tell Traffic Engineering what signs to put where without a study on it.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised staff will provide the Board with a report.

Chairman Scarborough called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 8. (Z9901401) Samuel W. and Martha A. Long?s request for change from GU to RU-1-11 on 0.14 acres located on the north side of Evinrude Road, west of Jones Road, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 8 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 9. (Z9901402) James R. and Shauna R. W. Jones? request for change from AU to EU on 0.5 acre located on the north side of McIver Lane, west of Rockledge Drive, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 9 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 10. (Z9901403) Brevard County Board of County Commissioners? request for CUP for towers and antennas (54 feet monopole) in GML zone (currently having CUP for a tower and sewer plant) on 37.11 acres located on the south side of Wickham Road, west of I-95, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 10 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 11. (Z9901404) Shellie Friedman?s request for change from BU-1-A to RU-2-10 on 3.682 acres located on the southeast corner of South Patrick Drive and Sea Park Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Ray Roberts advised of his opposition to the proposed request; and stated to bring 36 homes into this area, which is possible under the zoning request, would create a problem; it is approximately 150 people and as many as 50 cars; he is in favor of property owners using their property to the best advantage financially and otherwise; but the common good does become a factor. He noted there will be an impact on the school crossing; the property is next door to Sea Park School; it faces South Patrick Drive and Sea Park Avenue; depending on how the traffic is routed, there could be a considerable problem for the school children twice a day coming; and there will be traffic impact along South Patrick Drive. Mr. Roberts stated there is a canal south of the property; a couple of times a year, there are as many as 25 or 30 manatees in the canal; and such canal may get runoff from the parking lot and would contribute to pollution of the canal. He stated he is not trying to completely limit development of the property, but would request the zoning be reduced from RU-2-10 to RU-2-6 which would be approximately 20 or 22 houses instead of 28 or 36 houses; and there would be a lot of congestion with RU-2-10.

Joe DiPrima stated he is purchasing the property from Shellie Friedman; the present zoning is not the best usage for this property and could generate a lot more traffic for a commercial venture than a project which would be townhomes and patio homes; there will not be parking lots and there will be streets, garages and driveways; and utilization of the land is probably going to be approximately 28 units, even though the zoning would permit more. He noted a restriction of anything less than that would not be reasonable since the other zoning in the area would allow 10 units to the acre; this request would do the same thing; it is an excellent project; they will not be doing anything that would come close to changing the manatees? environment; and they will have to meet all the requirements for retention of water on the property. Mr. DiPrima stated there is a drainage ditch along South Patrick Drive that exists right now and would remain; and they would be enhancing and cleaning it up to make it more presentable.

Chairman Scarborough inquired is Mr. DiPrima willing to submit to binding the site to only 28 units. Mr. DiPrima responded they have done a preliminary site plan; they are not going to get 36 units on the site; but he would like to have the flexibility if there are 27, 28 or 29 units, that it would not be restricted to something less than that. Mr. DiPrima stated the units will be individually owned, four to six units in a building, and probably not exceeding 28 units in the whole project.

Commissioner Higgs inquired will Mr. DiPrima bind himself to the style of the units, individually owned and no more than four units per building; with Mr. DiPrima responding he previously stated four and six-unit buildings.

Zoning Official Rick Enos inquired is this townhouse development with platted lots. Mr. DiPrima responded the one they just finished did not have platted lots, there were metes and bounds, and the property was deeded; and it will probably be the same for this property. Mr. Enos

advised there are other options if there is a townhouse subdivision with platted lots; RA-2-10 could be used as opposed to RU-2-10; the RU-2-8 and RA-2-8 classifications include eight units

to the acre; and based upon the 3.68 acres, Mr. DiPrima could get his 28 units with RA-2-8 classification. Mr. DiPrima inquired is there a possibility to have dual zoning; with Mr. Enos responding if Mr. DiPrima wants the option, he needs to stay with the RU classification as both options are available in RU.

Commissioner Carlson inquired does Mr. DiPrima have a problem with RU-2-8; with Mr. DiPrima responding negatively.

