The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on May 6, 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, County Manager Tom Jenkins, Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca, and Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley.

The Invocation was given by Commissioner Truman Scarborough, District 1.

Commissioner Helen Voltz led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

REPORT, RE: REQUEST FROM BOY SCOUTS FOR OPEN FIRE

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised of a letter from Assistant Fire Chief Tim Mills asking that the Boy Scouts from the Cape Canaveral Area Troop 338 and Pack 358 be permitted to use an open fire at their Crossover Ceremony; and stated the Cape Canaveral Fire Department will be on site, and Chief Mills recommended approval.

Chairman Scarborough inquired when will the ceremony be held; with Ms. Busacca responding on May 12, 1999.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize Boy Scout Pack 358 and Troop 338 to have an open fire at their Crossover Ceremony on May 12, 1999, from 7:00 p.m. to approximately 9:00 p.m. at Capeview Elementary School, with Cape Canaveral Fire Station providing site stand-by apparatus.

Chairman Scarborough advised there is a Policy Committee that should meet on these issues; and inquired if the request is in line with the policy; with Chief Bill Farmer responding yes. Chairman Scarborough inquired if Assistant County Attorney Kyle King reviewed it; with Chief Farmer responding he does not know. Ms. Busacca advised the Board directed the County Attorney to amend the Emergency Order relating to fires to provide that applications for exemptions be brought to the Board to clarify the authorizations contained in the Order; so based on that, it would be within the action of the Board.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the Policy Committee discussed it briefly and Mr. King was present; it was mentioned that another request would be received and how would it be processed; and the Committee agreed it should come to the Board. Chairman Scarborough stated he understood copies would be sent to all the members of the Committee; with Mr. Jenkins responding if that has not been done, it will be taken care of in the morning.

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

TASK ORDER NO. 97-08 WITH HDR ENGINEERING, RE: ROYAL OAK C & D LANDFILL

Chairman Scarborough advised there are staff members here on Item V.A. and recommended it be considered by the Board. He passed the gavel to Vice Chairman Higgs.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize the Chairman to execute Task Order No. 97-08 with HDR Engineering to assist in determining the potential impacts of Royal Oak C & D Landfill, at a cost not to exceed $50,000.

Vice Chairman Higgs inquired, since it is a significant amount of money, and the City of Titusville surrounds the area, has someone talked to the City about sharing the cost; with Commissioner Scarborough responding no. Vice Chairman Higgs inquired if the County is going to do it because it is in the unincorporated area; with Commissioner Scarborough responding it is the prudent thing to do; and if it is not done right, it could be more expensive. He stated the City has never come to the County and asked it to share the cost on any of its projects; and inquired if the County is going to start doing that with the cities. Vice Chairman Higgs stated one of the issues is the City's wellfield; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he does not know what the issues are until they get a consultant in there. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised solid waste disposal is a Countywide function, and that is why it is being approached this way. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Enterprise Fund is Countywide and encompasses the municipalities which pay into it.

Vice Chairman Higgs inquired if the report will come back to the Board with options for determination of how to proceed; with Solid Waste Management Director Richard Rabon responding yes, there will be a report to the Board. Commissioner Scarborough stated Attorney Frank Griffith represents Delta Recycling, and is present.

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

Vice Chairman Higgs advised several years ago there was a landfill in South Brevard that was extremely controversial, so she is sensitive about that and wants to be informed. Commissioner Scarborough stated when Mr. Rabon applies for a permit for a landfill, he generally gets a consultant to help him; and when the Board is dealing with something that is complex, it needs to do it in an intelligent way.

Vice Chairman Higgs passed the gavel to Chairman Scarborough.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: TABLE ZONING ITEMS FROM FEBRUARY 1 AND 3, 1999 PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDAS

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider recommendations of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board, made at its public hearings on February 1, 1999 and February 3, 1999, and tabled by the Board of County Commissioners on March 4, 1999, as follows:

Item 1. (Z9902302) Michael J. Quatraro's request for CUP for alcoholic beverages on-premises consumption in BU-2 zoning classification on 0.64 acre located on the north side of First Street east of U.S. 1, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Commissioner Higgs advised the Board tabled the item and asked staff to provide traffic impacts and Code Enforcement action information; the report from Mr. Thompson indicates there was a retention pond on the site that was filled in; and if it was reconstructed to its original permit, the property would only have room for nine parking spaces, and the square footage of the facility indicates a need for 23 parking spaces. She stated directly to the south is an existing business with nine parking spaces for a boat ramp and public parking for residents and visitors to the river and the island; those spaces cannot be included for the required parking spaces; and overflow parking from the business, if allowed to expand, would either park in the boat ramp parking and other public access parking areas or in the rights-of-way of First Street and/or U.S. 1. She stated another item of concern is the Code Enforcement action; and requested staff give the Board a status report on that.

Zoning Official Rick Enos advised there were six Code Enforcement cases that started in 1998; some have been complied with and closed, but two are still open; and one is no building permit for the deck, which has an outstanding lien and fine, and the other is the retention pond.

Michael Quatraro stated he thought all the violations were closed, but knew there was a pending fine he will have to pay. He stated he rebuilt the seawall, and there are more than nine parking spaces on the property.

Commissioner Higgs stated based on the report from Mr. Thompson, an expert in traffic engineering, as of April 6, 1999, his estimate is there would only be room for nine parking spaces and 23 spaces would be required. She stated based on the area and inadequate way in which the parking could be handled on the site, it would be inappropriate to expand the use of the property, so she would move to deny the CUP.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to deny Item 1 based on the inability of the property to adequately handle the expansion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 2. (PSJ90201) Mary Anne Stephens as Trustee of the William Hualpha Stephens Revocable Trust's request for change from RU-1-9 to GML on .275 acre located on the west side of Depot Avenue, north of Fay Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board.

Mr. Enos advised the request is for the Sheriff's Office PAL Program; and it was recommended for approval by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve Item 2 as recommended by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS OF APRIL 5, 1999

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board, made at its public hearing on April 5, 1999, as follows:

Chairman Scarborough passed the gavel to Vice Chairman Higgs.

Item 1. (Z9904101) Ronald R. Gross's request for change from AU to RRMH-1 on 2.38 acres located on the west side of Blounts Ridge Road, north of Aurantia Road, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 1 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 2. (Z9904102) Susie Butler Parrish's request for change from AU to RU-1-11 on 0.32 acre located on the east side of Spikes Lane, south of Canaveral Groves Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

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

Item 4. (Z9904104) Brian G. and Debra Lawson's request for change from GU to ARR on 1 acre located on the east side of Satellite Boulevard, north of Harley Avenue, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 4 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 3. (Z9904103) Mae Charlayne Johston, as Trustee's request for change from AU and RR-1 to GML(I) on 5? acres located on the west side of U.S. 1 at the western terminus of Kloss Street, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Vice Chairman Higgs passed the gavel to Chairman Scarborough.

Billy Jenkins, Lieutenant with Kennedy Space Center Fire Department, advised with volunteers goes noise, speed and not the best handling of fire equipment; paid fire departments have one engine and not a lot of volunteers so it is less impact; and he lived within a quarter of a mile from Scottsmoor Fire Department, and the volunteers loved to blow the sirens. He stated there is a commercial zone about two-tenths of a mile to the south; the fire station will be put within two miles of the Scottsmoor Fire Station; it is still five miles from Mims and four miles from the County line; and moving it one mile south would put it in a better area for more homes than in the proposed area. He stated the fire station will be a bigger impact on the neighborhood than it would be if it were moved into the commercial area.

Chairman Scarborough inquired who will staff the new station, and was there consideration of moving it further south; with Chief Bill Farmer responding they looked at moving it further south which would be four to five miles radius away from the County line; and that would be a detriment if the Scottsmoor Volunteers were not able to continue their efforts. He stated they try to stay within a three-mile circle; and the closer they get to Mims/Grantline Road area the closer they are to more stable water supply. He stated the fire station will be staffed with career fire fighters; they will allow volunteers to ride with them as they do at any station; but it will be a career station and would not be staffed completely by volunteers.

Commissioner Voltz inquired what is the policy on sirens; with Chief Farmer responding it is left to the discretion of the drivers, but they are advised not to use the sirens unless it is an absolute necessity to safely traverse traffic.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 3 as recommended by the P&Z Board.

Commissioner Higgs advised she goes by two County fire stations located in residential areas and observed nothing adverse from houses not selling, etc., and has not heard complaints from the neighbors. She noted she heard a welcome from people in the area, so there is no adverse impact based on her observations.

Chairman Scarborough advised Chief Farmer made an attempt to meet with all the people in the area. Chief Farmer advised he met with everyone in the area; Mr. Jenkins was not there, but his wife was; and he spoke with her at length. He stated everyone around Kloss Street who would be directly impacted was contacted; and there was only one gentleman who was concerned about noise, but thought the advantage of having a fire station outweighed that issue.

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

Item 5. (Z9904105) C. R. Powell, Trustee's request for CUP for security trailer (renewal) in AU zoning classification on 40.34? acres located on the south side of Stuckway Road, west of Jabez Road, which was tabled to May 3, 1999 P&Z Meeting and May 20, 1999 Board of County Commissioners meeting as the applicant was not present, with reprocessing fee required.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to table Item 5 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 6. (Z9904201) Bud and Mary Carol Crisafulli's request for change from TR-1 and RR-1 to TR-2 with BDP limiting development to one unit per acre maximum on 28? acres located on both sides of Pine Island Road, north of SR 3, which was recommended by the P&Z Board for approval of SR with withdrawal of RR-1 portion as amended by the applicant, and with a binding development plan limiting development to one unit per acre.

