MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

May 24, 2007

 

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on May 24, 2007 at 5:01 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida.  Present were:  Chairperson Jackie Colon, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Chuck Nelson, Helen Voltz, and Mary Bolin, Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten, and Assistant County Attorney Morris Richardson.

 

The Invocation was given by Father Bob Markunas, Our Lady of Grace Church, Palm Bay, Florida.

 

Commissioner Bolin led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance. 

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon read aloud a resolution recognizing the People to People Student Ambassador Program.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution recognizing the People to People Student Ambassador Program.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

A representative from the People to People Student Ambassador Program stated her group of students will be traveling with 41 delegates from the area in grades nine through 12; they will be leaving on June 18, 2007 and will be returning on July 9, 2007; and will visit various cities promoting peace and understanding from one culture to another.

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon extended condolences and prayers to Chief Muldoun and the City of Palm Bay for the fallen firefighter who lost his life, Michael Racinik. 

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon read aloud a resolution proclaiming the week of June 4 – 9, 2007 as Management Week.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to adopt Resolution proclaiming Management Week and expressing its sincere appreciation to the National Management Association for its valuable contributions and assistance to the citizens of Brevard County.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

A representative from the Florida Space Coast Council expressed appreciation to the Board for claiming Management Week in America in Brevard County for June 4 – 9, 2007.  She stated during that week, the Council will observe Management Week with a banquet on June 6, 2007 at Gregory’s in Cocoa Beach; the Council will be awarding Brevard County Manager of the Year to Miss Lisa Rice, President, Executive Director for Brevard Workforce Development Board; and will also award the Gold Knight of Management to Mark Nappy, an Associate Program Manager for Ground Operations at United Space Alliance at Cape Canaveral.  She stated the National Management Association believes that good management and good leadership go hand in hand and is a skill that is learned through training and practice.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution commending the Palm Bay Lions Club for its outstanding service to the community and wishing them success with its First Annual Dinner Dance Gala.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon read aloud a resolution recognizing Palm Bay High School’s Drill Team.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution recognizing Palm Bay High School’s Drill Team for their outstanding efforts and offering congratulations and best wishes for a successful future, as they have done an amazing job and have made the Board very proud.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Sergeant Rick Beauton introduced Chelsea Holliday, the two-time national champion for regulation drill. 

 

Chelsea Holliday expressed appreciation to the Board for the recognition; stated everybody on the drill team works hard; and many of the team members are going in the military and she would like for everyone to keep them in their hearts as they go into the armed forces.

 

 

Commissioner Nelson read aloud a letter from the Homeowners Association commending Cheryl Howell.  The letter indicated the professional relationship the Homeowners Association has  had  with  Housing  and  Human  Services  Department;  and stated there have been many

accomplishments in their communities that would not have been realized if it were not for Ms. Cheryl Howell and the Housing and Human Services Department.  The letter stated Ms. Howell’s efforts have been proven to be very valuable; for the past few months, Cheryl and her co-workers have been attending the Homeowners Association regular monthly meetings to present brief community capacity training sessions; stated Ms. Howell was able to get a website established for the Homeowners Association; and her visible enthusiasm and encouragement have been assets to the community.

 

Theresa Robinson stated the letter Commissioner Nelson read expresses the Homeowners Association’s feelings exactly; she thanks God for giving someone the vision to revisit the way of doing business with the communities and she believes the community has one of the best coordinators in Ms. Cheryl Howell; through several CDC capacity building training sessions, the community experienced learning in a totally different fashion; and she expressed appreciation to Ms. Cheryl Howell.

 

 

Senator Mike Haridopolos expressed appreciation to the Board for its suggestions throughout the session; and stated he knows many of the Commissioners came to Tallahassee to visit personally and it makes a difference.  He stated what the Delegation has tried to do, especially on the Senate side, is take the plan to the people; before the Senate plan for tax reduction came out the idea was to listen to the taxpayers as opposed to the tax makers; and they had the good fortune to travel the State and visit 14 different communities including Orlando, Jacksonville, and Miami, and also to places like Lakeland, Lake City and Chiefland and some smaller communities because they too have felt the enormous bite of tax increases through the years.  He stated the Senate arrived at the end of session without striking a deal; the Senate and the House were not in the same place; and the two parties thought it best to wait and have a Special Session which begins on June 12, 2007.  He noted he is happy to report from the last meeting on Monday, some progress has been made; there will most likely be some type of rollback in the fall resulting in this year’s tax bill; and then any structural changes that might be made will be made by the people.  He noted those changes would be in the Presidential Primary that will take place in the January Primary; and roughly $20 million would be saved by not having a separate or special election.  He noted in talking to non-homesteaded homeowners, their taxes have gone up dramatically; the assessments have gone up and thus taxes go up even when millage goes down slightly; and those people are begging for relief.  He stated for the first time in history more people are leaving Florida than coming to Florida.  He noted there is much concern for Brevard County; in 2010 there will be a dramatic change at Kennedy Space Center; and the County needs to be prepared for that.  He stated the Delegation is in the process of negotiations; there will be an additional meeting on June 4^th to discuss the rollback proposals; and the Senate position from the beginning is that those who were hardest hit will see the most relief; those who have been in a homesteaded property for the last five years have seen either a static situation or maybe even have seen a reduction in the actual tax rate; and those persons are pretty content and they were not the ones at the Town Hall meetings across the State.  He noted those people who are hurting are those persons in a newly homesteaded property  or  in  a  non-homesteaded  property,  whether  residential  or  commercial;  and that is

where the relief is being focused.  He advised there have been discussions about Super Homestead in which everyone gets kind of the same homestead when they purchase a home, whether it be 10, 20, or 30, up to 50 percent; also being discussed is a tiered homestead, meaning the first $200,000 of their homestead would be 50 percent of value and then tiered downward as the price of the home goes up, up to about $1 million; that would be almost a reverse of the progressive taxes that the United States has; the more expensive the home, the less of a tax break one would receive; and that is how it would work.  He stated he appreciates the input from the Commissioners; last night he was in St. Lucie County and the day before that he was in Miami; it has been a real experience and the Delegation wants to keep its ears open to make sure it is working with good numbers; Ms. Busacca and others have done an outstanding job of presenting how the proposed reductions and taxations reduction in spending would affect the services; and that has been a valued discussion.  He stated by taking a one-year rollback and having a vote of the people to see if they want to change their homestead will give the Delegation a better perspective in which to work from.

 

Chairperson Colon stated she appreciates Senator Haridopolos being open minded; and an elected official that is not open minded is not a good elected official.  She stated 29 percent of Brevard County’s residents need relief and that is where she would like the focus; the small businesses are getting hit hard; they are paying a terrible amount of taxes; and 79 percent of the citizens are protected.  She stated she is pleased the Delegation is working with those numbers and facts; one Commissioner believes the Delegation would not hurt Brevard County; but the rest of the Commissioners have been preparing and looking at the entire budget and other serious numbers.  She stated the Board has been given numbers; but it is a moving target; and the last number it was given was $76 million.  She noted Legislative Delegation Coordinator Leigh Holt informed the Board earlier in the afternoon that it is probably looking at anywhere from $30 million to $40 million, but it is still a moving target; and the ones who need the most help are the 29 percent, which are the businesses and non-homesteaded property owners. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she is the Commissioner who has been positive; since Senator Haridopolos is elected by the same constituents as the Board is elected by, he will do the right thing; and he will not cause the Board to do something that is going to make it layoff 1,400 or 1,500 employees.  She stated in the end, the citizens of Brevard County and Florida will see the tax cuts that many people are looking for; 71 percent of the people in Brevard County are already homesteaded; and it is the rest of the people who are having a problem and they are the target audience for the tax cuts.

 

Commissioner Nelson expressed appreciation to Senator Haridopolos for seeing him when he was in Tallahassee.  He stated he is not as optimistic as Commissioner Voltz because he was able to talk to the House Committee and it was not a pleasant experience at that time in Tallahassee; but he was encouraged by the Senate’s more measured approach to looking at the problem and not just rushing out; and it seems to have continued and he appreciates that.