Commissioner O?Brien expressed concern as almost all the other surrounding area is zoned RU-1-11; the property behind the proposed property is undeveloped; if the Board approves RU-2-8 tonight, it is a given that the rest of the property will also be going RU-2-8; and this does not slow growth, but jams more people per square foot into a smaller area than the rest of the surrounding areas. He noted he does not see any good reason why the Board should do this.

Commissioner Voltz stated this is a down zoning; and anytime the Board down zones, it makes a positive impact on the community.

Commissioner Carlson stated there are enough issues outstanding that she will move to table the item until the issues on impact are clarified.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to table Item 11 until March 4, 1999 Board of County Commissioners? meeting to clarify issues. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 12. (Z9901501) Brevard Sports Arena & Rodeo, Inc.?s request for change from AU to BU-2 on 5.17 acres located on the west side of Dike Road, north of U.S. Highway #192, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board as BU-1 with a Review of Use for associated wholesale uses.

Commissioner Voltz inquired what are the applicant?s plans for the property.

Marc Collins stated his plans are to move his business, which is located on U.S. Highway #192, and build a new building on the property which is for automotive accessories, primarily aluminum wheels and installation of accessories.

Commissioner Voltz inquired would there be outside storage; with Mr. Collins responding negatively. Commissioner Voltz stated BU-1 would be all right; with Mr. Collins responding he

also does wholesale sales, which is minor wholesale. Mr. Collins stated in a BU-1 zone, he cannot do that; and at the last meeting, they discussed having BU-1 with a wholesale exception.

Mr. Enos stated the P&Z Board spoke about the Review of Use process; and it approved the BU-1 with a Review of Use for associated wholesale uses.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 12 as BU-1 with Review of Use for associated wholesale uses as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 13. (Z9901502) Lowe?s Home Centers, Inc.?s request for change from RU-1-7 to BU-2 on 1.93 acres located on the east side of Feast Road, south of U.S. Highway 192, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 13 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 14 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 15 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages

for Zoning Resolutions.)

Item 16. (Z9811202) Michael J. and Lorraine Pelosi?s request for CUP for alcoholic beverages on-premises consumption in BU-2 zone on 0.69 acre located on the north side of S.R. 520, east of North Courtenay Parkway, which was withdrawn by the applicant.

The Board withdrew Item 16 from the agenda.

The meeting recessed at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:13 p.m.

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider the recommendations of the P&Z Board, made at its public hearing on January 4, 1999, regarding administrative rezonings as follows:

Item 3. Ernest A. Desantis and Isabelle C. Finnell. Change from TU-1(20) to TU-1(7), which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Ernest Desantis stated he knows his zoning has changed to TU-1(7), and there is not much he can do about it; and requested if the Board believes there is a need for additional motels in the South Beaches area in the future, that it look at the existing motels presently there and give them an opportunity to expand versus allowing property to be rezoned. He noted he would like to build more units, if possible, in the future.

Commissioner Higgs stated the recommendation from the P&Z Board is TU-1(7) which is consistent with the Ordinance adopted by the Board; and she will move approval.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 3 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Voltz voted nay.

Item 2.z. Saundria G. Taldo. Change from RU-2-10 to RU-2-8, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Ernest Desantis stated Ms. Taldo had to leave, and requested in the future that existing motels be looked at first and given the chance to expand.

Commissioner Higgs stated it is a reasonable place to start if the Board ever decides to go down that road.

(CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 2.z. as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Voltz voted nay.

Commissioner Voltz stated if someone does not want their property down zoned or rezoned, the Board should not be doing it.

Item 1.a. Kaleny Limited of Florida, Inc. Change from TU-1(20) to TU-1(7), which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Bernard Alwill, owner of the Surfcaster Motel, stated he went to court and fought for the right to get more units; he would rather have had what he had purchased in 1990 which was 20 units per acre; it was taken away from him because the Board is continuously down zoning individuals? properties; but the taxes keep increasing and the owners do not get the opportunity to make more income to pay such taxes. He advised of his opposition to the change in zoning from TU-1(20) to TU-1(7).