Bud Crisafulli advised of surrounding developments; stated there is a change from TR-2 to SR; he does not want to build a mobile home community; and he will submit to one-to-one density, but needs SR for half-acre lots for configuration, as the property is unique. He stated on Pine Island Road the lots will be one acre.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he received numerous letters and messages from people who do not want TR-2 expanded in the area. Mr. Crisafulli stated he does not want TR-2. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if Mr. Crisafulli would accept RR-1 for the entire parcel; with Mr. Crisafulli responding he would take one unit to an acre, but needs the SR designation to cluster some of the homes. Mr. Crisafulli stated he would lose half of the lots with RR-1. Mr. Enos advised SR would allow half-acre lots; Mr. Crisafulli amended the application to SR at the P&Z meeting; and there is a binding development plan that would limit the overall density to no more than one unit per acre.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 6 as recommended by the P&Z Board, with a binding development plan limiting the total density to one unit per acre.

Harry Clark, Roger Belew, Simone Spiess, Sharon Earl, and Tom Strickland all expressed concern about the flooding and drainage situation, and reduction in lot size; inquired what is the County's plan to handle the water; presented pictures of canals; suggested RR-1; and requested denial of the rezoning until there is a drainage plan that is proven to work.

Ms. Spiess inquired why the North Merritt Island Board has not been able to review zoning applications; with Mr. Enos responding applications are made three months in advance of the meetings; applications were accepted for July, prior to setting up the North Merritt Island Board; and after July, the North Merritt Island Board will review requests for rezoning.

Commissioner O'Brien advised the flooding in 1994 was a 50-year flood event; if it occurred tomorrow, it would be just as bad; ditches were cleaned out to reduce flooding; Pine Island canal is high and so is the canal he lives on; and if the County gets that kind of rainfall again, it would expect flooding in Merritt Island, Grant, etc. He stated Mr. Crisafulli could put mobile homes on both sides of the road; the density for this development will average one unit per acre; he has a right to use his property; and it is not only unfair, but also illegal to take away his property rights. He stated his motion is to approve SR with a BDP that says no more than one unit per acre overall density.

Commissioner Higgs advised last week the Board looked at development standards for places with unique problems; in this case they have TR-2 in place; and the request is less intense and lower density.

Chairman Scarborough passed the gavel to Vice Chairman Higgs.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to table Item 6 to include water retention on site in the Binding Development Plan. Motion died for lack of a second.

Mr. Crisafulli expressed concern about being forced to pay for engineering regarding water retention. Commissioner Scarborough stated how Mr. Crisafulli would deal with the water can be constructive.

Vice Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Scarborough voted nay.

Vice Chairman Higgs passed the gavel to Chairman Scarborough.

Item 7. (Z9904202) Jon and Connie Benson's request for change from AU to EU-2 on 3.74 acres located on the southeast corner of Grant Road and North Tropical Trail, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

John Campbell, representing the applicants, advised the request for EU-2 is for six building sites and smaller homes; it is an area of retired people to have 1,500-square-foot homes; and they will offer a BDP for not more than six units on the 3.74 acres. He advised of surrounding zoning, and stated the request is consistent with the character of the surrounding area.

Melody Boucher presented pictures of her home on Grant Road directly across from the property; stated it is 3,800 square feet; and advised the area is rural in character, and EU-2 would not be compatible.

Simone Spiess, representing North Merritt Island Homeowners Association, advised the property is zoned AU and faces homes of RR-1 or estate use; they enjoy a rural lifestyle and are interested in preserving it; there are other areas for retirees; and to preserve the way of life on North Merritt Island they would suggest RR-1.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if there are homes on smaller lots in the area; with Ms. Boucher responding the street to the east of the property has homes of 2,000 square feet plus; and there are homes on less than one acre, but they were there a long time.

Commissioner O'Brien suggested SR for half-acre lots; with Mr. Campbell advising of surrounding zoning and noting the configuration of the land is such that they need the Estate Use classification. He noted it is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and was approved by the P&Z Board. Discussion ensued on the zoning classifications in the area, sizes of lots, sizes of houses, and front footage.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 7 as EU-2, with a binding development plan requiring 100-foot frontage and 1,800 square-foot minimum house size. Motion did not carry; Commissioners O'Brien and Voltz voted aye; and Commissioners Higgs, Carlson, and Scarborough voted nay.

Commissioner Higgs stated RR-1 would be appropriate. Chairman Scarborough stated it is the applicant's prerogative on how to proceed. Commissioner Higgs suggested tabling the item to let them think about it; and Mr. Campbell responded they do not want to wait and would like to get approval to develop six lots.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 7 as SR with a binding development plan providing for 1,800 square-foot minimum house size. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

Item 8. (Z9904203) Marc P. Lavigne and Jacalyn M. Francisco's request for change from AU to RR-1 on 1.4 acres located on the west side of Joseph's Court, south of Crisafulli Road, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Marc Lavigne advised they bought a parcel of land immediately adjacent to their parcel to obtain access to East Crisafulli Road; it is irregular in shape and unimproved; they did put a driveway on the western edge and have no use for 1.4 acres which they would like to sell as a lot. He stated it fronts Joseph Court so it can get a building permit; the Comprehensive Plan allows for RR-1; and he does not care for RR-1 next to him, but he is forced to because the Zoning laws require 2.5 acres for AU and it is below that acreage. He stated they have no choice but to ask for a rezoning.

Priscilla Andersen advised she lives within 500 feet of the subject property, and opposes the request; there are extreme flooding problems in the North Merritt Island area; the newest home built adjoining her property has a septic tank above eye level from her yard; a 2.5-acre homesite has to raise the house pad and septic system five to six feet from her property level; and that is a lot of fill and a lot of water displacement. She noted a 2.5-acre AU-zoned lot could retain its stormwater, but she cannot imagine how a one-acre lot would be able to do it. She inquired who is liable for the rainwater that would run off onto her property. Ms. Andersen stated retention is not required on one RR-1 lot according to Surface Water Management and Public Works Engineering; and read from the Executive Summary for North Merritt Island prepared by Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., as follows: "On the north and south sides of East Crisafulli Road near the "S" bend, localized yard flooding was prevalent for several weeks after Tropical Storm Gordon and subsequent rainfall events. . . .locate the channel from the mangrove ditch south of Crisafulli Road to mosquito impoundment via the existing lake at King's Park. Improvements will not totally eliminate flooding in the study area, but will reduce flooding hazards along the main drainage conveyance system by reducing peak flood stages and shortening the duration of flooding from severe storm events. Extremely severe storms will continue to cause flooding within the study area, but when it does occur, peak flood stages will not be as high and the duration of flooding will be greatly reduced. During Tropical Storm Gordon, problem areas remain inundated for up to two weeks after the storm. For areas that have very flat topography, such as the North Merritt Island area, the duration of flooding can be more critical than the depth of flooding. Roads in low-lying areas that flood for a few hours are a nuisance, but if these same areas flood for several days, they become hazards to emergency vehicles and a danger to people who must travel them to reach their homes, businesses, or stores to shop for food and supplies. Long duration of flooding also hinders the repair or reestablishment of utility services that are typically interrupted during severe storm events. This in itself can place a monetary and physical hardship on residents and businesses in the area that are dependent on these utilities services. In addition, recurring inundation of roadways with floodwaters is extremely detrimental to the structural road system. Flood waters standing on or near the road surface will saturate the base material leading to structural failure when traffic is resumed. Rapid deterioration of the road is likely to occur. High tail water levels in the Indian River along with the tropical storm type rainfall events will continue to cause flooding problems in the North Merritt Island area. It is not economically feasible or in some cases even possible to protect all the areas of North Merritt Island from all flooding possibilities." Ms. Andersen stated the County has done a great job so far; the surrounding zoning is AU; and if the property changes to RR-1, it will set a precedent for the rest of the area to rezone their properties, and it would be hard to say no. She presented a map of the area to the Board. She stated there is no cure for the flooding problems, according to the study, because of the very low-lying lands, especially in the northern part of North Merritt Island.

Simone Spiess, representing North Merritt Island Homeowners Association, echoed previous concerns expressed by the homeowners in the area who have large properties with AU zoning; and stated the precedent of creating an RR-1 parcel in that area will encourage rezoning of other parcels, and have a negative impact on the character of the area as well as the delicate balance of stormwater management.

Ronald Erwin advised he owns 3.75 acres on Joseph Court; he did research before buying, and found it was all zoned AU; and that is why he bought his land. He stated if the parcel is rezoned to RR-1, it will set a precedent; there are people who own five to eight acres who could divide their lands into one-acre lots; he bought out there because he wanted his space; and he does not want to be elbow-to-elbow with people. He stated the second concern is flooding which has been covered already.

Mr. Lavigne stated he empathizes with his neighbors who are objecting; he does not like the flood waters that back up the drainage system, but that is living in Florida; and when it rains he has puddles in his yard. He stated as for setting a precedent, that is why he said he does not like RR-1 but is forced to do it because the property is below 2.5 acres; and if there is a way to keep it AU and still parcel off the 1.4 acres, he would like the Board to consider that.

Commissioner Higgs advised there have been rezonings in Grant and Valkaria from AU to RR-1; there is a difference in the character of those zoning classifications; the entire street is AU; that is the character of the area; and if it is changed to RR-1, the Board may be looking at a lot of parcels rezoning to RR-1. She stated until there are standards in place the Board will have greater problems allowing people to build on lands that have unique problems; and recommended the property remain AU.

Commissioner O'Brien stated because he has less than 2.5 acres, the applicant cannot get a building permit for the property. Mr. Enos stated he has a larger lot that he is trying to split into two lots. Chairman Scarborough stated his initial explanation was to cut off a piece of a subsequent purchase for his access; and he can do that, but that does not mean the Board has to change the zoning map to accommodate his sale. Mr. Enos inquired how big is the parcel; with Mr. Lavigne responding Parcel 276 is 2.55 acres total. Chairman Scarborough advised he has places in District 1 where the trend has been to change from AU to RR-1; that is fine if it is the trend; but here it is not the trend; and it would change the basic character and where the market wants to go. Commissioner O'Brien stated it is surrounded by AU on all sides; to change it would not be compatible with surrounding zoning, so he would have to move to deny.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to overrule the P&Z Board's recommendation and deny Item 8. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 7:21 p.m., and reconvened at 7:43 p.m.