 

Chairperson Colon stated the Board is grateful to Senator Haridopolos; he has done a tremendous job of listening and the Board cannot ask for more than that; and it is important to allow people to give feedback.

 

Commissioner Bolin thanked Senator Haridopolos for his open-door policy with the Board; and stated if he has any questions please call the Board so that the circle of communication can continue.

 

Chairperson Colon stated open communication has not been the case with others in the Delegation; some of them have not been receptive; and she is saddened by that because they were elected by the same citizens they are about to affect.  She stated Senator Haridopolos has truly listened to the people; and he has allowed the Board to speak to him and that is a true politician and statesman.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she has had positive conversations with all of the Delegation and they have been open to listening, so she has not had a problem.

 

Senator Haridopolos stated he appreciates the Board’s kind words; the Delegation will keep its open-door policy; it has been a challenging year; and he has a new baby at home who he has not gotten to see often because he has been on the road so much.  He stated the other thing the Delegation is trying to do is have predictability in the Tax Code; right now, a non-homesteaded property owner has no idea what their taxes are going to be; that is the way it has been for many years; and it is a struggle the Delegation goes through.  He stated the Delegation also wants to make sure there is transparency; the Board has been great about keeping its numbers out in public and letting the Delegation know what the cuts could be; and transparency is very beneficial.  He stated in the elections policy, whatever campaign contribution comes in is online showing the person who gave it, how much they gave, and the date they gave it; and it is also shown how he has spent the money.  He stated people will see more progress after the June 4^th meeting in Tallahassee; the Special Session will start on June 12^th; and the Delegation wants to be deliberate, measured and truly understand the impact a huge tax cut, a medium tax cut, or a small tax cut will have on the citizens.  He stated everyone wants lower taxes; he has been the biggest advocate of it in the Senate for the last five years, but he wants to make sure the Senate understands those impacts and how it would affect citizens locally and on a statewide basis.  He noted the State budget this year went down by almost $2 billion over the last year; the State spent less this year than it did last year by almost $2 billion; and it was helped today by about $500 million in vetoes.  He noted in this year’s smaller budget by almost $2 billion, the per-student educations were increased by about $465 per student; and another important issue is I-95.  He noted almost $100 million was put into the State budget to accelerate the I-95 project because it is vitally important; and it might be a federal highway, but there is a State role there and the Delegation wants to assist in every way it can, because that is a basis of government.  He stated it is important to not only arrive safely, but also get goods and services to the right place in a timely fashion. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the Board does not seem to be able to get the message across that the barriers for I-95 are needed in order to save lives; and I-95 is how many people in Brevard County get back and forth to work.  She stated at the League of Cities Workshop the Senator was able to hear the concerns of unfunded mandates; some of the things that have been said is that the budget is going down because of a lot of unfunded mandates; and a lot of the mandates are going to the  Counties and that is  of great concern because  those dollars have been in  the

millions.  She noted the Board’s budget grows because of the things that are given to it; and the Board is going to  come up with those  numbers so that the Delegation can see exactly what the

unfunded mandates are that are being requested from local government.  She stated it is difficult; $465 million was the increase by the State for students; and inquired if the citizens will be the ones paying for it.

 

Senator Haridopolos stated the Governor, the Senate, and the House have all agreed that education funding would go untouched; education will not be dealt with as far as cuts or adjustments, but the focus will be on County, City and special taxing districts; and incredible gains that have been made as a State over the last few years in education are paramount, let alone the Constitutional Amendment with class size.  He noted in regards to I-95, the northern and southern portion do have the barriers for the most part because the construction is taking place, but more work needs to be done; and he is attempting to secure those barriers across the central portion of the County as well.  He thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak today and advised it can call on him anytime. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to approve a transportation impact fee reimbursement in lieu of the transportation impact fee credit approved by the Board on July 8, 2003 for Oak Grove, LLC; and authorize the Budget Office to implement all budget changes necessary to process the reimbursement.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to grant a waiver of Section 62-102 to allow a third lot to utilize the same easement for an additional building permit for Mr. and Mrs. Scott Widerman.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to execute Waterline and Ingress/Egress Easement Agreement on property jointly owned by the City of Rockledge and Brevard County in favor of the City of Cocoa.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to adopt Resolution of Necessity for F.S. Stores, Incorporated, for the pursuit of eminent domain to acquire property needed for John Rodes Boulevard/Sheridan Road Intersection Improvement Project.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to execute Offer and Purchase Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation for property needed for the realignment of NASA Boulevard.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to approve a change in the current Internal Audit Plan to allow the replacement of the Water Resources (Utility Services) Billing Audit with an audit of the Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency (MIRA).  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to approve the Pineda Interchange Commitments and Transportation Proportionate Share Agreement between Brevard County, The Viera Company (TVC) and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), the Locally Funded Agreement with FDOT, and authorize the Resolution; authorize the Chairperson to execute all documents associated with the Agreement; and staff to fulfill all of the provisions listed in the Agreement.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to authorize the Chairperson to execute, after review and concurrence by the County Attorney, Department Director and the County Manager, a Settlement Agreement and other documents necessary to clearing the leasehold interest of the Billboard Lessee in conjunction with the Pineda Causeway Extension and Realignment Project.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to adopt Resolution of Necessity for the commencement of condemnation proceedings for the acquisition of a leasehold interest for a portion of County property acquired for the Pineda Causeway Extension and the I-95 Interchange Project; and direct the County Attorney’s Office and staff to proceed with this action utilizing the “quick take” method.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Zoning Manager Rick Enos advised Items VI.B.4., VI.B.10., VI.B.11., VI.B.12., and VI.B.13., are tabled to the September 6, 2007 Board of County Commissioners meeting.

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider items to be tabled, as follows:

 

 

Item VI.B.4.  (Z0705103) Paula Lounsbury, Trustee, Blaine Lounsbury and Megan Lounsbury’s request for a change of classification from AU to SR on 20 acres, located on the northwest corner of Wild Turkey Road and Ford Road, which was recommended for tabling by the Planning and Zoning Board to allow the applicant to meet with the homeowners in the area.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to table Item VI.B.4. to the September 6, 2007 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Item VI.B.10.  (Z0705203) Cocoa Free Will Baptist Church Inc.’s request for a Small Scale Plan Amendment (07S.10) to change the Future Land Use designation from Residential 1 to Residential 4, and a change of classification from RR-1 to IN(L) on 4.49 acres, located northwest of S.R. 524, and east of Friday Road, which was tabled by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Local Planning Agency.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to table Item VI.B.10. to the September 6, 2007 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item VI.B.11. (Z0705204) William P. Taylor’s request for a change from GU to AU on 5 acres, located west of Friday Road, south of Rector Road, which was tabled by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to table Item VI.B.11. to the September 6, 2007 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Item VI.B.12. (Z0705205) William P. Taylor’s request for a change from GU to RR-1 on 1.35 acres, located west of Friday Road, south of Rector Road, which was tabled by the Planning and Zoning Board. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to table Item VI.B.12. to the September 6, 2007 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Item VI.B.13. (Z0705206) William P. Taylor’s request for a change from GU to RR-1 on 1.37 acres, located west of side Friday Road, south of Rector Road, which was tabled by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to table Item VI.B.13. to the September 6, 2007 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Board of May 7, 2007 and the Administrative Rezoning Items of April 9, 2007 Planning and Zoning meeting and May 3, 2007 Board of County Commissioners meeting.