Hank Saunders, real estate agent, stated the Surfcaster Motel is an old motel which was built in 1953; it was the prominent place on the ocean; there was hardly any development there; and the residents came after the motel was built. He inquired what is the intent to constantly decrease the density and put a hardship on Mr. Alwill who has done nothing but improve his property and spent a lot of money; and he had to take the County to court and sue to be allowed to build a building that he had gone through the process to build in the first place. He noted Mr. Chapman, the owner prior to Mr. Alwill, worked through the system and had the property in a mixed use status for five months; the County took it away from him; he does not understand the reasoning; and it is an outrage.

Commissioner Voltz stated whoever the Commissioner was back when the Comprehensive Plan was done decided to down zone the entire beach; that was where the whole thing started; once it was put in the Comprehensive Plan, they worked toward down zoning the beach; and the Commissioner of the District has gone with the Comprehensive Plan all along.

Chairman Scarborough stated the prior Commissioner of District 3 is the one who started the process.

Commissioner Higgs stated the 1988 Comprehensive Plan made changes; they were good changes; the small area plan changes, which she participated in, tried to come up with a resolution from 1993 until the Board acted in 1998 on what to do with existing uses; and the conclusion of most of the Board was the Ordinance now in place regarding existing uses, preservation of rights, and the balancing of conflicting interest.

(CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Item 1.a. as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners O?Brien and Voltz voted nay.

Item 14.a. Bud and Mary Carol Crisafulli. Change from TR-2 to RRMH-1, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Bud Crisafulli stated this particular piece of property is on Pine Island Road; he is cornered on one side by Colony Park which has about 14 rental units to the acre; on the south side is Colony Park Trailer Park with four units per acre; and the proposed school site borders him on the south. He noted he has TR-2 zoning right now; RRMH-1 zoning is being proposed; he is concerned with the acreage between Colony Park and Pine Island Road; he needs the TR-2 designation for his lot sizes; and he only wants 35 units on 35 acres. He noted all the property is is cattle pasture.

Zoning Official Rick Enos stated one approach would be an application for TR-2 zoning with a binding development plan limiting the density to one unit per acre; it would make the TR-2 zoning consistent with one unit per acre in the Comprehensive Plan; and the Board could table the item for readvertising.

Commissioner O?Brien stated the Board could also waive the fee.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board and the agricultural community need to aggressively sit down, look at the issue, and get consultants to come up with ways to assist the agricultural community.

Commissioner O?Brien stated the Farmland Trust and Mr. Crisafulli?s group can meet with County staff to find solutions to help the farmers in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to table Item 14 to the May 6, 1999 Board of County Commissioners? meeting and waive fees. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 6.a-b. Robert G. and Genevieve Milliken, and Carl J. Signorelli. Item 6.a. was withdrawn by staff for readvertising for the April, 1999 hearing, and Item 6.b. was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board from BU-1 to BU-1-A.

Carl Signorelli expressed his support for the rezoning of Item 6.b. from BU-1 to BU-1-A; and gave examples of what the Comprehensive Plan did to him.

(CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to accept withdrawal of Item 6.a. and approve Item 6.b. as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 2. a-c. St. Johns River Water Management District, Brevard County, and FDOT. Change from PUD, IU and AU to GML(P), which were recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Items 2.a-c as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 3.a-b. Merritt Island Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. and School Board of Brevard County. Change from AU to GML(I), which were recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Items 3.a-b as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 4.a-d. Hawkins Enterprises, Inc., R.R. & Emily E. Stieff, Bud and Mary Carol Crisafulli, and Derry L. and Melody A. Bilby. Item 4.a. was tabled to the April administrative rezoning agenda at the request of the applicant, and Items 4.b.-4.d. were recommended for approval by the P&Z Board from SR and TR-2 to RR-1.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to table Item 4.a. to the April administrative rezoning agenda, and approve Items 4.b.-4.d. as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 5.a. Colony Park Utilities, Inc. Change from TR-1 to RRMH-1, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Item 5.a. as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 7.a-g. Joseph D. and Kim Marie Kelly, Michael W. and Joyce F. Collins, David K. and Avice M. Evans, Virginia F. Wilson, Michael W. and Joyce F. Collins, Hazel S. Tracy, and Cornerstone of Merritt Island, FL., Inc. Change from TR-1 to TR-2, which were recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

(CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Item 7 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 8.a-v. Joyce W. and Marsha A. Mitchell, Debra L. Dale and Michael T. Green, Robert M. and Michelle J. Sayler, Carl H. and Linda C. Wick, III, Roosevelt T. and Mary F. Tyler, Charles L. and Mary M. Hurtt, Robert H. and Eli L. Reed, III, Carl J. and Maureen T. Signorelli, Dorothy Novesky, Steven E. and Merilea S. Cain, Bobby G. and Marilyn E. Bruckner, Harold G. and Jean R. Green, James L. and Cynthia G. Sullivan, Norman W. and Gayle P. Murphy, Wade A. and Judith A. Ivey, Walter and Marlene G. Pidhoretzky, William E. and Deborah A. Stapleton, Delmas R. Ellis, TR., Gregory T. and Stacy L. Goforth, Joseph B. and Mary C. Crisafulli, Jeffrey B. and Cheryl A. Crisafulli, and Bud and Mary Carol Crisafulli. Change from RU-1-7, EU, and RR-1 to SR, which were recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Item 8 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 9.a-b. Carl J. Signorelli, and Gilbert C. and Yvonne M. Ryan. Change from RU-2-15 to RU-2-4, which were recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Item 9 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 10.a-c. Joseph V. and Teresa M. Parlapiano, Carl J. Signorelli, and Diana O. Corlew. Change from RU-2-15 and RU-2-10(5) to EU, which Items 10.a-b were recommended for approval by the P&Z Board and Item 10.c. was tabled to the April, 1999 administrative rezoning agenda at the request of the property owner.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Items 10.a-b as recommended by the P&Z Board, and table Item 10.c. to the April, 1999 administrative rezoning agenda. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 11.a-d. St. Johns River Water Management District, Henry C. and Diana W. Milliken, St. Johns River Water Management District, and Brevard County. Change from PUD, GU, AU, and IU to GML(P), which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

(CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Item 11 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 12.a. School Board of Brevard County, FL. Change from AU to GML(I), which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Item 12 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 13.a-c. William F. Leonard, Ralph K. and Lull W. Bailey, and Howard M. Gold. Change from SR and IU to RR-1, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Item 13 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages

for Zoning Resolutions.)

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider ordinance amending Ordinance No. 96-30, reducing Port St. John Dependent Special District Membership.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to adopt Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida; amending Ordinance 96-30 relating to the Port St. John Dependent Special District; specifically amending Section 4, Membership and Organization, to reduce the number of members from nine to seven; providing for a non-repealer provision; providing for severability; and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Ordinance No. 99-05.)

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to adopt Ordinance amending Chapter 62, "Land Development Regulations", Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Article VI, Section 62-2117(10), relating to the common storage of recreational vehicles and boats in residential subdivisions; providing for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; providing an effective date; and

providing for inclusion in the Brevard County Code. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Ordinance No. 99-06.)

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider ordinance amending Chapter 62, Land Development Regulations, Articles II, III and VI, Numerous Sections from 62-100.1 to 62-1843.

Commissioner Higgs stated page 9 of the draft ordinance refers to PUD?s having 1.25 units; and it may not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Commissioner Voltz noted she was under the impression it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Official Rick Enos stated Commissioner Higgs? concern is that it be clarified as up to 1.25 units; and no one can assume they will get the maximum. Commissioner Higgs noted they only get the bonus in a PUD if they do certain things; and she does not like the present language.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the language can be revised to read "up to."

Commissioner Higgs stated page 6 (d) refers to the criteria for vested rights and eminent peril; eminent peril is such a standard for vested rights; and requested staff look at a standard such as injurious to the public health, safety and welfare or something else.