Item 9. (Z9904301) Ernest M. Surles and Leon O. Surles's request for change from BU-1 to BU-2 on 1.20 acres located on the west side of U.S. 1, north of First Street, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

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

Item 10. (Z9904401) Steven L. Leymeister's request for change from RU-1-13 to TR-1 on 0.2 acre located on the southeast corner of Blanche Avenue and White Road, 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. (Z9904402) Wayne E. Johnson's request for change from TR-1 to AU on 6.01 acres located on the north side of SR 520, west of Friday Road, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 11 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 12. (Z9904403) S & S Petroleum, Inc.'s request for change from BU-1 to TU-2 on 0.85 acre located on the north side of SR 520, west of I-95, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Commissioner Carlson advised she met with the applicant, S & S Petroleum, Inc.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 12 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 14. (Z9904405) Thomas R. and Joanne Page's request for change from BU-1 to BU-2 on 0.83 acre located west of U.S. 1 and north of Allen Hill Avenue, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

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

Item 13. (Z9904404) A. Duda & Sons, Inc.'s request for change from PUD to RU-1-7 on 489 acres located on the west side of Wickham Road, south of Windsor Estates Drive, which had no recommendation from the P&Z Board due to a tie vote.

Commissioner Carlson advised she met with the applicant, Pat O'Grady from Windover Farms, and Mr. and Mrs. Myron Stevens from Windsor Estates. She stated they discussed the plan, issues surrounding the rezoning, the road that would be an access point to the property, the effects on Windover Farms, and the proximity of the project to the Stevens' home.

Attorney Richard Torpy, representing the applicant A. Duda & Sons, Inc., advised the developers of the project, whom he directly represents are Messrs. Roy Pence, Jim Swann, and Malcolm Kirschenbaum; and the property is under contract with the applicant for purchase. He stated the request is for rezoning of an expired PUD to RU-1-7 for the entire parcel which encompasses over 400 acres. He advised of his efforts to send notices to all the people the County notifies, numerous meetings with residents of Windover Farms, Windsor Estates, and Pineda Crossing, and the stipulations they filed with the County and are willing to make part of a binding development plan. He submitted a copy of the stipulations to the Board; and noted a stipulation was added as a result of discussions with Windover Farms Homeowners Association. Mr. Torpy read the stipulations as follows: (1) a minimum of 150 acres be set aside as conservation or open area within the site; (2) no more than two units per acre total density developed on the property; (3) the developer will not develop more than 860 units within the subdivision; (4) no road connection to Turtle Mound Road; (5) minimum of 100-foot vegetative buffer between any lot on their property and Windover Farms; (6) no road connections to Pineda Crossing, Windsor Estates, Waterford Place, and Oak Park; (7) minimum living area of any unit will be 1,200 square feet; (8) any contiguous lot to Pineda Crossing will be a minimum of 75 feet wide and 110 feet deep; (9) a minimum of 100-foot buffer between lots contiguous to building lots within Pineda Crossing which may be used for stormwater retention, open space, and conservation mitigation that may be deemed necessary; (10) any house on any lot contiguous to or within 110 feet of a lot in Pineda Crossing, Windover Farms, or Waterford Place will have a minimum living area of 1,400 square feet; (11) a minimum of 100-foot buffer between any lot within the property and Waterford Place; (12) any lot within the property will be a minimum of 1,000 feet away from any lot in Windsor Estates and Oak Park; (13) entrance road from Wickham Road will be a minimum of 150 feet south of Windsor Estates and Oak Park, subject to approval by Brevard County; (14) reduce Pineda Causeway dedicated right-of-way from 200 feet to 160 feet, subject to Brevard County concurrence. Applicant agrees to enter into a modification of the Agreement to donate land between A. Duda & Sons, Inc. and Brevard County dated March 5, 1996, and recorded in ORB 3577, PG 1376. The modification provides that the northerly boundary line of any right-of-way for Pineda Causeway extension shall be a minimum of 140 feet south of the southern boundary line of Windsor Estates. Subject to the completed modification of the Agreement, the applicant will formally request Brevard County to vacate the existing 100-foot right-of-way that lies along the southern boundary line of Windsor Estates; and subject to the County's approval, any pavement for the road to be constructed by the developer will be a minimum of 225 feet away from the southern boundary of Windsor Estates; (15) any sewer lift station within the subdivision will be a minimum of 500 feet away from Windover Farms, Pineda Crossing, Waterford Place, Windsor Estates, and Oak Park; (16) the applicant will formally request Brevard County to vacate the existing right-of-way running north and south along the western boundary of the property to be rezoned; and 17) any lot within 110 feet of any lot within Windover Farms shall be a minimum of one-third acre. Mr. Torpy introduced Doug Robertson, Planning and Development Consultant.

Doug Robertson advised he reviewed the various Elements of the Comprehensive Plan and concluded the request is consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Polices of the Comprehensive Plan, specifically the Future Land Use Maps which classification is residential.

He stated the project is within the density guidelines which allow a density of up to 12 units per acre since it is an urbanizing classification; and their request limits the density to a total of two units per acre. He advised there are many Policies in the Comprehensive Plan which encourage the use of urban in-fill projects and discourage urban sprawl; he has 12 references to the attributes of in-fill throughout the Comprehensive Plan which he will submit for the record; and read from Goal 1, Objective 1, of the Future Land Use Element, as follows: "Brevard County shall limit urban sprawl by directing new residential development to areas where the densities are compatible with the established growth patterns and where public or private facilities and services are available or programmed to serve the development at or above the level of service adopted in the Comprehensive Plan." Mr. Robertson advised in his opinion, the project is clearly an in-fill project; it is surrounded by four existing subdivisions; all services and facilities are available to service the project; and the request will not exceed established level of service thresholds that have been adopted by Brevard County.

Chairman Scarborough advised the applicant's time has expired; and inquired how much longer will it take; with Mr. Torpy responding it is an extensive project; and requested additional time.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to extend the time for the applicant by ten minutes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Robertson advised over 150 acres of the 435 acres will be preserved as open space, conservation areas, or buffers; the wetland assessment has been completed; a jurisdictional wetland boundary has been determined by the St. Johns River Water Management District; so there will be a significant amount of open space and conservation areas associated with the project. He reiterated Mr. Torpy's statements about buffers between surrounding subdivisions and the project, no road accesses, densities, entrance road, minimum lot and house sizes, wetland areas, and no connection to Turtle Mound Road or any subdivision. Mr. Robertson advised there will be no adverse impact on traffic; and the density limitation, extensive buffers, minimum house sizes adjacent to subdivisions, and no road connections make the request consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the surrounding areas.

Commissioner Carlson advised #2 which says, "there will be no more than two units per acre developed on the property," is misleading; they are planning 860 units on actual developable land of 275 acres; and requested clarification. Mr. Robertson advised the 860 units on the entire 435 acres should be close to no more than two units per acre on an aggregate basis. Commissioner Carlson inquired how many units will be on each acre; with Mr. Torpy responding they have not finished their studies and that is why they said the total density will not be more than two units per acre; they do not know what the developable acreage is going to be, but the overall density will be two units per acre. Commissioner Carlson stated it is closer to 7 or 8 units per acre by the math; with Mr. Torpy responding they have engaged in extensive discussions with the surrounding communities so they know what that means; and they have asked for specific lot sizes which his clients attempted to provide. Commissioner Carlson requested an explanation of #14; with Mr. Torpy responding the homeowners in Windsor Estates were concerned about the proposed Pineda Causeway extension and its proximity to their homes; that extension has nothing to do with the project; however, the concern is the project using it as an access and it becoming part of the Pineda Extension in the future. He stated there is a 300-foot piece of land owned by the applicant; there is an existing 100-foot wide County right-of-way adjacent to Windsor Estates; their original proposal would have put their road closer than it is now; and they told the residents of Windsor Estates they would shift it as far south as they could, which is 140 feet south, but it would require the Board's approval because it has an Agreement with Duda about the location of a 200-foot strip of land; and it will require a modification to that Agreement. He stated A. Duda & Sons are willing to enter into that stipulation and modify the Agreement so they can put their improvements further south; the hope is their pavement will be 225 feet away from Windsor Estates; and the discussion was if there is a Pineda Causeway extension that goes through in the future, with their pavement as far south as possible, the other lanes would be added to the north but not closer than 140 feet to the southern boundary of Windsor Estates. He advised it is an attempt to make the situation better for residents of Windsor Estates, but they have limited control, and the County has much of the control. Mr. Robertson advised to clarify the density on developable acres, it comes to about 3.1 units per acre and two units over all considering the wetland acreage also.

Sans Lassiter, registered professional engineer, advised he was asked to look at the project from a traffic engineering standpoint and concurrency; he did an analysis and worked with staff to come up with procedures for doing that; and he went along with their procedures and came to a common agreement there is sufficient capacity on the road to handle the project. He stated with the project it would be at 84% of capacity on Wickham Road. Commissioner Higgs requested an explanation of how they came up with the numbers; with Mr. Lassiter responding concurrency first came about when they did a blanketing capacity against all roads regardless of characteristics, realizing that in the future, as they get closer to capacity, they would need to look at the actual specific characteristics of the road; that is what they did as requested by staff, and came up with capacity using DOT software; and that is how they came up with the numbers. He noted staff agreed with their analysis. Commissioner Higgs inquired if all the platted lots in the area are accounted for in the numbers; with Mr. Lassiter responding the way concurrency works is when the lot is developed that is when the trips are put on the road. He explained the three-step concurrency procedure, noting at the zoning or subdivision plat approval stages it does not give a developer the right to develop those lots from a concurrency standpoint. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the current volume is the number on the road today plus the number permitted this year; with Mr. Lassiter responding that is his understanding. Mr. Enos advised it includes all building permits issued, but not all site plans or plats. Commissioner Higgs stated there might be hundreds of other lots in Windsor Estates, Pineda Crossing, Waterford Place or Oak Park that are not accounted for in that current volume. Mr. Lassiter stated that is correct; and advised the concept of concurrency is a first-come, first-serve basis, not because property is zoned or subdivided, but actually ready to construct; and that is because the demand does not occur until a building permit is issued. Commissioner Higgs inquired if that is how it is done throughout the State; with Mr. Lassiter responding there are a hundred different ways of doing it, and Brevard County is not that different from most areas; those that require concurrency early for projects that may never build end up with ghost trips on their roads; and others who want to build cannot because of the ghost trips taking up the capacity. Commissioner Higgs stated the flip side of that is subdivisions that sold lots not accounted for under the current volume. Discussion ensued on concurrency analysis, build-out conditions, vesting, and traffic impact studies.