Item VI.B.2. (Z0705101)  Robert G. (Jr.) and Joan Potts’ request for a change from TR-1 to RRMH-1 on 1 acre, located east of Old Dixie Highway, north of Roosevelt Road, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.B.2. as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item VI.B.6. (Z0705105)  Higginbotham Real Properties, LLC’s request for a  change from BU-1 to BU-2 on 1.5 acres, located east of U.S.1., north of Silver Hill Lane, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.B.6. as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Item VI.B.8. (Z0705201) Harold R. Kring and Beth S. Kring, Trustees’ request for a Small Scale Plan Amendment (07S.12) to change the Future Land Use designation from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial and a change from BU-1-A to BU-1 on .21 acre, located on the southeast corner of Merritt Avenue and McLeod Street, which was recommended for approval by the Local Planning Agency and the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.B.8. as recommended by the Local Planning Agency and the Planning and Zoning Board; and adopt Ordinance amending Article III, Chapter 62, of the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, entitled “The 1988 Comprehensive Plan”, setting forth the Twelfth Small Scale Plan Amendment of 2007, 07S.12, 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 clause; and providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

 

 

 

 

Item VI.C.1. Section 30, Township 26, Range 37, Parcel 257 on 43.3 acres, owned by Florida Inland Navigation District, currently zoned BU-2 (Retail, Warehousing and Wholesale Commercial) and IU (Light Industrial) with a Binding Site Plan, and proposed to change to GML(H) (Government Managed Lands - High Intensity) with removal of the Binding Site Plan, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.  

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.C.1. as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

Item VI.C.2. Section 26, Township 25, Range 36, Parcel 254 on 28.28 acres, owned by Florida Inland Navigation District, currently zoned GU (General Use), and proposed to change to GML(H) (Government Managed Lands – High Intensity), which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.  

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.C.2. as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Item VI.C.3. Section 18, Township 20G, Range 35, Sub. #01, all of Blocks 1 to 6, and all of Blocks  7 to 10, 23 to 26  and 30, except  Lot 1, Block 8 and all of Blocks 34, 35, 46 and 47, and Section 18, Township 20G, Range 35, Sub. #02, N. 275 ft. of Lot B, and all of Block 36, N. ½ of Lot #,  Lot D,  except  W. 420 ft. F,  Blocks  D.1, E.1, F, all  of Blocks 28, 29 and  37, 31,  32 and Block 8, Lot 1 on 290.02 acres, owned by Florida Inland Navigation District, currently zoned AU (Agricultural Residential), and proposed to change to GML(H) (Government Managed Lands – High Intensity), which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.C.3. as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Item VI.C.4. Section 20, Township 21, Range 35, Parcel 1, and Section 21, Township 21, Range 35, Parcels 251, 252, 253, 254, and 255 on 36.5 acres, owned by Florida Inland Navigation District, currently zoned RU-1-9 (Single Family Residential) with a Binding Concept Plan, and proposed to change to GML(H) (Government Managed Lands – High Intensity) with removal of Binding Concept Plan, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.C.4. as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Item VI.C.5. Section 20, Township 21, Range 35, Parcels 2, 3, 4, 30, 31, 49, and 50 and Section 21, Township 21, Range 35, Parcels 256, 259, 260, and 261 on 76.98 acres, owned by Florida Inland Navigation District, currently zoned AU (Agricultural Residential) and proposed to change to GML(H) (Government Managed Lands – High Intensity), which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.C.5. as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board and the Board of County Commissioners.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

VI.A.1. (Z0704201) Anthony G. LaCourt’s request for a Conditional Use Permit for Alcoholic Beverages for On-Premises Consumption in a BU-1 zoning classification on 0.15 acre, located on the northwest corner of Fortenberry Road and Plumosa Drive, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Attorney John Evans, representing the applicant, distributed material to the Board.  He advised the subject property is at the intersection of Plumosa Drive and Fortenberry Road; the areas colored  yellow are  the  properties zoned  BU-1  and BU-2;  and the property is surrounded by a shopping center.  He noted the GML zoning on the map is a County lift station; to the east is a car dealership; to the south is the Chamber of Commerce and the KSC Credit Union; on the southwest corner is a dental office; and next to the dentist office is a storage facility. He stated the subject property is currently zoned BU-1; he has included in the Board’s packages a site plan and an aerial map showing the surrounding development; and the Board also has a list of the BU-1 uses.  He noted it is important to review the uses; BU-1 allows billiard uses, but the question before the Board is if his client is allowed to sell alcoholic beverages; a billiard hall is a much less intense use than some of the other uses in BU-1; BU-1 allows grocery stores, furniture stores, funeral homes, and hardware stores, which are all intense uses; and he believes the proposed  use  is  compatible  with  the  other  uses  allowed in BU-1.  He noted there is another CUP application on Courtenay Parkway that has received 100 percent approval from the Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency and 100 percent approval from the Planning and Zoning Board; yet his client has received negative votes from both Boards; he believes both applications should be considered under the same circumstances and grounds; and he is not speaking against Item VI.B.9., but his client should also be granted a CUP.  He stated the applicant of Item VI.B.9. is relatively close to Merritt Island High School; his client has no schools near the subject property; stated the competitor’s property has an apartment complex abutting it; he has included an aerial in the Board’s packages of the competitor’s property; and the Board can see the vicinity of the apartment complex and the High School.  He noted the competitor has indicated there is a stop light, but they have to drive on a residential street to get to the stop light; his client has a stop light at the corner of Fortenberry and Plumosa; there is also a stop light at S.R. 520 and Courtenay; and the subject property has plenty of parking as most of the business would be in the evenings.  He noted the Planning and Zoning Board indicated the proposed business should not be on a side street; Plumosa is not a side street, as it is the back door to the largest mall in Brevard County; it has considerable traffic, but it is not overburdened at 41 percent capacity; and the competitor’s property is on North Courtenay Parkway, which is at 100 percent capacity.  He stated the speed limit in the area of his clients property is 30 mph, which is relatively slow and traffic should not be an issue.  He noted that sporting events take place in the evenings and weekends, so Mr. LaCourt’s business will be conducted when all of the other businesses are closed for the day; and the traffic conflict would be reduced that otherwise a BU-1 use would have in the area.  He stated his client’s application for a CUP meets the qualification for a CUP better than his competitor’s because it is a good location for the type of use and it is relatively low in intensity; and any traffic will be at the opposite time of normal traffic in the neighborhood.  He stated the Planning and Zoning Board indicated that bars should be on S.R. 520; he does not know why anyone would want bars or billiard halls on a four-lane divided highway; his clients property is in a lower speed and lower traffic area; and it is a much more appropriate place for a neighborhood billiard parlor and sports bar than on a main highway. 

 

Anthony Sidor stated he has a business at 225 S. Plumosa Drive, which is a dental office on the southwest corner of Fortenberry and Plumosa Drive;  he is opposed to the application for a CUP for alcoholic beverages; the increased traffic will be a problem; and there are several other uses that would not have that much traffic.   He noted bars have people in and out all the time; he has cars cutting across his parking lot putting both his patients and his staff in danger; and more traffic would create a bigger problem.  He noted Plumosa Drive is a one-lane road in each direction; there is a turn lane in front of his office, but other than that it is a fairly small road to get in and out of; and there is going to be a lot of traffic on and off of the road in that area.  He stated the Planning and Zoning Board was more concerned with ease of getting in and out of the area with a large bar; he also has a problem with noise, as the hours on the application are from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., which is during his business hours; and the proposed use is a sports bar and he is worried about the noise that it will cause during his business hours.  He stated  sometimes people frequent bars and do not behave properly; and he is worried for the safety of his employees.  He noted he is concerned about the parking; the application indicates 130  seats  in the bar  and there are only 43 parking spaces designated to it; with 130 seats, the capacity for the bar has to be greater than 130 people; and he is concerned people will be parking in his parking lot either during or after business hours.  He stated if people are going to be parking in his lot after business hours, he is concerned about vandalism in an area where there are no other businesses open from 12:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m.  He noted there is no retail in the area currently; it is mostly medical, dental and banks in the area; and it is not the correct place to put a bar that will be serving alcohol.  He noted the Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency and Planning and Zoning Board thought the subject property was a poor place to put a sports bar and he hopes the Board of County Commissioners agree.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired what is currently on the property; with Mr. Evans responding there is nothing on the property; there is a County lift station to the north, but the subject property is vacant.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Mike Erdman dealership is near the subject property; with Mr. Evans responding it is across the street.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the dealership has ever had any problems with vandalism, thefts, or accidents; and stated Fortenberry Road is a very busy road and she would not consider it a side road.  Mr. Evans noted the staff report indicates the road is at 41 percent capacity; and the parking lot has 74 spaces and half of the shopping center would be daytime operation and the billiards would be nighttime; so there would be plenty of overflow parking; and there would be no need to park on anyone else’s property.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the applicant wanted to build a building containing a sports bar and other things; with Mr. Evans responding affirmatively.  Commissioner Voltz noted if someone goes to a sports bar, normally they drink in the evenings.  Mr. Evans stated people in the service industry like to go out after their restaurant shuts down at 10:00 p.m. and want to play billiards and have a beer before they go home.  Commissioner Voltz stated there are two times that are at issue; one is lunch time and she hopes the sports bar would serve food; the other time at issue is late in the evening; and inquired if Mr. Evans had done any research to see what kind of vandalism has happened in the area. 