Commissioner Higgs noted the circled numbers 21 and 22 refers to industrial and abutting AU; she reviewed the ready maps and where the County has AU abutting IU; she has a problem when the County talks about a classification that has not been developed for residential; and if someone owns the property and they are planning to put a house there, and the County allows a different standard for the IU in terms of where people can park, it is wrong.

Mr. Enos stated staff can strike the language provision in both the IU and IU-1 cases because the previous sentence would govern the AU; the previous sentence refers to 100-foot setback for all residential classifications; and AU is a residential classification.

Commissioner Higgs stated she can support what is here with that change. Commissioner Voltz requested clarification on the revision. Mr. Enos stated Sections 21 and 22 which deal with the IU and IU-1 zoning classifications include provisions that require 100-foot setbacks for

shipping or receiving where adjacent to residentially zoned property; and there is another provision that changes that to 25 feet where adjacent to undeveloped agriculture. Commissioner Higgs noted she is also concerned about the size of lots for gas stations.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Ordinance amending Chapter 62, "Land Development Regulations", Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Chapter 62, Articles II, III and VI, specifically amending Chapter 62, Article II, Division 1, Section 62-100.1(5) & (18), "Administrative Duties of the Planning and Zoning Official," to limit the Zoning Official?s authority to Article VI; amending Article II, Division 3, Section 62-185, "Records; Regular and Special Meeting," to remove unnecessary language concerning Board?s ability to raise the special hearing fee and the specific dollar amount of the special hearing fee as it may become outdated by future Board resolution; amending Article II, Division 4, Section 62-213, "Meetings; Records," to add additional criteria for special hearings before the Board of Adjustment and to update reference of Zoning Director to Zoning Official; amending Article III, Section 62-507(d)(5), "Appeal Procedure; presentation of claims of regulatory takings or abrogation of vested rights," to correct and expand the referenced Section for improved identification; amending Article VI, Division 1, Section 62-1102, "Definitions and Rules of Construction"-building height; guesthouse; lot, double frontage; lot line, front; nonconforming use; and variance; to correct the error in roof slope allowed, add verb to correct sentence structure for guesthouse definition, to remove the solid wall requirement and add fences to preclude access for lot, double-frontage definition, to incorporate easements and flag lots within the definition of lot line, front to assist the property owner to select which lot line is the front, to list the specific subsection where nonconforming uses are described and to list the specific subsection where variances are described; amending Article VI, Division 2, Subdivision II, Section 62-1186(2)(d, e, and f), "Nonconforming Mobile Home Parks," to restate authorizing regulations, to allow for a dimensioned drawing or a survey to be utilized; amending Article VI, Division 3, Section 62-1253, "Adoption of Zoning Classifications," to limit areas of control to unincorporated areas of the County; amending Article VI, Division 3, Section 62-1255(a) and (b)(2)(e), "Establishment of Zoning Classifications and Consistency with Comprehensive Plan and Exhibit A ? Consistency of Zoning Classifications with Future Land Use Map Series," to limit areas of control to unincorporated areas of the County, to incorporate residential density increase for PUD zoned areas to be consistent with Future Land Use Element XIII Policy 1.4(C) and to consolidate the zoning categories within Exhibit A; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision II, Section 62-1331, "General Use, GU," to define the actual development character of the General Use (GU) zoning classification; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision II,

Section 62-1334.5(2) "Agricultural Rural Residential, ARR," to correct transposed chapter number referenced; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision II, Section 62-1343(4)(b)(7)(ii)

"Single-Family Attached Residential, RA-2-4, RA-2-6, RA-2-8 and RA-2-10," to add the word feet to the sentence requiring square feet to clarify criteria; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision II, VI, VII, and VIII Sections: 62-1343(4)(b)(7)(iii)(a) "Single-Family Attached Residential, RA-2-4, RA-2-6, RA-2-8 and RA-2-10, "62-1371(8)(a) "Low-Density Multiple-Family