Mr. Torpy advised the reason concurrency was developed that way is because of a taking issue and defacto moratorium; the County's system allows people to come in at the zoning stage and address the issue, but the actual trip is at the building permit stage when the County knows they will build a house and use the road. Commissioner Higgs stated it does not give a picture to someone who is planning for the future; it accounts for only those that are on the road this year and not those that are site planned for the year or subdivisions that have been platted and lots sold to individuals. Mr. Torpy stated it takes out the guess work; at the zoning stage staff can tell them what they project the paper trips to be on a section of road and how long it will take to get there; and if everybody built everything that is out there, staff would know those numbers. Commissioner Higgs stated that is not reflected in any of the numbers for this project; with Mr. Torpy responding that is not a concurrency management issue, but staff tracks those and keeps track of that for planning purposes. He stated concurrency management looks at what they are actually using; the County is only using 72% of Wickham Road; when it gets over 85% it will start rationing those trips; and that is how it is handled. He stated it allows people to use their land until capacity runs out rather than use capacity with paper trips. He stated people who bought lots and have not built on them will not be able to use the lot if the roads are at capacity until the County gets the roads for them, same as water and sewer capacities.

William Joy, representing Pineda Crossing Homeowners Association, advised they met with Mr. Pence to discuss their concerns; they want to be treated the same as their neighboring communities with 100-foot buffer between their development and the proposed development; they received a commitment for that from Mr. Pence; and they agreed it can be used for water retention. He stated with that agreement, they accept the Pence development; however, they would like to express concern about rapid development in their area and a need for a plan to handle growth, especially the traffic on Wickham Road. He stated Wickham Road and Pineda Causeway extension are responsibilities of the County and not the developer; they expect their elected officials to work those issues before they become problems; and they hope the Board will insure the congestion problems elsewhere will not occur in their area. He stated Windover Farms does not want Turtle Mound Road extended; Windsor Estates does not want an entrance road just to their south; but they do not offer alternative solutions. He stated Mr. Pence has made a reasonable effort to accommodate their requests and if this request is denied, another developer may not be so accommodating.

John LaSelva, expressed concern about the minimum lot size allowing 700 square-foot homes, but the document says 1,200 minimum house size, but also says the possible incompatibility is due to the significant disparity in minimum lot and house sizes, and it still permits smaller homes and lots. He inquired how many homes would they put on how many acres. Commissioner Carlson stated they have 860 units and 275 developable acres and that would give about three units to an acre. Mr. LaSelva stated in the GLA memo to staff dated April 5, 1999, they answered concerns about traffic and used FDOT model; Wickham Road is not an FDOT road; they did not look at the minimum for a 36 to 45-mph road which is 1,320 feet between traffic signals; Item 13 says their entrance will be 150 feet south of Windsor Estates; and Item 14 says 225 feet; so all he knows is the road is less than 1,320 feet from the existing Pineda Causeway where there is a traffic light. He stated the GLA Report says, "The future signals include the three existing signals of Pineda Causeway, Post Road, and Long Leaf Elementary, plus a potential new signal for the project entrance." He stated it leaves out a lot of other proposed traffic signals and does not answer left turns and right turns; and requested the Board table the request for a traffic study, paid for by the developer, for the entire area.

Commissioner Carlson advised at the last MPO meeting she brought up the area in question and that they need to look at a scope of service to see what they could do in terms of a plan or analysis of the entire area, from Post Road north to Wickham Road as it runs east and west; so that is in the process right now and will come back to the Board in September.

Transportation Planning Director Bob Kamm advised there will be a scope of service for a consultant to develop a plan and analyze and evaluate the traffic situation in the North Melbourne area at the Wednesday MPO meeting. He stated they will look at what can be done to Wickham Road both long term and short term, what options may be available in terms of extending Pineda west and how it could be done, the geometry questions of an intersection at Wickham Road with Pineda, and a range of other questions dealing with traffic circulation issues in the North Melbourne Area. He noted it will be a relatively fast-paced study and he would like to have it done by Labor Day.

Commissioner Carlson advised she held a town meeting in the Commission Room on April 26, 1999, to get the community together and let them know the issues; the rezoning item brought a lot of it to the surface; the main issue was transportation; but the two are separate entities, and the rezoning is separate from the issue of transportation problems the County is currently facing. Commissioner Higgs stated zoning cannot be separated totally from transportation; with Commissioner Carlson responding she meant in terms of the meeting, they did not discuss the rezoning, only the transportation issues.

Pete Rudden advised he is directly affected by the development north of his property and abuts the property; Mr. Pence should not be burdened to do the full traffic analysis; they proposed to build 860 homes; there are a lot of properties in that general vicinity approved and started to build on; there are commercial developments on the east side of the road; and they will make traffic congestion a significant problem. He stated it is the duty of the Board to evaluate that and properly dispose of it; he is not for or against the rezoning and leaves that to the Board; Mr. Pence's plan is speculative right now, but he is willing to work with them and give them a 100-foot buffer along the perimeter of Windsor Estate and Pineda Crossing, but in Phase 2 there is only a 100-foot buffer against the lotted areas and no buffer to the conservation area which is in back of his home and north of the property. He stated the real intent for conservation is to maintain a large area for animals, and requested the buffer be extended to the area north of the Pineda Crossing conservation area. He stated they have speeders and their road is serpentine; and suggested planners take serious consideration of the entrance road. He stated the Pineda Causeway extension is not in the 25-year plan and should be given attention; Mr. Pence is going to build on his property; and the County can make the extension that is critical to all who live in Melbourne and for evacuation routes in terms of emergencies. He stated the Board is responsible to consider the best interest of all; and suggested it consider traffic density and foresight for Pineda Causeway extension. He stated the Pence consultant did not address the density in Commissioner Higgs' concerns of parcels that have been purchased and not permitted yet; and recommended the Board see what the number is because it is up against the stop point if those lots are considered. Commissioner Higgs inquired what is the number of trips out there that would be included in the number that have been platted in subdivisions but not built on yet; with Mr. Kamm responding as part of the preparation for the town meeting that Commissioner Carlson had, staff did additional research on what subdivisions are in the area and what lots are available for development in the unincorporated area only; their records show office and commercial at 2,600 trips, and subdivisions at 4,371 trips including the Moynihan property which has been filed since the rezoning and is roughly 4,700 trips; and the total is about 11,900 trips. Commissioner Higgs inquired if that would be added to the current volume; with Mr. Kamm responding that would be the worse case scenario if everything developed at its maximum rate. He stated the way concurrency works is they work with adjacent segments, assign traffic to adjacent segments and take the traffic and continue it on through the network, but they assign it to the adjacent segment, in this case, Wickham Road. Commissioner Higgs stated if it fronts on Wickham Road, it is added in, and if it goes any place else, it is not added in; with Mr. Kamm responding they would get into how traffic turns at major intersections and they do not know that. Mr. Kamm stated if it is in the City of Melbourne, that is not included.

Leo Burgunder stated before purchasing his home he was suspicious of the location lying directly in the path of what any sane person would consider to be a direct route between the Pineda bridge and I-95; however, their builder told them that the County and State have no plans to extend the Pineda Causeway. He stated it was not until the meeting held by Commissioner Carlson that he and others were told the County owned the property that was eventually sold and developed as Windsor Estates by Mr. Roy Pence; and granting the rezoning at this time and fixing the location of access to the property at Wickham Road would only continue the legacy of poor County decisions concerning the intersection. He stated his specific issues are: (1) the GLA technical memorandums dated March 30 and April 5, 1999 which were released to the public on April 30 at his insistence, show Wickham Road capacity was recalculated upward to 41,200 trips per day; the new capacity is able to afford the 9,340 trips which would be generated by the 860 homes; the GLA analysis and County approval on April 5 contain no provision for additional trips generated by the A. Duda and Sons Wickham Lakes development even though it is common knowledge the County has full intentions to connect Mr. Pence's private road with Lake Andrew Drive. He stated the road plan is detailed in the March, 1996 Agreement with A. Duda & Sons. Mr. Burgunder stated (2) both the County and GLA state in the record that a new intersection would need to be built to handle the 9,340 potential trips which currently represent one-third of existing Wickham traffic today; the traffic flow pattern would enter Wickham approximately 700 feet from the existing Pineda light and is less than 1,320 feet required under the Florida Administrative Code 14.96 for 40 to 45 mph roadways; (3) the County is currently planning to install another traffic light at the entrance of Pineda Crossing and Business Park Drive to increase safety at that intersection; but the light was not included in the calculations submitted in the GLA technical memorandums. (4) The Trinity Junior Senior High School project will likely make Wickham Road a school zone, significantly increasing pedestrian bus and vehicle traffic; those plans have been known by the County for some time; but were not considered in granting the Pence rezoning traffic concurrency on April 5, 1999. He stated the County has also not determined the impact of the FEC Railway crossing and future possible Amtrak service on Wickham Road capacity. Mr. Burgunder stated Patrick Air Force Base is the County's single largest employer and stopping traffic flow from Wickham onto Pineda Causeway due to train traffic must be factored into the capacity calculations for the intersection. He urged the Board to table the rezoning request and demonstrate the leadership to forge a win/win solution, which protects the property rights of Mr. Pence and the other developers and of the public. He stated he will submit a written proposal that may accomplish those objectives and also propose that the Board create a citizen's advisory panel to review and comment on solutions to the issues raised in his remarks. He requested to be personally notified 30 days in advance of any future public meetings considering the rezoning request or any public meeting dealing with the connection of a private road to Wickham Road.