 

Tony LaCourt stated he has operated a bar a quarter-mile from the subject property for ten years; he lost the lease when the Publix was built; and there was never any vandalism.  Commissioner   Voltz   inquired if   Mr. LaCourt’s  other  bar  was on  Fortenberry Road; with Mr. LaCourt responding it was approximately 100 feet off of Fortenberry Road.  Mr. LaCourt noted he would be serving food in the evening, as well as at lunch.

 

Mr. Evans stated the Dentist spoke of noise, but the proposed sports bar will be completely indoors with no outside business; Mr. Sidor is saying he does not want the property to be built on, but anything that is built there is going to cause additional traffic; and according to the list of uses in BU-1 there can be much higher traffic than what his client is proposing.  He stated no one would condone attacking Mr. Sidor’s employees; it is an unfair argument; and the same thing can be said about any business.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she agrees the Board should not base its decision on fears; and inquired of the issues the Board needs to seriously look at.  Assistant County Attorney Morris Richardson stated the considerations include the character of the land use on the property and the  surroundings,  changes  in  the  conditions  of  the  land  use being considered, impact upon infrastructure, compatibility with land use plans for the area; and appropriateness of a CUP based upon consideration of applicable regulations relating to zoning and land use in the context of public health, safety and welfare. 

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired if Mr. LaCourt’s other bar did not have Fortenberry Road frontage, instead having frontage in a shopping center; with Mr. LaCourt responding there was a car wash right behind his bar.  Commissioner Nelson stated there were some issues raised at the Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency meeting and the Planning and Zoning meeting; and inquired if the Board is not supposed to compare one project to another; with Mr. Richardson responding affirmatively, as the proceeding is quasi-judicial and with each item the Board is supposed to focus on that item as opposed to comparing it and contrasting to other items on the same agenda.  Commissioner Nelson stated Fortenberry Road and Plumosa Drive are both collector roads and are not arterials; the intersection is an entry area to a residential area further to the south on Plumosa; that was an issue that came up at both the Planning and Zoning and Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency meetings; and inquired if there are any other CUP’s on Fortenberry Road.  Mr. Evans advised there is a CUP at the mall. Commissioner Nelson inquired if that CUP is on the mall property and faces into the mall and not onto Fortenberry Road; with Mr. Evans responding it has an access next to it on Fortenberry Road.  Commissioner Nelson stated the biggest concern at the Planning and Zoning meeting, and also his concern, is there are professional offices and some limited retail in the vicinity; the proposed facility would be the only one like it on Fortenberry Road and Plumosa Drive; and he does not see that it is consistent with everything else that is out there.  Commissioner Nelson stated the applicant mentioned to him there may be a food service that may also require a CUP; with Mr. LaCourt responding he does not need a CUP for a pizza parlor; and there is a vitamin store and a bakery that also wants to be included in the shopping center.  He noted there is Hayes Meats across the street, a vegetable fruit stand also across the street; and a PVC supply store on Fortenberry Road.  Commissioner Nelson noted they are smaller businesses; his preference would be to have the proposed business on a major arterial as opposed to some of the collectors, particularly one that goes into a neighborhood; and he will not be supporting the request.

 

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to deny Item VI.A.1. as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board and the MIRA.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Item VI.B.9. (Z0705202) W.S. Badcock Corporation’s request for a Conditional Use Permit for Alcoholic Beverages for On-Premises Consumption in a BU-1 zoning classification on 0.24 acre, located on the east side of Courtenay Parkway, south of Mustang Way, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item VI.B.9., as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Motion carried and ordered; Chairperson Colon voted nay.

 

 

Item VI.B.1. (Z0705501) CMBP Development, LLC and KJD Investments, LLC’s request for a Small Scale Plan Amendment (07S.8) to change the Future Land Use designation from Residential 4 to Community Commercial and a change from RU-1-7 to BU-1, on 1.09 acres, located on the west side of Feast Road, south of New Haven Avenue.

 

Fred Mullins stated the rezoning of the property will mean more of his residential neighborhood going commercial and he does not want to see it happen; Lowes is directly behind him and now the commercial coming from New Haven Avenue and down Feast Road; and Feast Road is only a quarter-mile long from New Haven Avenue to the dead end.  He noted there is no turn around and there is already a problem with traffic and people trying to make a quick right turn to try to bypass Lowes; and if the commercial is moved farther down the street, it is going to get worse.

 

Motion by Commissioner Bolin, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item VI.B.1., as recommended by the LPA and the Planning and Zoning Board 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 Ninth Small Scale Plan Amendment of 2007, 07S.9, 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 clause; and providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

Item VI.B.3. (Z0705102) Mai Krupa, Inc.’s request for a Small Scale Plan Amendment (07S.9) to change the Future Land Use designation from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial, and a change from RU-2-10 to BU-1 on 1.18 acres, located on the southeast corner of Aurantia Road and U.S. 1., which was recommended for denial by the LPA and the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

John Evans, representing the applicant, commented on the subject property and the business that was on it until the 1970’s; stated the property was vacant for a while and then the property owner at the time rezoned the property to RU-2-10, which would allow quite a few apartments there, but that was not a good idea; and his client is interested in renovating the property.  He stated his client initially applied for a BU-1 zoning in order to have a convenience store with gas pumps; when  he was before  the  Planning and  Zoning  Board it became clear that there were some others on the drawing board in the area that may overload the area with convenience stores and gas pumps; and he went back to his client after being denied by the Planning and Zoning Board and asked if he would be willing to amend the application.  He stated his client amended the application to request BU-1-A; BU-1-A will be consistent with the land use plan;  and the  uses  in BU-1-A are a  little  less  intense than BU-1.  He noted he had a meeting with the Mims group and his client inquired what the community would like to see on the property; the consensus from the community was that a grocery store in the area would be a great thing; and currently it is a long drive to get to a grocery store.  He stated his client has decided to build a grocery store similar to Sharps Brothers; they will have limited meat, vegetables, and serve the community in that way; and since that is allowable in BU-1, he rescinded his request for BU-1-A and reapplied for BU-1 with a Binding Development Plan stipulating that the property would only contain a grocery store.  He noted when talking to lenders, he discovered they did not like limiting a property to one use because if they have to foreclose, they can only sell it to a grocery store; he has amended the Binding Development Plan to allow a grocery store and any permitted use in BU-1-A; and that is what he is currently proposing.

 

Ed Skarosi stated his property is directly east of the subject property; he is opposed to the rezoning of the area because it has been residential since the late 1960’s; changing the zoning will change the character of the neighborhood; and he has concerns because at U.S. 1 and Aurantia Road is a bus stop and the increase in traffic due to the grocery store will put children in danger.  He noted if the Board grants the rezoning he would like to add language in paragraph two of the Binding Development Plan stipulating alcohol sales would be limited to beer and wine only; that his culvert that has been damaged during the ongoing site work that the property owners have been doing, be repaired; and that a fence be installed around the property completely, with a 50-foot natural vegetative buffer remaining between his property and the fence.

