March 6, 2003

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on March 6, 2003, at 5:35 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairperson Jackie Colon, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Ron Pritchard, Nancy Higgs, and Susan Carlson, Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca, and Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley.

The Invocation was given by Commissioner Nancy Higgs.

Commissioner Jackie Colon led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

REPORT, RE: OPPOSING HOUSE BILL ON TRANSPORTATION

Transit Services Director Jim Liesenfelt stated a bill has been filed in the Florida House that would take away the County’s Transportation Disadvantaged Trust Fund, which is worth $1 million to the County; and it would also make the County responsible for Medicaid transportation without any funding attached, which currently is approximately $1.5 million. He stated the State Association and the Florida Transportation Commission are looking for support from the counties to oppose the bill; and requested the Board send a letter opposing the bill.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize sending a letter to members of the Legislative Delegation opposing the House bill that would take away the County’s Transportation Disadvantaged Trust Fund and make the County responsible for Medicaid transportation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: TICO AIR SHOW

Commissioner Pritchard stated on March 7, 8, and 9, 2003 at Space Coast Regional Airport, the Warbirds will be taking off for the Tico Air Show; and recommended everyone attend.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: ELECTION DAY

Commissioner Pritchard stated Tuesday, March 11, 2003 is election day; but individuals can vote any day prior to March 11. He stated the races are for State Senator for Senate District 26 and State Representative for House District 30; and encouraged everyone to vote.

REPORT, RE: SNUG HARBOR COMPLIANCE DATE EXTENSION

Commissioner Higgs stated a notice was received from the attorney for the Snug Harbor utility advising the compliance date for residents installing backflow devices has been extended to March 31, 2003; and at that time there will be information about further extension depending on how things are going.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING EAGLE SCOUT JOSHUA L. WICKHAM

Commissioner Carlson stated Joshua Wickham is the son of Dave Wickham and the grandson of former County Commissioner Joe Wickham, for whom Wickham Road is named. She read aloud a resolution commending Eagle Scout Joshua L. Wickham for his accomplishments.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution recognizing the achievements of Joshua L. Wickham including his achievement of the rank of Eagle Scout. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 03-071.)

Commissioner Carlson inquired what is Krav Maga; with Mr. Wickham responding it is Israeli street combat fighting, which is a martial arts style that is becoming popular in the United States. Commissioner Carlson inquired about Mr. Wickham’s project; with Mr. Wickham responding the project took a long time; he researched the historical significance of buildings in the downtown Eau Gallie; and with the help of sponsors, he made and placed the historical landmark signs. Commissioner Carlson presented the Resolution to Mr. Wickham.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING STUDENTS OF SATELLITE BEACH HIGH SCHOOL
LATIN PROGRAM AND TEACHER BETTY TSATIRIS

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised Ms. Tsatiris was her Latin teacher at Melbourne High School.

Commissioner Carlson read aloud a resolution commending students of the Satellite Beach High School Latin Program and their teacher Betty Tsatiris for their outstanding achievements at the National Latin Forum at the University of Kentucky.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution commending the students of the Satellite Beach High School Latin Program, Lisa Lee, Steven Milley, Alice Artz, Heather Albright, Karen Riewe, David Martin, Michelle Brown, Jennifer Bewerse, and Maggie Heim, and their teacher Betty Tsatiris for their outstanding achievements at the National Latin Forum at the University of Kentucky in August 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 02-072.)

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING STUDENTS OF SATELLITE BEACH HIGH SCHOOL
LATIN PROGRAM AND TEACHER BETTY TSATIRIS

Commissioner Carlson presented the Resolution to Ms. Tsatiris. Betty Tsatiris stated the students worked very hard; they go to district and State competitions; this is all voluntary on their part; many have to study during the summer months; and they are a pleasure to teach.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING EAGLE SCOUT ALEXANDER M. THOMAS

Commissioner Carlson read aloud a resolution recognizing Eagle Scout Alexander M. Thomas for his accomplishments.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution recognizing the achievements of Alexander M. Thomas including his achievement of the rank of Eagle Scout. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 03-073.)

Commissioner Carlson presented the Resolution to Mr. Thomas. Mr. Thomas expressed appreciation for the Resolution; and commented on the benefits of scouting.