Cheryl Bouvier stated she is not opposed to Mr. Pence building 860 homes, but her major concerns are allowing new subdivisions when there are existing lots that have not been developed and are for sale and not selling in all the different subdivisions, impact on schools, and 1,400 square-foot houses next to 2,500 square-foot homes on an acre or half an acre. She recommended Mr. Pence be required to put minimum 1,800 square-foot homes and half-acre lots next to Windover Farms, Pineda Crossing, and Windsor Estates.

Myron Stevens advised part of the rezoning is a partial roadway constructed to serve the new subdivision and intended to be part of the Pineda Causeway extension; the die will be cast because there are no other roadways tied into the Pineda Causeway extension east of Wickham Road; so making a decision on this request is not simple, as it will affect the future of traffic and other factors in the community. He stated normally that is not part of zoning, but because the roadway is part of the Pineda extension, the Board will limit its options.

Doris Ahern, representing Windsor Estates, advised there is a discrepancy in Mr. Torpy's letter between Items 13 and 14; and requested he clarify it. Mr. Torpy advised Mr. Pence indicated the more restrictive in Item 14 would apply. She described Windsor Estates; noted a petition with 165 signatures requesting a permanent 300-foot buffer between Windsor Estates and the proposed entry road, including any expansion for the extension of Pineda Causeway, a comprehensive traffic study of the area, and identifying placement of utilities on the land. She advised of meetings with the developer, the reduction of dedicated right-of-way for Pineda Causeway extension through amendment of the Agreement with the applicant, support of the proposed development, and withdrawal of their request for a 300-foot buffer.

Stuart Warren advised RU-1-7 is not consistent with adjacent subdivisions and will set a precedent for a more dense development; RU-1-11 or RU-1-13 will reduce the number of units and increase green space, making for a nicer upscale neighborhood which is why most of them moved to the area; and requested the Board consider RU-1-13. He advised of Mr. Pence's concessions; and expressed concern about school overload.

Carlos Gonzalez advised his main concern was the square footage of homes, but he understands they can be bigger than 1,400 or 1,200 square feet. He advised of Suntree Elementary School being capped, building of Long Leaf Elementary, and concern about increased traffic; and inquired if Pineda Crossing, Phases 4 and 5, were included in the traffic studies; with Mr. Kamm responding only Phase 3 was included.

Alfred Key, representing the Shriners, advised twelve years ago they bought 40 acres that abut the proposed development and I-95; they have not met with anyone concerning their interests; their main interest when they purchased the property was to make it accessible to all the members scattered throughout the County; and they were quite sure Pineda Causeway was going to be extended, and it escapes them why it was not. He expressed concern about one evacuation route by U.S. 192 for South Brevard, while six routes exist for those in Central and North Brevard; and stated it is time to solve that dilemma. He advised of gridlocks on Merritt Island, a need for a north/south artery and the Pineda Causeway extension; and stated he is not against the development, but it should be done in a sound and sensible manner and the traffic problems worked out for the people of the entire County as well as commerce in the area.

Patrick O'Grady, President of Windover Farms Homeowners Association, described how their subdivision was developed with natural settings in mind, many amenities, lakes, ponds, nature trails, and wildlife sanctuaries for various animals, including eagles, hawks, bobcats, deer and boars; and stated introducing significant levels of traffic in the area will destroy the delicate balance they worked hard to maintain. He stated extension of Turtle Mound Road would not only mean additional traffic, but would result in increase in traffic throughout their community; Turtle Mound Road was not designed to handle anything but residential traffic; and to allow anything else to happen, including access to another community or commercial development to the north would be catastrophic to their community and require a substantial capital outlay for the County. Mr. O'Grady advised of concerns about the safety of children, compatibility of lots that will back up to their lots, efforts of Mr. Pence to provide a transitional area with one-third acre lots, access to the commercial area north of Windover Farms not being from the south, and access for the Azan Temple property; and stated they support the application for rezoning with stipulations noted by Mr. Torpy. He expressed appreciation to Roy Pence, Jim Swann and Rick Torpy for their efforts to work out the differences.

Rick White indicated personal support for Mr. Pence and his development for doing an excellent job informing the people and working with them, and strong opposition to any extension of Turtle Mound Road. He described the environment of their community; stated the Shriners position will be met by the Pineda Causeway extension; and requested the Board protect their environment and not turn Turtle Mound Road into a Wickham Road.

Jay Moynihan, President and developer of Pineda Crossing, reiterated what homeowners said about Mr. Pence and his associates; and stated his support for the request except for Item 6 which references no road connection to Pineda Crossing and others. He stated he understood there would be no connection of any sort, including utilities and pedestrian ways, as well as roads. He expressed concern about Item 14 which would move the right-of-way for Pineda Causeway extension against their property. He stated if the Board reduces it to 160 feet, it would be a disservice because it would take away from transportation and evacuation and other situations in the area the Board may have to deal with. He requested the Board keep it on the same centerline of the 300-foot corridor and not impose Condition #14 which they oppose; and stated removing that from the conditions, they support the project.

B. B. Nelson, representing the Shriners, advised he was involved with the long-range plan to build a hospital, clinic, or Shrine temple on the property located at the southeast quadrant of I-95 and Pineda Causeway; and the east/west plan for the extension of Pineda Causeway is important, because they service in excess of 400 young people who are taken to hospitals in Tampa and other places. He stated the majority of the stipulations are not controlled by Mr. Pence and are controlled by the County; the donation by A. Duda & Sons for the Pineda Causeway Extension is about 60 acres that was committed on March 5, 1996; so all the agreements they presented are still in the control of the County. He stated there are two Turtle Mound routes; the original Turtle Mound Road was a thoroughfare through the County; but the last one is the western Turtle Mound Road, which is also part of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that is not a desirable access to the Shriners' property because of the numerous driveways on it; and it was to be the Pineda Causeway extension to I-95. He stated they will probably move because the Pineda Causeway extension has been shoved by the subdivisions and goes through the center of their property; and now they want to protect their only access to the property from the south, but that was not the way they intended to develop it. He stated Mr. Pence did not meet with the Shriners to discuss the development; there was a meeting set up, but he had a problem and had to leave; they do not object to the zoning category or the use; but their concern is proper planning for transportation and access. Mr. Nelson stated the four miles from Wickham Road to the north and Post Road to the South is a total block; they cannot go east, west, north, or south without using Wickham Road, I-95, or U.S. 1; so the Board has a major responsibility to provide access for the Shriners and evacuation from the beach.

Sandra Stone stated she lived in Melbourne Beach for 13 years and never had a problem getting off the beach; there is nobody ranting and raving about the causeway; and it bothers her that people in Merritt Island and Palm Bay are trying to direct traffic down the street she lives on. She stated if Turtle Mound Road becomes a major thoroughfare, everyone will cut through there and there will be problems on Aurora Road; and requested the Board not open up Turtle Mound Road as there are three bus stops and children waiting for buses on it. She stated she appreciates what the developer has done, but has concerns about the size of the houses.

The meeting recessed at 9:34 p.m., and reconvened at 9:51 p.m.

Stan Bernstein, President of Suntree Homeowners Association, advised of meetings with the representatives of the developer; and their efforts to address traffic and stormwater management; and requested the item be tabled until a stormwater management plan can be presented that would assure them the Suntree area would be protected from possible flooding.

Attorney Torpy advised the issues they are required to address for zoning are consistency, compatibility, and concurrency management; staff's report addresses those issues positively; and the only question was possible incompatibility with Windover Farms, but after concessions were made, those residents support the project. He described surrounding properties and their concerns; advised the project does not exceed level of service for traffic on Wickham Road; and noted the developer has offered to work with the various homeowners in surrounding subdivisions. He stated Mr. Moynihan complained about pushing the right-of-way to the south; that is true; however, he is a developer who can create a buffer for his residents like they are doing. He stated the Shriners access from Turtle Mound Road would not be cut off; they are not going to access their subdivision from Turtle Mound Road; everyone acknowledges the Pineda Causeway extension is inevitable and necessary; and implored the Board to find the funding for that. Mr. Torpy stated they took all the diverse interests of all the people and provided the Board an overwhelming group of support with all their stipulations; clarified Items 6 and 14; and stated delay is a moratorium of zoning for no reason and may cause the developer not to be there. He stated the project benefits the County by alleviating its traffic problems in the future; it meets the laws; it is not time to stop it at the zoning stage; and by approving it the County will know what is there, can plan trip generation, and maximum homes, and will know what they are studying. He stated legally they meet all the requirements of the current Code; the developer spent a lot of time making everyone happy; and urged the Board not to put it off and engage in a taking, but approve the zoning which does not mean the trips will be on that road.

Commissioner Voltz inquired how many acres would be needed for roads and common areas; with Mr. Torpy responding they have to do a survey and study to determine developable property and do not have those specifics at this time. Commissioner Voltz inquired if they will all be single-family homes; with Mr. Torpy responding yes, and the smallest home will be 1,200 square feet.

Chairman Scarborough stated it is apparent that the Pineda Causeway extension will connect the new project; and inquired where are they going to connect. Mr. Torpy pointed out access points on the map. Chairman Scarborough inquired if the Board has the capacity to limit access from the extension or will it have numerous curb cuts; with Mr. Kamm responding the Agreement with A. Duda and Sons requires some access points.