 

Ray Rivera stated he owns property very near the subject property; he is in support of the grocery store; he knows the applicants and he knows their character; the American Hindu Indians are family oriented, they are strong businessmen and they are disciplined to business; and if one were to walk into one of the stores owned by the applicant there would not be any pipes or paraphernalia being sold.  He noted the applicants’ kids are being raised in the community; and he believes the proposed grocery store is needed in the community.  He stated he believes there is some bitterness with Mr. Skarosi because he wanted the applicant to buy his property, but that did not happen; and Mr. Skarosi has made up some accusations and wants   demands   to  the   point  of  including  that  he  and the applicant enter into some kind of

contractual agreement for them to buy his property.  He requested the Board approve the application.

 

Gloria Colarchik stated locational and developmental criteria for Community Commercial property in Paragraph C, Section 2.8 states, “Community Commercial clusters up to 10 acres in size should be spaced at least two miles apart”.  She noted on the map that the 11.36 acres of undeveloped Community Commercial already exists directly across U.S.1 from the proposed  zoning  change;  they  stretch from Aurantia Road to the north to one parcel of Grandperrin; if there was a want or a need for more Community Commercial property, the 11.36 acres would already have Community Commercial buildings or businesses located on them; but there is not a want nor a need for more Community Commercial property.  She stated less than 16 months ago  she  stood before  the  Board with  a  petition of over  200 names; the community is speaking loud and clear and it does not want any more Community Commercial property; as Mr. Evans was speaking the Board can see the applicant has run the gauntlet about what it is he really wants; it leads her to question what the motive is for the zoning change; and as a concerned neighbor she believes the Board should deny the request to change the zoning.  She noted the applicant already has Neighborhood Commercial zoning; he can put in businesses  such  as  a beauty  shop,  daycare,  or  an  ice  cream shop; those types of facilities would be welcome in the community; but there are already many facilities that sell alcohol; and the reason she moved to the area was to get away from development.  She stated she understands she has to drive 4.5 miles to S.R. 46 to get coffee, but that is what she moved there for and she does not want more Community Commercial.

 

Fred Kusterer stated what Mr. Evans said about the community meeting was true; there were some suggestions made and the general consensus was that a grocery store was needed in the area; Mr. Skarosi is the only neighbor who lives next door to the property; and if they can agree to something in the BDP, the Mims Community Group would support the request.

 

Mr. Evans stated his client would consent to add to the Binding Development Plan that there be no hard alcohol sold.  He stated according to the staff report, Community Commercial is allowed at collector/collector streets and his client meets those location requirements; it is significant that the application is for the rehabilitation of an old building; there are plenty of turn lanes so traffic is not an issue; and he will work with the School Board on the bus stop to separate kids from any traffic.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired how many properties highlighted on the map are actually developed.  Ms. Colarchik stated the only property developed is the one on the corner of U.S. 1 and Aurantia Road that is the convenience store with a gas station that already exists; and nothing else is developed.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board wants to go to BU-1, would there need to be a reclassification of the land use; with Mr. Enos responding affirmatively.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like the persons interested to go out into the hall and discuss it and then come back to the Board. 

Item VI.B.5. (0705104) D&E Hardware Company’s request for an amendment to a Binding Development Plan in a BU-1 zoning classification on 1.2 acres, located on the northwest corner of U.S. Highway 1 and Roberts Street, north of Dunn Street and east of Econ Avenue.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the Binding Development Plan includes landscaping and a fence will be  installed along  Econ  Avenue; because it  is a quadruple frontage lot, the fence can only

be limited to four feet; and inquired if the community understands it will be a four-foot fence versus a taller fence. 

 

Attorney John Evans, representing the applicant, stated the community had no objection to the fence height.  Commissioner Nelson inquired if the community understood the fence could only be four feet in height; with Mr. Evans responding the word landscaping never came up in the discussion; and the landscaping criteria is from the old binding site plan.  He noted the only change to the old binding site plan was to take out the words, “access off Econ Avenue”; there is a four- foot fence there  now for the existing  D&E Hardware;  and it is now going to be carried

forward as it currently exists.  Commissioner Nelson stated there was not expectation of change.  Commissioner Scarborough advised his office notified the community about this request and he did not get any comments back. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to approve Item VI.B.5., as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Item VI.B.7. (Z0705106) Pete Marti’s request for an amendment to an existing Binding Development Plan in BU-1 and BU-1 zoning classifications, on 5.41 acres, located on the southwest corner of U.S. Highway 1 and Cross Road, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Zoning Manager Rick Enos stated the only question staff had on this item was that there were changes to the access plan, which staff does not have a problem with; but the previous Binding Development Plan also dictated there would be a buffer also along the west side and that provision has been left out of the existing one; and he is not sure if that was intentional or not. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board could move the item with it included in the BDP; with Mr. Enos responding the applicant would have to agree to it.

 

Pete Marti inquired what he is agreeing to; and stated there is a buffer on the other part of the property now.  Mr. Enos stated on the west side of the property currently, Mr. Marti abuts a single-family subdivision of manufactured homes; and there is a heavy vegetative buffer there now of what looks like mature trees.  Mr. Marti stated there is a 25-foot buffer at the other building he built on the west side.  Mr. Enos advised the proposed Binding Development Plan leaves out the buffer that was part of the previous Binding Development Plan.  Mr. Marti inquired if the buffer could be 25 feet; with Mr. Enos respond 25 feet would be fine.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated that component part would not be changed and it will carry forward; whatever Mr. Marti agreed to previously would still be in the Binding Development Plan; and inquired if that was acceptable to Mr. Marti.  Mr. Marti introduced his project manager David Pugh.

 

David Pugh stated sometimes a landscape buffer requires an opaque buffer which is very costly.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired what the original Binding Development Plan indicated; with Mr. Enos responding it did not specify on the original Binding Development Plan.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the intent is to keep it intact; it cannot be expanded or eliminated; and if that is acceptable, then the item can move forward. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item VI.B.7. to amend Binding Development Plan with addition of 25-foot buffer as stated in the original Binding Development Plan.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Item VI.B.14. (Z0705207) Terry L. Rosenberger’s request for a change from RU-1-9 and RU-2-10 to all RU-2-10, on 0.66 acre located on the northeast corner of Lake Drive and Sundial Court, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated in looking at the drawing of the lot, he does not see it as being consistent with the neighborhood; the applicant is able to get additional density because of the stem that is on the property; it takes it out of character for what is already out there; and it is, in effect, a way of creating additional density, but it does not seem to be consistent with the character of the land.  He inquired how many units the applicant could get on the property; with Mr. Enos responding he could get as many as six units on the proposed RU-2-10 zoning. Commissioner Nelson stated currently there are duplexes on the property; and inquired why the applicant would want to do that.

 

Terry Rosenberger stated Country Oaks is approximately 300 feet to the east; it is currently multi-family and single-family; and it encompasses a larger area than just a subdivision that is duplexes with two vacant lots remaining.  He stated he is looking at options of what to do with the 25-foot width lot that is 711 feet deep, including a bike path.  Commissioner Nelson stated he has a problem with generating the additional density just because he has a 25-foot strip of land; and it is a unique feature, but the people driving to their duplexes will go by six units on a piece of property that should probably be just another duplex. 

 

Mr. Rosenberger stated the potential is there for that; it could be a larger square footage duplex because of the added 25-foot depth east and west and a duplex does not restrict height to what is single-family height that is generally in the neighborhood; he sees the potential for a visible structure that is comparable to what his is proposing; and he has looked at parking requirements as well.  Commissioner Nelson inquired if the applicant can currently put another duplex on the property; with Mr.  Enos  responding affirmatively.  Commissioner Nelson inquired if a zoning change would be needed; with Mr. Enos responding for a duplex on the property a zoning change would not be necessary unless the applicant wanted to use the 25 feet of the other parcel immediately behind the subject property, then the Board may want to at least rezone that much of it. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he does not have a problem giving the applicant utilization of his space and making it part of the rezoning, but he cannot support getting the additional density up to six units on that parcel; and inquired of the appropriate motion, as far as the 25-foot strip, would give the applicant benefit of that without gaining the density.

 

Mr. Enos advised the Board could approve the rezoning to RU-2-10 only on that portion of the additional 25-foot strip south of the north lot line extended; in other words, extending the north lot line of the duplex lot easterly; and everything south of that line could go to RU-2-10.