Residential, RU-2-4, RU-2-6 and RU-2-8,"62-1372(8)(a) "Medium-Density Multiple-Family Residential, RU-2-10, RU-2-12 and RU-2-15," 62-1373(7)(a) "High-Density Multiple-Family Residential, RU-2-30," 62-1481(7)(a) "Restricted Neighborhood Retail Commercial, BU-1-A," 62-1482(7)(a) "General Retail Commercial, BU-1," 62-1483(7)(a) "Retail, Warehousing and Wholesale Commercial, BU-2," 62-1511(8)(a) "General Tourist Commercial, TU-1," 62-1512(8)(a) Transient Tourist Commercial, TU-2," 62-1541(6)(a) "Planned Business Park, PBP," 62-1542(7)(a) "Planned Industrial Park, PIP," 62-1543(7)(a) "Light Industrial, IU," and 62-1544(8)(a) "Heavy Industrial, IU-1," to update the adjacent zoning listings available for additional building height; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision II, Section 62-1344(2) and to create Subsection (5)(c) "Residential-Professional, RP," to move accessory building setback criteria from the accessory use Subsection (2) and to create a Subsection (5)(c) to contain accessory building setback information; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision III, Section 62-1373(2). "High-Density Multiple-family Residential, RU-2-30," to add consistent accessory structure size criteria as found in other multi-family zoning classifications; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision III, Sections: 62-1371(5)(c)(3) "Low-Density Multiple-Family Residential, RU-2-4, RU-2-6 and RU-2-8," and 62-1372(5)(c)(3) "Medium-Density Multiple-Family Residential, RU-2-10, RU-2-12 and RU-2-15," to add allowance for reduced side setbacks for a single-family residence for oceanfront property; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision III, Section 62-1373(5)(c)(3) "High-Density Multiple-Family Residential, RU-2-30," to add allowance

for reduced side setbacks for a single-family residence for oceanfront property; deleting Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision III, Section 62-1371(9) "Low-Density Multiple-Family Residential, RU-2-4, RU-2-6 and RU-2-8," to remove duplicate criteria regulated by the Land Development Regulations; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision IV, Section 62-1404(14) "Mobile Home Park, TR-3," to reinstate the method of park ownership; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision IV, Section 62-1405(2)(a and b) "Single-Family mobile home cooperative, TRC-1," to add garages to list of allowed accessory structures and to amend Subsection (2)(b) to be consistent with criteria set forth in previous Subsection (2)(a); amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision VII, Section 62-1511(5)(b),"General Tourist Commercial, TU-1," to correct the citation requiring a minimum lot coverage to state the maximum lot coverage; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision VIII, Section 62-1543(5)(c), and (8)(a), "Light Industrial, IU," to relocate the citation for truck parking and loading; amending Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision VIII, Section 62-1544(6)(c) and (9)(a) "Heavy Industrial , IU-1," to relocate the citation for truck parking and loading; amending Article VI, Division 5, Subdivision II, Section 62-1835.7(a), "Gasoline Service Stations," to correct spelling of the term principal; amending Article VI,

Division 5, Subdivision II, Section 62-1835.8(1), "Gasoline Service Stations in the TU-2 Zoning Classification," to correct the official reviewing authority; amending Article VI, Division 5, Subdivision II, Section 62-1839.7(d)(2 and 3) "Preexisting Use," to correct a listed citation and to correct sentence structure; amending Article VI, Division 5, Subdivision II, Section 62-1841.7, "Security Mobile Home," to add provisions to define when such use if allowed and to correct the spelling of the term "Principal;" providing for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; providing an effective date; and providing for inclusion in the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida, as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Ordinance No. 99-07.)

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider South Beaches Administrative Rezoning, as follows:

Items 19.a-b. Brevard County, and State of Florida IITF/Sebastian Inlet State Park. Change from PUD, RU-2-4, and BU-1 to GML(P).

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 19 as recommended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages for Zoning Resolutions.)

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 9:58 p.m.

ATTEST:

_______________________________________

TRUMAN G. SCARBOROUGH, JR., CHAIRMAN

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_________________________

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK

(S E A L)