Commissioner Carlson advised she asked Mr. Kamm what the likelihood is of getting the intersection at I-95, and he responded in order to have limited access it has to have connection to the Pineda Causeway; and right now those possibilities are drying up and the County only has one access point off Wickham Road which is the 300 feet. She stated there is a site plan on the south portion of that right-of-way, so there is no way to access east and west for the Pineda extension; the problem is how to approach it; and the likelihood of getting the interstate connection is much lower if the County cannot get the connection at U.S. 1 and Wickham Road.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if the project comes together and the developer has most of the access points, but there are points other people can access, how many diverse things could occur; with Mr. Kamm responding since the property is in the vicinity of the alignment and in large tracts that would likely be developed into large subdivisions as opposed to platted lands, the County has some degree of control through the BDP on how access would be metered out; and it has the opportunity, through proper site planning, to address access management issues. Chairman Scarborough stated Brevard County will only have so many interchanges with I-95; and while it is valuable to the community, it is also valuable that the access to I-95 be a well-managed approach. He inquired to what extent the movement from 200 to 160 feet as part of Item 14 impacts the planning that staff would be undertaking; with Mr. Kamm responding the 200 feet was in anticipation of having a very high level expressway type of road; the interstate system has 300 feet; and since there is not going to be that high level of roadway with an interchange at Wickham Road, he is not sure it is necessary to have 200 feet. He stated the 150 to 160 feet would be adequate for a nice four-lane road with an open drainage system, sidewalks, and median, etc. which can be done without much difficulty.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the development impacts the community and creates a need for fire stations, schools, etc., who will pay for those; with Mr. Torpy responding the taxpayers have always paid for expansion of schools; the School Board does not want to put a school in prematurely and waits until it is needed; they do not know how fast the subdivision will build out, so to build a school now does not make sense; and as homes are occupied and children come in, the need for a school will become apparent and a school constructed. He noted that is what always happens and what will happen in this situation. Commissioner O'Brien stated if that was true, there would not be 25 portables behind elementary and junior high schools. Mr. Torpy stated because of the rapid growth Brevard County is experiencing, that will happen; he does not have all the answers, but it is not an issue for zoning; and the Board should not hypothesize problems that do not exist to deny zoning. Commissioner O'Brien stated he was not implying that; the question is at what point does the Board look down the road at all the impacts of all developments and do forward financial planning; property taxes should take care of the costs of impacts; however, if that were the case, the Board would never have to raise taxes. Mr. Torpy stated it is a great question, but historically all developers pay impact fees that are calculated to pay their share of impacts on schools and everything else; they have complied with all the County's requirements; and they will pay their impact fees. Chairman Scarborough stated there are no impact fees for schools in Brevard County.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board has the ability, at the zoning level, to look at impacts on roads, etc.; with Ms. Bentley responding yes, the Board can look at traffic impacts, but it would need expert testimony dealing with that issue to show violations of its Ordinances and criteria. Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Kamm is a traffic expert; and inquired if Pineda extension that may be coming through the area be described as an arterial road; with Mr. Kamm responding the intersection with Wickham Road is critical to what type of road Pineda can be; if the Board is faced with an offset intersection, it would be likely to look at Pineda west of Wickham as a collector roadway and not try to create an arterial; and that would probably mean not pursuing an interchange. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the County cannot have a collector road as an interchange with I-95; with Mr. Kamm responding there is no prohibition against it, but if there was an interchange, the traffic loading on Pineda would be so great that it would create a horrific bottleneck at the offset intersection with Wickham Road; so if it wants to look at an interchange, his recommendation is to make sure it has a four-legged intersection at Pineda and not an offset intersection. He stated the key to what can be done with the Pineda Causeway revolves around the type of connection and intersection the County can create at Wickham Road. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the character of the road and intersection with Wickham Road would determine if there can be an interchange; with Mr. Kamm responding that will be the fundamental objective of the study he spoke of earlier, to look at options particularly at the Wickham Road area.

Commissioner Higgs stated there are 30,016 trips on Wickham Road right now; to add the volume from the development plus lots already platted will add another 11,908 trips; and that would be 41,924 which is greater than the capacity of the road. She inquired what would that mean from the standpoint of the Comprehensive Plan; with Mr. Kamm responding it would move into a potential moratorium situation, and the County would be obligated to move with due diligence to solve the problem and create additional capacity or make improvements to make capacity available so it is no longer a deficient roadway. Ms. Busacca advised the Concurrency Regulations require that when it gets to 90 or 95% of capacity, the County would put it in the Capital Improvements Program for improvements which would alleviate the problem before it gets to 100%; and it can continue to issue building permits up to 110% of capacity. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it gets to maximum acceptable volume, would the Board have to find a way to solve the problem and build road capacity; with Ms. Busacca responding it would have to find a way to solve the problem; and the Ordinance envisions a moratorium as something the Board would put on until the problem is solved. Commissioner Higgs stated if the Board invokes a moratorium, it would have to have a way out of the moratorium; and there will be fiscal obligations, responsibilities and consequences if it hits that capacity.

Commissioner Carlson advised concurrency information from Melbourne, which has a large apartment complex, and over 2,000 trips have not been added into the number of total trips. Mr. Kamm advised that is a long-standing issue in concurrency management of how to share data with cities; it is true in Brevard County and across the State; and it is not one of the strengths of the Growth Management Act of how intergovernmental coordination occurs; so there is no effective mechanism developed to share that information in a timely manner. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the 30,000 trips took into consideration the City of Melbourne's subdivisions along the east side of Wickham Road from Wickham Forest north to Live Oak; with Mr. Kamm responding it shows up in the traffic count on Wickham Road.

Commissioner Higgs stated the developer has done a good job; her concern is not the incompatibility, but the consequence of approving the development on the infrastructure at that location; and not even counting the City of Melbourne the real numbers of trips make her uneasy approving the rezoning that will create those consequences. She stated she is not sure the Board should go that way until it has a way of figuring out what to do.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Pineda study the Board is going to talk about next week details possible numbers of driveways; with Mr. Kamm responding they can look at that; and it is not explicit in the scope, but it is not a major addition and can be added. Commissioner Voltz stated FDOT would not allow that many traffic lights on Wickham Road in the short distances. Mr. Kamm advised there were speakers who referenced FDOT's spacing standards; FDOT follows its standards for its roads; however, they do not apply to County roads. He stated they look at those standards as good principals, but they are not obligated or bound to follow them in the same way that FDOT is; so there can be variations from those standards. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the County adopted the FDOT standards for its roads; with Mr. Kamm responding only for design and not for access management, which deals with driveways, spacing, traffic signals, etc. Commissioner Voltz inquired if there is a capacity problem and the Pineda Causeway could be extended, but not have an interchange with I-95 relatively quickly, is it a possibility to handle the lack of capacity the project would cause; with Mr. Kamm responding FDOT did a very detailed study of the extension of Pineda in 1988; as part of that study, they looked at an interchange and went through the first steps of the process and actually got approval for an interchange on I-95; those approvals do not go away once granted by the Federal Highway Administration; so what would be necessary is to go back and update that documentation. He stated the studies staff and other private entities who evaluate traffic in the area have done indicate that the Pineda Extension does provide relief to Wickham Road; and that is another thing they will verify and document in the planning study they are going to be doing, exactly what benefit does the County get from the Pineda extension with and without an interchange. He noted they will have numbers to make informed decisions about that. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the County roads have to be over capacity and improved in order to have an interchange; with Mr. Kamm responding the new requirement today is that the Federal Highway Administration would make the County maximize local street system before approving an interchange; however, the interchange granted in 1988 or 1989 pre-dates those regulations; and that approval is still there. He noted they need to ask FDOT, as part of the study, exactly what the status of that interchange is. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the County could bring Pineda extension to I-95 to address capacity; with Mr. Kamm responding it seems possible at this point. Commissioner Voltz stated the 860 homes will not be there next year and will take place over a period of years; and the County will have years to study the capacity issue in great detail. Mr. Kamm stated the connection at Wickham Road is important; and the Board needs to look at that to make sure it works with an interchange at I-95. Commissioner Voltz inquired if only PUD's and DRI's address the school issue and fire stations, etc.; with Mr. Enos responding only DRI's are subject to a higher level of scrutiny.

Commissioner Carlson expressed appreciation to the developer for working with the community and the applicant; and stated nobody is perfectly happy, but everybody will take a change. She stated there are no guarantees in zoning; approval does not give the developer a guarantee he will be issued building permits; there is a site plan approval process; and nothing may happen if the plan that comes from the MPO turns out it is too detrimental to do anything and the Board has to reassess it. She stated there are a lot of hurdles in terms of environmental issues, drainage, etc.; the alignment and traffic are the biggest issues; she has discomfort with the accuracy of the traffic counts; and asked the applicant if he is willing to wait until the traffic study is completed to determine the overall impact. Mr. Torpy responded not for the rezoning. He stated the study should be done in September, long before they will come in for permits; the Board will be able to tell them they cannot have permits if they do not have the capacity; but they need to move forward with the rezoning this evening.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the extension of the buffer area for Pineda Crossing on Tract A; with Mr. Torpy responding they have granted them the buffer they requested. Commissioner Carlson stated it does not continue on the Pineda Crossing undeveloped tracts; with Mr. Torpy responding the agreement they entered into with Pineda Crossing is for the buffer where their lots will be adjacent to the development; and if there is a conservation area,, there is no need for a buffer. Commissioner Carlson stated the buffer stops on Tract A and does not go all the way; with Mr. Torpy responding it stops where their houses stop, and that is what they asked for and what his clients agreed to do. Commissioner Carlson stated she would like to see it continue because there will be an outcry when the undeveloped Pineda Crossing tracts are developed; with Mr. Torpy stating they cannot build in the conservation area to the south, so that issue is not there. Pete Rudden stated Roy Pence did concede to a 100-foot buffer along the perimeter of Pineda Crossing as well as Windover Farms; but it is actually not continued at that point where Pineda Crossing has a preserve which is his back yard. He identified the area on a map; and requested continuance of the buffer. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the applicant agrees to do that; with Mr. Torpy responding that area is all natural conservation and there is nothing there now; and he was told Pineda Crossing set that aside as a conservation area. Mr. Pence stated their lots back up to the conservation area; and he will provide a buffer wherever his lots are contiguous to their lots. Mr. Torpy stated there is no need for a buffer between the back of a house and a conservation area; their houses back up to the conservation area, and so will Mr. Pence's houses in that area; and the conservation area becomes the buffer. Mr. Pence stated the environmental issues will be addressed by the County staff and St. Johns River Water Management District at the site plan approval stage; and they are very good at providing protection for conservation areas.