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired if Mr. Rosenberger understood what the Board is proposing; with Mr. Rosenberger responding  affirmatively;  stated he is  looking  at greater depth of that 25-foot strip, as perhaps rezoning 500 feet would allow four units; and he does not want to change to RU-2-10 on the duplex lot, as it is critical to keep that since it is developable.  He stated the Future Land Use allows up to 15 units per acre in the majority of the area; and he has a strange configuration of the lot.  He stated in his proposal, the majority of the cars are going to be parking behind the structure.  Commissioner Nelson stated it will still be a sizeable structure on the lot that is in a neighborhood of duplexes.  Mr. Rosenberger stated there would be more people coming and going and more children and neighborhood activity; it is a spacious corner lot; and he understands sidewalks would be a requirement on the site plan but not necessarily to be built for sidewalks, but to show that capacity for other options of traveling.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he would like to make a motion based on Mr. Enos’ description; and inquired if that would give the applicant the benefit of the 25-foot strip; with Mr. Enos responding yes, it would allow the applicant to use the 25 feet as part of the duplex lot configuration, but he does not believe it would generate any additional units.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she would like to be sure if it is okay with the applicant before the Board does something he is not okay with; and the applicant may like what he has better than what the Board is proposing.  Chairperson Colon stated what the Board is proposing is denial if the applicant does not accept the motion.

 

Mr. Rosenberger stated that in itself is denial of six units; and that is what he was proposing, so whatever option the Board goes with he will still have other options with the property.

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Rosenberger was okay with the motion; with Mr. Rosenberger responding either way.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated there has to be some rationale between the number of units and   how   the   property  is   configured;   there   could   be  an  enormously complex issue with somebody acquiring some road that gets dumped back into some small parcel; he has never seen a more frightening case than this one because the 25-foot strip is so far removed from the property that once you are at the other end of that strip, it is really not part of the property at all; and he thinks the motion is well reasoned. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Item VI.B.14. as RU-2-10 on that portion of the 25-foot strip south of the north lot line of Lot 18, extended easterly.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item VI.B.15. (Z0705301) Patricia A. Billingsley and William D. Billingsley, Jr.’s request for a Small Scale Plan Amendment (07S.11) to change the Future Land Use designation from Residential 4 to Community Commercial, and a change from GU to BU-1, on 2.24 acres located south of Eber Road, and west of American Drive, which was recommended for approval with a  Binding Development Plan, limiting use to a day care center, by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Chairperson Colon stated usually the Board hears the applicant first, but it has found it is easier to hear the concerns of the community first and then the applicant.

 

Eva Nagymihaly distributed exhibits to the Board.  She stated the Minton Road and Eber Road area has become very congested due to the development around the area; a proposed subdivision is going to be huge; development is just beginning on it; and the homes will be built on 50-foot by 100-foot lots.  She noted another item that is a problem is a gas station on the corner, which is great, but people pull on and off of Minton Road quickly; it is dangerous and there have been several accidents at that location.  She stated there is an “S” curve with the posted speed limit at 10 to 15 mph; however, some people end up in the retention pond because they were going too fast.  She showed the Board the applicant’s property on the map and stated the entrance to the property is on the south side of Eber Road; the applicant’s entrance, as well as the other one, share a main entrance, but what will happen without a double line is people turning into the daycare when other people will be wanting to go on; there will be people crossing the double line on the “S” curve; and further down is Carrigan Street, on which town homes will be built, whereas her subdivision is the next street over, with single-family homes on 1 acre or more.  She stated when turning from Willow Wood to Eber Road, traffic is backed up beyond Eber Road; if the applicant is granted a daycare limited to a daycare use, the other areas will push to become businesses; and once that is done, that is the end of the area.  She stated she would like the Board to consider the safety issue and the fact that it is so built up now that there is no infrastructure and Eber Road is only single lane and cannot handle all the homes and all of the development; and the applicant can move or purchase another property on Minton Road that is able to handle a business.

 

Claire Gibbs stated she also lives in the same neighborhood as Ms. Nagymihaly; the traffic on Eber Road in the past five or six years has become extremely congested and it is dangerous, particularly at the “S” curve in the intersection; housing developments that have been approved to the east have caused more traffic; and people do not slow down to the posted speed limit at the “S” curve.   She  stated  she would like the Board to consider a daycare and the times of day

when people would be coming and going would likely coincide with the heaviest traffic times of the day on Eber Road.  She noted she has tried to enter her subdivision on Willow Wood sometimes when the west bound traffic on Eber Road has been backed up from the light at Minton Road,  all the  way back to her development,  which is  well  past the  entrance to the proposed daycare; and that would happen at the heavy traffic times which would coincide with when the daycare would be the most active with parents dropping off and picking up children.

 

Heather Joyner, applicant, stated it seems the speakers’ main concerns are traffic; traffic was one of the very first things she looked at when she originally thought about rezoning the property; according to the staff report the current volume is at 57.86 percent and the proposed volume will only be at 60.91 percent; so it is less than a three percent increase in traffic volume; the entrance to the daycare is not directly across from the subdivision, it is actually east of the subdivision; and she does not feel it would cause any problems.  She noted the daycare is going to sit well back from the road; it will have a “U” shaped driveway with numerous parking places;  and she  does not feel it will be an issue.   She stated at the Planning and Zoning meeting she agreed to a Binding Development Plan for a daycare; when she agreed to that, she thought she was agreeing to a BU-1-A zoning; and inquired if a Binding Development Plan was different to BU-1-A.

 

Chairperson Colon stated a Binding Development Plan would limit her to a daycare only.

 

Ms. Joyner stated her bank will not give her approval for a daycare only, but it will approve her for BU-1-A with a Conditional Use Permit, which is what she discussed with everyone.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired what Ms. Joyner received from the community in regards to the letter she sent them explaining her proposal.  Ms. Joyner stated she received a phone call from a gentleman who lives in the first house in the subdivision; she explained what she was doing and he said it was great and that he had not heard anything from anyone else in the community and that everyone was excited about it.  She stated she sent out letters, but he was the only person she heard from.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she did not know there was an objection until now; Crystal Lakes is not going to have an impact; and she does not have a problem with the request.

 

Commissioner Bolin inquired if the Board is going to approve the request at BU-1-A; with Commissioner Voltz responding it will be BU-1-A with a CUP.

 

Mr. Enos stated the only issue with that is that the Conditional Use Permit would have to be advertised; and the Board can approve the BU-1-A today, but the daycare center is a Conditional Use Permit in BU-1-A, which would mean it would have to be advertised.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the Planning and Zoning Board would have to hear the request for the  Conditional  Use  Permit; and if the Board tables it now,  it would be tabled until September.  Mr. Enos stated the Board would not need to table it because it can approve the BU-1-A now, but the BU-1-A by itself would not give the applicant the daycare center; Ms. Joyner would have to reapply for a CUP for the daycare center; and that would ultimately delay the construction of the childcare center.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if there was an issue with Ms. Joyner’s bank that would not allow the BU-1; and stated BU-1 is a little more intense in that area.  Ms. Joyner stated Mr. Enos spoke to her about doing BU-1 with a Binding Development Plan to also include the BU-1-A; and that way it satisfies the bank and satisfies the community because it is restricted to the daycare for the BU-1 and it saves her from having to reapply for anything. 

 

Mr. Enos stated that was one of the other options; if the Board wanted to change the Comprehensive Plan to Community Commercial, it could approve BU-1 with a Binding Development Plan limiting the site to a daycare center or any other BU-1-A use; but that requires the Board to amend the Comprehensive Plan to Community Commercial. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired how long that process takes; with Mr. Enos responding the Board can do that today, because that is basically what the request is. 

 

Heather Joyner stated that would be wonderful for her because she would like to open by this time next year and be open for the summer session.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired which would be beneficial for both parties; with Mr. Enos responding if the Board does not wish to change the Comprehensive Plan to Community Commercial, then there are two approaches; one would be to approve the BU-1-A today; approve the Comprehensive Plan to Neighborhood Commercial; and then the applicant would have to come back for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare center, which would take another four months or so.  He noted the second option, if the Board does not want to change the Comprehensive Plan to Community Commercial, is to approve the BU-1-A in the Neighborhood Commercial today; the Board could amend the Code to eliminate the Conditional Use Permit in BU-1-A and make that use a permitted use; that is a possibility, but it would still take some time, but not as long as the request for the Conditional Use Permit; and he does not see the value in the Conditional Use Permit anyway, as it is a reasonable use in BU-1-A as a permitted use. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if having daycare centers in BU-1-A is preferential; with Mr. Enos responding it is more reasonable; the Board can direct staff to amend the Code today; to save time, it can direct staff to go directly to the LPA with an ordinance rather than coming back with legislative intent; and it could all be done by August. 

 

Heather Joyner stated she will not get her loan if the Board does that.  Commissioner Voltz inquired why, as this is the way she thought she would get her loan.  Chairperson Colon stated she still has to go through the process.  Mr. Enos stated there would be no further action that the  applicant  would  need  to  do,  but it  would  require the applicant to wait until the Code was amended to have the daycare use; but she would have all of the BU-1–A uses; and he does not see how the bank would object to that.

 

Ms. Joyner stated a condition to the financing is having the rezoning.  Commissioner Voltz stated she will have the ability to do any BU-1-A use, and not just a daycare.   Chairperson Colon stated today the Board would approve BU-1-A and amend the Comprehensive Plan today; and that is all.  Mr. Enos stated the Board would need to make a second motion directing

staff to amend the Code to add a daycare center to the permitted uses in BU-1-A.  Chairperson Colon inquired if Ms. Joyner would be able to go forward, but also allow the Board to make sure it amends the Code.  Mr. Enos stated it puts the applicant at risk if the Board chooses not to amend the Code, and that is the only real risk to her.

 

Ms. Joyner stated if she is approved as BU-1 with a Binding Development Plan to include BU-1-A, that limits her to just a daycare in BU-1.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board wants to make sure it does not do anything that is going to affect the rest of the County; it is not trying to tailor it to the applicant; the Board is comfortable agreeing that BU-1-A could allow a daycare center; and it wants to make sure the Code complies with that.  She stated the Board needs to make sure the decisions it makes are beneficial to the whole community and that it also protects the community; and the Board wants to make sure it has every mechanism possible so that it can protect the neighborhood also.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated if the Board rezones the property to BU-1-A, the applicant can have all of the BU-1-A uses; and the Board will make daycare centers a permitted use in BU-1-A, as it is in BU-1.  Ms. Joyner inquired if the Board is going to remove the Conditional Use Permit out of the BU-1-A; with Commissioner Voltz responding yes, and it will be a permitted use in BU-1-A.

 

Ms. Joyner inquired if there is any way the Board can guarantee her the BU-1-A approval now that she does not need to wait until August before she starts construction and pulling permits. 

 

Mr. Enos stated Ms. Joyner could presumably get started on some of her permits, but she will have to wait until the Code is amended before she gets too far; and Ms. Joyner stated she is concerned with her bank.  Commissioner Voltz stated she thinks what the Board is doing will satisfy the bank.  Mr. Enos stated if all the bank wants is all of the BU-1-A uses plus a daycare center, this action will get her there.  Ms. Joyner inquired if she had to wait until August with the bank; with Chairperson Colon responding that is not up to the Board.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the applicant is walking into a potential trap; the trap is that the Board is going to give her BU-1-A and amend the Code; the only way the Board can amend the  Code  is   through   a   public   hearing;   and   people may come to the Board with profound problems with BU-1-A permitting daycares.  He stated if that happens, it will not pass; and Ms. Joyner’s option then would be to go back to BU-1 and apply for a Conditional Use Permit, as Mr. Enos has explained.  He stated Ms. Joyner should not assume she has anything today  and  should not  assume  any  Commissioner  can  commit  to anything  because  when it changes the ordinance it is committed to listen to other people and listen to each other before a decision is finalized; and there should not be an assumption that it is a done deal.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board can move forward with the original request and then direct an administrative rezoning to BU-1-A; with Mr. Enos responding the Board can do that. Commissioner Voltz stated there would still be a Comprehensive Plan change.

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired if the Board is at risk at that point of the bank claiming the Board is devaluing the property; with Mr. Enos responding that is a possibility.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Board can stick with the first motion of a Code change, although it puts the applicant at risk.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would vote against that; the only thing he would like is the idea of going to BU-1-A this evening and having the applicant apply for a Conditional Use Permit as the Code already provides; and he knows that is not fast, but sometimes it is best to take the time.  Commissioner Voltz stated regardless of what the Board does tonight, it should address the issue of whether or not a daycare is allowed in BU-1-A.

 

Chairperson Colon stated it may not be what the applicant wants, but it may be the cleanest way of doing it that the Board can feel comfortable in making sure it has the safety factor.

 

Ms. Joyner inquired if she has to come back before the Board with a Conditional Use Permit; with Commissioner Voltz responding affirmatively.  Commissioner Scarborough stated Ms. Joyner can get the BU-1-A this evening; and the Conditional Use Permit has to be advertised. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Item VI.B.15. as Neighborhood Commercial and BU-1-A; direct staff to initiate a Code Amendment to allow a Child Daycare as a permitted use in BU-1-A; suggest the applicant apply for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare; and adopt Ordinance amending Article III, Chapter 62 of the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, entitled “The 1988 Comprehensive Plan”, setting forth the eleventh Small Scale Plan Amendment of 2007, 07S.11, 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 clause; and providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Commissioner Voltz suggested to Ms. Joyner that she contact the neighbors in the area and look at circulation within the property to control traffic.  Ms. Joyner inquired if the BU-1-A is approved, and she will apply for a Conditional Use Permit; with Commissioner Voltz responding affirmatively.

 

 

Item VI.B.3. (Z0705102) Mai Krupa, Inc.’s request for a Small Scale Plan Amendment (07S.9) to change the Future Land Use designation from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial, and a change from RU-2-10 to BU-1 on 1.18 acres, located on the southeast corner of Aurantia Road and U.S. 1., which was recommended for denial by the LPA and the Planning and Zoning Board.  (CONTINUED)

Mr. Evans stated he and the adjoining neighbors have agreed to amend the Binding Development Plan providing there would be no sale of hard liquor; and the BDP would also be amended providing his client would fix a culvert on Mr. Skarosi’s property.  Mr. Evans stated there is a culvert on the property owned by Mr. Skarosi that a previous owner had damaged, and his client will repair that culvert at his cost; and his client will install a fence where the property abuts Mr. Skarosi’s property.  He stated he will put all of that in a Binding Development Plan.  He noted Ms. Colarchik has a philosophical objection to the zoning and he cannot help her. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the parties spoke about fence size and the nature of fence; with Mr. Evans responding it was agreed the fence would be six feet high and on the property line, with the pretty side facing Mr. Skarosi.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated Binding Development Plans do come back to the Commission  at regular meetings; and as soon as it is received, the Board will send copies to all interested persons to see that it is correct.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item VI.B.3. with a Binding Development Plan limited to grocery store use only, no hard liquor sales, owner to repair culvert on abutting property owned by Ed Skarosi, to install six-foot fence against abutting property owned by Ed Skarosi; and adopt Ordinance amending Article III, Chapter 62, of The Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, entitled “The 1988 Comprehensive Plan”, setting forth the Ninth Small Scale Plan Amendment of 2007, 07S.9, 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 clause; and providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance establishing an Ad Valorem Tax Deferral Program for recreational and commercial working waterfronts.