Commissioner Carlson stated it would not be advantageous to open up Turtle Mound Road to through traffic because it is a collector road with a lot of driveways; she has concerns about stormwater management; and inquired if staff is looking at stormwater and drainage issues in regard to impacts; with Ms. Busacca responding she is not aware if staff is looking at that, as it was not mentioned as being one of the priority areas. Ms. Busacca stated it may be a priority area, but it would come after the platted areas and North Merritt Island. Mr. Torpy stated as part of their site plan and permitting process, they will be required to address that so they do not flood other areas. He stated two agencies will be watching that; it is a requirement of the permitting process; all the environmental issues and stormwater issues must be addressed; but it is not addressed at the zoning stage. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board needs to put some sort of zoning on the property; the developer worked hard to get something that would be workable in the community; so she would move for approval with a BDP including the 17 conditions or stipulations.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Item 13 with a binding development plan that includes the 17 conditions and/or stipulations stated by the applicant's representative.

Chairman Scarborough stated Item 14 talks about the applicant agreeing to enter into a modification agreement to the Agreement between Brevard County and A. Duda & Sons; and inquired if that makes sense since they are not a party to the Agreement; with Mr. Torpy responding the applicant is A. Duda & Sons, and he has permission to represent them in the specific matter because they have agreed to it. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the reduction is for the entire length of the dedicated right-of-way; with Mr. Torpy responding no, just where it is adjacent to Windsor Estates.

Chairman Scarborough called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

Commissioner Carlson stated she would like to encourage the applicant to consider a few things; one is that they wait until the traffic studies are done and there is more information about drainage, which would be about September, before submitting a site plan; and the other is to consider linear parks and wildlife corridors within the development and other developments that are interested in connecting. She stated Barbara Meyer with the MPO can provide information on that. She inquired about the status of the cockaded woodpecker in the area of Jay Moynihan's development; with Ms. Busacca responding she does not know the answer to that.

Item 15. (Z9904501) Daniel S. and Beatrice Platt's request for change from AU to BU-2 on 14.40 acres located on the east side of Columbia Road, north of U.S. 192 which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board as BU-1 as amended by the applicant.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Item 15 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 16. (Z9903202) Glenn Edward and Donna Lee Northcraft's request for change from RR-1 to AU on 3? acres located on the south side of East Crisafulli Road, east of SR 3, which was recommended for denial by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to deny Item 16 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PORT ST. JOHN DEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICT BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS OF APRIL 7, 1999

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board, made at its public hearing on April 7, 1999, as follows:

Item 1. (PSJ90302) Brevard County Board of County Commissioners' request for change from GU to GML(P) on 192.70 acres located at the western terminus of Fay Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Item 1 as recommended by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ADMINISTRATIVE REZONINGS OF APRIL 5, 1999

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider recommendations of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board on administrative rezonings made at its public hearing on April 5, 1999 as follows:

Item 1. Section 17, Township 28, Range 38, Parcel 503.1, the portion zoned TU-1(20), owned by Vincent and Maria Taranto, from TU-1(20) to TR-3, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if TR-3 is consistent with surrounding zoning.

Vincent Taranto presented a picture and explained the locations of Spessard Holland Golf Course, the County's sewer plant, TR-3 for four seniors retirement parks, RU-2-10 area rezoned to TR-3 in 1998, the proposed rezoning, and a future area which he will bring before the Board in a few months for TR-3. He stated the majority of the area is zoned TR-3; and he supports the rezoning.

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

Items 2a-d. Section 11, Township 29, Range 38, Parcels 509, 510, 511, and 506, owned by Osvaldo Hector and Martha Ann Garziglia, Andrew and Mary Blasi, Frederick and Mary Hoff, and Floridron (South Shores) Limited, Inc., from RU-2-10 to RU-1-7, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

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

Items 3a-bb. Section 10, Township 29, Range 38, Parcels 791.0 - 791.Z, and 792, owned by Joseph Richardson, Eileen Smallman, William and Claire Munroe, Jr., Ramon Williamson, Gary Beckner, Joseph and Patricia Napolitano, Jane MacDonald Lemmon, Edward Boyer, Horace Woodside, Jr., Michael Youness, Murray Mantell, Alice Flynn Estate c/o Charles E. Flynn, Brian and Barbara Cullen, Patrick O'Riordan, Richard Brophy, Glyn and Michelle Davies, Paul and Catherine Gibson, Paul J. Guerne, Jr., Seward Sweet, Amos Lavandier, Paul Murgo, H. Patrick Ryan and Paul M. McElroy, et al, Terry and Lois Weibley, Joan Vilasi, George and Larry Ann Torrente, Donna Marshall Life Estate, John Bacaris, Jr., and Patricia R. E. Murphy, Trustee, from RU-2-10 to RU-2-8, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

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

Item 4. Section 14, Township 29, Range 38, Parcel 275, owned by Damien M. Glynn, from RU-2-4 to RU-2-10, which was withdrawn by staff for re-advertising.

The Board accepted withdrawal of Item 4.

Item 5. Section 10, Township 23, Range 36, Parcel 753, owned by Hawkins Enterprises, Inc., from SR to RR-1, which was tabled by the P&Z Board to its May 3, 1999 meeting and May 20, 1999 Board of County Commissioners meeting.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to table Item 5 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 6. Section 22, Township 23, Range 36, that portion of Parcel 772 designated as residential on the Future Land Use Map, owned by Robert G. and Genevieve Milliken, from BU-1 to BU-1-A, which was tabled by the P&Z Board to its May 3, 1999 meeting and May 20, 1999 Board of County Commissioners meeting at the request of the applicant, to apply for a Comprehensive Plan amendment.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to initiate Comprehensive Plan amendment for Item 6. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 7. Section 27, Township 23, Range 36, Parcel 20, owned by Diana O. Corlew, from RU-2-15 and RU-2-10(5), to EU, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

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 8a-c. Section 14, Township 23, Range 36, Parcel 754, Section 23, Township 23, Range 36, Parcels 8 and 259, owned by Charles B. Coven Family Trust, c/o 1st National Bank/Mt. Dora Trust Department, Domenic Mirabile, Community Land Corp. et al, and Wade A. Ivey, Trustee, from 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 Items 8a through c, as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Items 9a-h. Section 22, Township 23, Range 36, Parcels 750, 793, 771, 802, those portions designated as residential on the Future Land Use (FLU) Map; Section 34, Township 23, Range 36, Parcels 766 and 767 the portion zoned BU-1; Section 2, Township 24, Range 36, Parcels 251, 312, and 503, the portion designated as residential on the FLU map, owned by Daniel Carew and James T. Carew, et al, Peter Bizzarro, William J. and Carolyn J. Bubbers, Delmas R. Ellis Trustee and B. Bruce Watson, et al, Rosemary Hilbig, Elizabeth Anne Lewis, Trustee, and Santa Cruz Construction, Inc., from BU-1 and BU-2 to BU-1-A, of which Items 9a through g were recommended for approval by the P&Z Board, and Item 9h was tabled to its May 3, 1999 meeting and May 20, 1999 Board of County Commissioners meeting.

Commissioner O'Brien advised he received a memorandum dated May 6, 1999 from staff; and inquired what does it cover; with Mr. Enos responding some of Items 9 and 12 are suggested for Comprehensive Plan amendments; there are several lots on the east side of Courtenay Parkway that are zoned commercial for their entire depth, but the Mixed Use District (MUD) goes back only half way; so for some of those items, staff is proposing the back half be rezoned BU-1-A, so they would have BU-1 on the front and BU-1-A on the back; or the Board can direct staff to initiate Comprehensive Plan amendment to move the MUD boundary to the back to keep all their zoning.

Commissioner O'Brien stated at one time the entire parcel was BU-1; the County rezoned half of it, so the parcel is half BU-1 and half something else; and the Board should make an effort to restore the original zoning on the entire parcel. He stated there is commercial property on the north side of Grant Road in the middle of nowhere, which makes no sense. Mr. Enos stated staff is unanimous in suggesting a Comprehensive Plan amendment for those lots rather than rezoning. Commissioner O'Brien advised of the problem with Carl Signorelli's property.

Item 12c. Parcel 504, William C. Irvin and Richard H. Stottler, et al.

Charles Moehle advised the property was purchased 35 years ago and is in the same ownership; considerable money was spent on the purchase, holding, and taxes, etc.; and the rezoning is a diminution of value and partial taking. He stated it was purchased as a future investment, retirement, and to leave to their children. He stated the property has frontage on SR 3 on the front and Balboa Road on the back; and some uses that would be appropriate for that area but are not allowed in PIP are complete automobile repairs, boat building, repairing, overhauling, boat sales and service, bottling, canning works, bus shops and storage, cabinet and carpenter shops, some types of commercial schools, contractors offices that would allow storage, certain dog and pet hospitals, engine sales and service, farm machinery sales and service, fertilizer stores, flea markets, freight trucking terminals, and garage and mechanical service. Mr. Moehle advised what is allowed in PIP is limited servicing of automobiles or mechanical things such as tune-ups and oil changes, but not repairs. He noted other things that are not allowed are glass installation, lumberyards, electrical appliance and lighting fixture manufacturing, mobile home and travel trailer sales, and manufacturing or assembling of musical instruments, toys, and rubber metal stamps; and stated for some reason kindergartens are not allowed but day nurseries are.

Commissioner O'Brien stated there is a concerted effort to try and assure that SR 3, from the Barge Canal North, does not end up like Clearlake Road; with Mr. Moehle responding the County is not providing for IU property anywhere on North Merritt Island, and at the gate and across the street from 3M have been heavy industrial use for many years. Mr. Moehle stated the ex-Rinker cement plant was there also, so it is an appropriate area for IU. He stated it is not appropriate or fair to change the zoning; and requested the Comprehensive Plan be changed for that property. He stated another burden of PIP is the minimum lot size of one acre, whereas in IU it is half an acre; and the setbacks from the sides are 150 feet in PIP and 100 feet in IU, as well as a minimum requirement of ten acres for PIP.

Chairman Scarborough advised if Mr. Moehle is correct, there are other areas that may be in a similar situation; so if the County is going to proceed with a Comprehensive Plan amendment, it should do a Comprehensive Plan examination of all those parcels and not just spot changes, because it is not appropriate to have one parcel as IU and the rest as PIP. Commissioner O'Brien stated every time the Board considers rezoning, it looks at what is compatible all around the property; in this case it would be a sore thumb surrounded by PIP if it was left as IU.

Mr. Moehle stated there are existing uses across the street that are IU; it is the only place on Merritt Island where there is heavy industrial use; and IU is not heavy industrial use, but IU-1 is heavy use. Chairman Scarborough stated the same thought process that would prevail for Mr. Moehle should prevail for the whole area because the Comprehensive Plan is not a property issue. He stated the Board will be going into extensive discussion on a new concept of how to do industrial zoning and compatibility; and suggested tabling the entire Item to determine if there is something that would make more sense after the Board's discussion next week. Commissioner O'Brien stated he is willing to do that, and will make a motion to table.

Commissioner O'Brien stated Mr. Blasky's property is also listed to be rezoned from AU to PIP; PIP rezonings are proposed on that portion of properties that are designated PIP on the Future Land Use Map; and inquired if the Board is just changing the designation on the FLU map and leaving the zoning as it is presently; with Mr. Enos responding yes, Mr. Blasky's property is one of five parcels currently zoned AU where the Comprehensive Plan designates PIP; so this is the first time with up zoning from agriculture to industrial. Mr. Enos advised Mr. Blasky wants to keep his property AU so that would require a Comprehensive Plan amendment; and the five parcels in that circumstance are 12 a, 12n, 12o, 12v and 12w which includes Mr. Blasky's property. Mr. Blasky stated the change would fractionalize the property with most of it AU and a small portion as PIP. Chairman Scarborough recommended denying the rezoning and instructing staff to start Comprehensive Plan changes.

Item 9a. Parcel 750. James Carew.

James Carew advised the property is owned by him and his two brothers; they purchased it in 1986; it was an acre and a half before they took 40 feet of the front in eminent domain to make the road wider; and the property next door and to the south is zoned IU. He stated after he spent 14 years paying for the BU-1 property, which he bought with intentions of using it for BU-1, someone decided to change it; and he does not want his property to be down zoned and wants it to remain as it is. He stated they all live behind the property; their property is zoned RR-1; they have a private easement; it will be next to residential even if they take half of it and make it BU-1-A; so he will have to provide a buffer.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the P&Z Board recommended the item be tabled. Chairman Scarborough stated the P&Z Board approved administrative rezoning for 9a. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the property will remain BU-1 and only the zoning on the FLU map would change; with Mr. Enos responding if staff initiates a Comprehensive Plan amendment on the property as well as the other seven suggested, rather than have each one of the people make their own request, the Board can direct staff to do it for all seven parcels. He noted they all have the circumstance where they have BU-1 all the way to the depth, but the MUD only goes half way back; and staff would have to rezone just the back half and leave the front as BU-1, which may not make a lot of sense. He suggested staff be directed to initiate Comprehensive Plan amendment on Items 6, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d, 9f, and 9h. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the Board does that, what will be the final outcome; with Mr. Enos responding if the Board approves the Comprehensive Plan amendment, the zoning will stay BU-1 on all of it. He stated the Board would basically be tabling these items until the Comprehensive Plan amendment happens, then staff will withdraw the zoning changes. Commissioner O'Brien advised Mr. Carew if the Board proceeds with Comprehensive Plan amendment, his property will remain BU-1. Mr. Carew thanked the Board, noting that is all he wanted.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired about the other items; with Mr. Enos responding it will be the same Comprehensive Plan amendment, but will go to residential in order to keep their AU.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to initiate Comprehensive Plan amendment to Mixed Use for Items 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d, 9f, and 9h, and approve 9e and 9g as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

Item 10. Section 02, Township 24, Range 36, Parcel 284, owned by Timothy and Linda Mills, from BU-1 and BU-2 to BU-1, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Commissioner Higgs advised Item 10 was withdrawn by staff due to existing use.

Item 11. Section 23, Township 23, Range 36, Parcel 258, owned by Military Construction Corp., from IU-1 to BU-2, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

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

Item 12. Section 13, Township 23, Range 36, Subdivision 50, Lot 6.01; Section 13, Township 23, Range 36, Parcels 502, 504, 505, 504.1, 506, 507, 503; Section 24, Township 23, Range 36, Parcels 251, and 250 that portion designated PIP on the FLU map; Section 11, Township 24, Range 36, Parcels 500, 257, 255, 275.1 through 277, 279 through 282, 283 through 284.D, 284.E through 285.C, 262, 252 that portion designated PIP on the FLU map, 260 that portion designated PIP on the FLU map, 268 that portion designated PIP on the FLU map, 264, 265, 269 PIP zoning with PIP FLU map - SR with residential FLU map, 251, 260.1; and Section 11, Township 24, Range 36, Subdivision 75, Lots 4, 5 and 6, owned by K. S. Properties of Merritt Island, Inc., Santa Cruz Construction, Inc., William Irvin and Richard Stottler, et al, LaVergne and Eleanor Williams, Trustees, William Edward and Julie Gunn, Co-trustees, Donald H. Gabbert, Pinner Grovers, Inc., Mae McCreary Life Estate, Henry and Ada Parrish, Jr., B & R Enterprises of Brevard, Inc., Florida Power & Light Company, Loyal Order of the Moose Lodge, Eldwood and Patricia Wardlow, Raymond and Donas Stites, Harvey Indian River Groves, Inc., John Smith, Jr. and Phillip Fahey, Jr., Nancy Rendahl, Brevard County, Michael and Anita Blasky, and Phyllis Walker c/o D. E. Walter, from AU and IU to PIP, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board except for Items 12a, 12v, and 12w which were recommended for Comprehensive Plan amendment.

Commissioner O'Brien advised he would like to take care of the items on the list and ask staff to begin the process to make the changes. Chairman Scarborough inquired what specific items is Commissioner O'Brien referring to; with Commissioner O'Brien responding Items 12a, 12n, 12o, 12v, and 12w. Mr. Enos advised 12s is slightly different circumstance; the planned industrial goes back almost the entire depth of the property; and staff is suggesting the Board direct it to bring the planned industrial to the entire depth of the property because there is a little piece in the back that is residential.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to initiate Comprehensive Plan amendment to residential on Items 12a, 12n, 12o, 12v, and 12w, and to Planned Industrial on Item 12s.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if there will be community input and discussions on the Comprehensive Plan amendment; with Mr. Enos responding yes, it will be a public hearing. Chairman Scarborough inquired about notices; with Mr. Enos responding if the Board wants staff to send notices, they can do it.

Chairman Scarborough called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

Mr. Carew stated when they bought the property in 1986, it was for a specific purpose; his brother builds tour buses for rock and roll bands, and built Willie Nelson's bus; he is in Phoenix right now, and received the registered letter; but he was not sent a notice. Chairman Scarborough asked Mr. Carew to give his name and address to Mr. Enos so he can be notified.

Chairman Scarborough stated the Board has not talked about tabling items; and inquired if it will be a separate motion; with Commissioner O'Brien responding yes. Chairman Scarborough recommending tabling any action until the Board sees what the new rules are going to be, as the Board may be talking about totally different things in a month or so of what is IU, what is PIP, moving PIP into commercial zones, etc.; and PIP could be emerged into the concept of being in a shopping center. Mr. Moehle inquired if the Board is going to table 12c until after its workshop; with Chairman Scarborough responding everything that deals with IU to PIP he would like to have tabled.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to table Items 12b, 12c, 12d, 12e, 12g, 12l, 12m, 12p, 12q, 12r, and 12t, currently zoned IU to September 2, 1999; and approve rezoning to PIP for Items 12f, 12h, 12I, 12j, 12k, and 12u. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 62, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 62, Land Development Regulations, to provide for independent living facilities.

Attorney Leonard Spielvogel advised changes were made to the ordinance since the first reading; they met with homeowners in Barefoot Bay, Micco, and Grant; and the concept was well received. He stated what the Board has before it is the result of a lot of meetings.

Commissioner Higgs advised it is not appropriate to locate a facility in IU, AU, IU-1, PIP, GML or PBP; and it should be in multifamily categories. Commissioner O'Brien inquired why not IU if there is property they want to build a facility on; with Commissioner Higgs responding IU would be surrounded by other industrial parcels and the uses would not be good for seniors. She stated there should not be intense development in AU, so it does not belong there either.

There being no further comments heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 62, Land Development Regulations, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Article VI, Section 62-1102, "Definitions and Rules of Construction," to add a definition of independent living facility; amending Article VI, Section 62-1935.8, establishing a conditional use permit and conditions for independent living facilities; amending Article VI, Sections 62-1334(3), 62-1371(3), 62-1372(3), 62-1373(3), 62-1481(3), 62-1482(3), 62-1483(3), 62-1541(3), 62-1542(3), 62-1543(3), 62-1544(3), and 62-1572(3), to add "independent living facility" as a conditional use in the agricultural residential (AU), the low-density multiple-family residential (RU-2-4, RU-2-6 and RU-2-8), the medium-density multiple-family residential (RU-2-10, RU-2-12 and RU-2-15), the high-density multiple-family residential (RU-2-30), the restricted neighborhood retail commercial (BU-1-A), the general retail commercial (BU-1), the retail, warehousing and wholesale commercial (BU-2), the planned business park (PBP), the planned industrial park (PIP), the light industrial (IU), the heavy industrial (IU-1), and the government managed lands (GML) zoning classifications respectively; providing for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; providing an effective date; and providing for inclusion in the Brevard County Code, as amended to remove all zoning classifications except multiple-family zoning categories for location of independent living facilities. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners O'Brien and Scarborough voted nay.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 11:39 p.m.

ATTEST:

TRUMAN SCARBOROUGH, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK (SEAL)