 

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

 

Susan Canada stated she is opposed to the proposed ordinance.  She noted the ordinance states in 2005 is when the Florida Legislature enacted Florida Statute 197.303 for different governing bodies to allow ad valorem tax deferrals for recreation commercial working waterfront properties.  She stated she is adamantly against the ordinance; and right now the County is short on ad valorem taxes with the County getting ready to cut possibly $76 million.  She stated the proposed ordinance also states that Florida Statute 197.303 also provides the authority for the Board of County Commissioners to adopt an ordinance to allow for ad valorem tax deferrals for recreational and commercial working waterfronts; and that would also include boat yards, boat manufacturers, and ship repairers.  She noted the proposed ordinance also mentions an annual application filed with the Tax Collector; and inquired who is going to verify the application.  She stated she finds the fiscal analysis to be incorrect in the study.  She noted the proposed ordinance also mentions that Brevard County has certain working waterfront properties that may not continue operating as water dependent support facilities without some form of ad valorem tax relief; and along with that is high insurance which eats into them even more; plus there are a lot of developers offering even millions of dollars; and of course a lot of them are going to go for that.  She stated in Section Three under definitions the proposed ordinance mentions recreation and commercial working waterfront means a parcel of real property that provides access for water dependent commercial activities including hotels and motels as defined; and the support facilities for recreational, commercial, research, or governmental vessels, and those facilities include docks, wharfs, wet and dry marinas, boat ramps, boat hauling and repair facilities and other support structures over the water.  She noted Brevard County has several boat manufacturing companies and many that do repairs.  She noted the proposed ordinance also mentions if there is a change in use or ownership; and inquired if that means if that a corporation changes does that mean this is due.  She inquired who is verifying the penalties for fraudulent filing.  She stated there is an attachment from the Brevard Marine Advisory which feel that the tax deferral does not supply true relief, but only works to increase the debt associated with the waterfront property.  She stated the study mentions 65 waterfront facilities within the County that might be eligible for the proposed deferral; but as to what the total would be, it stated 35 facilities were chosen for review; and 23 of the 35 facilities reviewed were found to be eligible for the deferral.  She stated if the Board passes the ordinance she would like to look at the properties’ books, and shareholders; and inquired if the business is not lucrative, then why are four new working waterfronts going in in the County as far as marinas.  She stated currently the basic needs of the County are not being met; people are living out of their cars; and before the County takes away more ad valorem taxes she hopes the Board denies the proposed ordinance.

 

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

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the ordinance has to be decided upon this evening; with Natural   Resources  Management  Director  Ernie  Brown  responding  no, but the complexity is imposed and it is not really as complex as may have been presented.  He stated the BMAC did unanimously support the ordinance; and there were some issues raised to inform the Board, but not in opposition.  He stated the ordinance is fairly innocuous; the ordinance is 100 percent voluntary; the likelihood of it being used by large numbers of people is slim because it is not a tax abatement as was inferred, because the tax revenue is not being lost, as it is being deferred; and that is an option that one to three facilities may employ to keep themselves afloat; but it is based on what the Marine Advisory Council recommended; it is a voluntary tool that could be used by those that are in situations where it is applicable, and it is not an abatement situation, which is what the BMAC prefer to have.  He stated the Property Appraiser will be watching over it, which is the same process for the Agricultural Program; and it seems to work well.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated it seems to him the Board is deferring everything that would impact its budget and this is a budgetary item. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated this is much simpler; there was one marina that thought the County was not doing something the State told it to do; and the marina requested the Board do this and when it found out it was a deferral program and that they would have to pay anyway, it decided they did not want to do that.  She stated the ordinance is not something that a lot of people have been wanting to do; everyone will have to pay their taxes, and the longer it takes it will back up on them and get really ugly for their own books; they are not going to be able to pay their taxes if the Board defers; and inquired if the State made it a law.

 

Mr. Brown stated the State made it a local option and there was a lot of pressure at one time to move this forward. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated with every IRA, and 401K, one defers paying income tax and people get into IRA’s and 401K’s because they do not pay taxes immediately and it gives them more capital to work with and maybe make more money; and there is a tendency for the deferral of the payment of income tax and property tax as much as there is of the non-payment.  He stated people may prefer not to pay a total abatement, but there still may be some incentive there.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board does not even need to do this; the State passed a law; she received a call from someone who asked why they were not getting a tax break from the law the State passed; when she looked into it, it was not really a tax break; and when it was explained, the person did not want it anymore. She stated the Board does not even have to look at it at all, because it is not that big a deal.

 

Mr. Brown stated it is at the pleasure of the Board to either approve, deny or take no action on the proposed ordinance.

 

Bea Polk stated there was concern from the Natural Resources office; and she has had calls from people with small businesses that are having a hard time and asking if they can get an ordinance  like  the one being proposed so they can  defer their taxes.  She stated the proposed

ordinance will open a can of worms because other businesses feel like they are being shunned; and there are a lot of businesses that are having a hard time right now. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the State thought it was doing people a favor, but it was not.

 

Joan Wheeler stated there is a marina in Titusville that was sold; if it had not been sold and rezoned for a high rise condominium it could still be a marina; and she feels sorry for the people who have to sell their riverfront property because they are not making enough money from the marina.

 

Mr. Brown stated the ordinance was not poorly done; Natural Resources staff did a fantastic job of putting together the ordinance in accordance with State law and the promulgation was targeted at the State level to working waterfronts; it was not a locally initiated effort; staff did exactly what was requested of it and crafted a very well articulated and legally binding purpose for the ordinance; and he did not want the record to infer the ordinance was flawed in its preparation.  He stated no action needs to be taken at this point.  He inquired if the ordinance is stalled, can staff bring it up at the request of the Board in the future; with Attorney Richardson responding affirmatively.

 

Mr. Brown introduced Matt Cover as the Boating and Waterways Coordinator who wrote the ordinance and is busy removing several derelict vessels from the Indian River Lagoon. 

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for a public hearing to consider an ordinance for St. Johns Heritage Parkway.

 

William Ferrell stated he supports the parkway and the transportation destiny; he and others in Palm Bay are concerned about gridlock and the transportation and evacuation needs of the County; and other property owners asked him to come and speak to the Board on the subject.  He stated he would like to get a plan together on the impacts and try to figure out a way to get the parkway built; and he would like to support the parkway and express appreciation to the Board for also supporting the parkway.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he will be voting in opposition of the ordinance; the Board has tools available to handle problems and by beginning to create methodologies of no impact fees and other things that are there for the purpose of making the system work; the roads are needed because development has created traffic; and the development has to somehow help with the problem of more people moving into the County.  He advised the Board is removing the solution from the problem and he does not feel comfortable with the direction.

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired what does waiver or relaxation in regulatory requirements normally  established  for  subdivisions,  multi-family,  commercial,  or  industrial   developments mean.  Assistant County Attorney Morris Richardson stated it means relaxing the rules.  Chairperson Colon stated she thought the Board already went over that and was comfortable with the ordinance.  Commissioner Nelson stated he did not remember that discussion.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Ordinance of the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners pertaining to the St. Johns Heritage Parkway; creating a new Section 62-2301 under Subdivision B in Division 6 of Article VI of the Brevard County Land Development Regulations as set forth in the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; providing standards and procedures for the award of incentives for the donation of right-of-way; providing for valuation of incentives; providing an alternative procedure for an acquisition by purchase; providing for the effect of annexation on a Donation Developer’s Agreement; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered, with Commissioners Scarborough and Nelson voting nay.  

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Brevard County Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance.

 

Steve Swanke, Planning Manager, stated this is a minor amendment that would allow reimbursement in lieu of impact fee credits when a roadway is constructed by a developer and accepted for maintenance by a city, or when a city issues a certificate of completion for the roadway; and it was unanimously recommended for approval by the BCAC and the LPA.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Ordinance amending Chapter 62, Land Development Regulations, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Article V “Impact Fees; amending Division 4 “Transportation”; amending Section 62-815 “Exemptions, Credits and Reimbursements” to allow reimbursement of a developer to occur when developer constructed capital improvements are accepted for maintenance by the County, a city or the State or when a certificate of completion is issued certifying that construction is complete and meets County, city or State design standards, whichever occurs first; providing legal status; providing a severability clause; providing for area encompassed; providing for conflicting provisions; and providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 7:38 p.m.

 

 

ATTEST:                                                                     ___________________________________

                                                                                    JACKIE COLON, CHAIRPERSON

                                                                                    BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

                                                                                    BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

         

          (S E A L)