ITEMS REMOVED FROM AGENDA AND TABLED TO OTHER MEETINGS

Commissioner Pritchard stated there has been a request to table Item III.A.4. Chairperson Colon advised there have been requests to table Items III.A.1 to May 22, 2003, III.A.4 to April 10, 2003, and Item III.B.7 to April 10, 2003.

Item 1. (Z0210403) The Pantry, Inc.’s request for change from TU-2 to BU-1, removing the existing CUP for Gasoline Pumps and Gasoline Sales on 0.67+ acre located on the north side of Wickham road, west of George T. Edwards Drive, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board, and requested to be tabled by the applicant.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table Item 1 to May 22, 2003 Board of County Commissioners meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 4. Yves Clerc, as Trustee’s request for change from RU-1-11 and RU-2-15 to all RU-2-15 with a CUP for a Residential/Recreational marina on 9.48± acres located on the west side of N. Banana River Drive, north of SR 520, which was recommended by the P&Z Board for approval as RU-2-15 with a BDP, limiting density to 68 units, and denial of the CUP for a Residential/Recreational Marina.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table Item 4 to April 10, 2003 Board of County Commissioners meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 7. (Z0302501) Scott J. Palmer and Robert A. and Sandra Johnson’s request for change from AU to BU-1-A on 0.06 acre, located on the north side of US 192, west of Katherine Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table Item 7 to April 10, 2003 Board of County Commissioners meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESCHEDULE, RE: SOLID WASTE WORKSHOP

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to postpone the Solid Waste workshop originally scheduled on March 20, 2003 to a future date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: COST SAVINGS FOR NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REZONING

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated staff suggests using a less expensive method of notification to property owners of administrative rezonings of some Conditional Use Permits that are non-controversial.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize staff to use First Class Mail to notify property owners of administrative rezonings of some Conditional Use Permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF SHIP AND HOME FUNDING, RE: AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING FOR
PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS

J. B. Kenna, Programming and Planning, stated the Board approved the allocation of $340,000 to Hope Properties, Inc. (Sonrise Haven) in HOME and HOME CHDO funds and authorized the Chairperson to execute contracts contingent upon the award not exceeding 120% of the appraised value, pending approval of the County Attorney and Risk Management; and the proposed purchase contract expires on March 13, 2003. He stated subsequent to the decision of the Affordable Housing Council, staff discovered an issue that may affect the eligibility of the applicant; each applicant who applies for this funding certifies, in accordance with the federal regulations, that the applicant and its principals must not within a three year period preceding the proposal be indicted or otherwise criminally or civilly charged with the commission of any offenses in connection with the commission of fraud, violation of Federal Anti-trust Statutes, embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; and staff discoverer a board member of Hope Properties, identified as the Director of Property Acquisitions and Development and Director of Construction, has pled guilty to five felony indictments for making false statements regarding the improvement of real property and has five other indictments pending.

Jack Gilbert, President of Hope Properties, Inc., stated they are a not-for-profit 501C3 organization in Brevard County, located in Palm Bay; they want to build three homeless facilities in the County for women, children, and families; and the application is part of that package. He stated they applied to Department of Children and Families for $634,000 as a grant to do the construction; they applied to the County under the RFP that was submitted for SHIP and HOME funds; and they were awarded $340,000 by the Affordable Housing Council. He stated the board of directors at Hope Properties consisted of five individuals at the time; four of the individuals are ordained ministers; and the fifth individual had a history of some issues in his past. He stated that individual made them aware of the issues, that he pled guilty to the charges, and that adjudication was withheld; and for him, that represented that he did not have a conviction. He stated the individual also indicated that he had judgments against his former company, but not against himself, so he did not realize this as being a violation of the form. He stated staff has indicated it may be a violation and that he still had pending charges from the State and was a co-defendant in a similar case; they were not aware there was still an active case and that charges were still pending; and to rectify the situation, they removed the individual from the board of directors and from any key role or responsibility. He advised the individual is not working on the properties at all; and requested they be approved for the funding. He stated they have several layers of protection in place for the County; they are placing a 50-year lien on the property for funds that would be provided as part of the grant, if it is awarded to them; and if there are any improprieties along the way, the County is protected by the lien. He stated there are several layers of protection; they are a very hands-on type of group; they are team oriented; they have three general contractors on staff; and he is the qualifier for the general contracting company. He advised he is a State-certified general contractor; and there are two other general contractors on staff. He stated Mr. Robert Pickett is the financial director; he has 15 years banking experience as a senior loan officer; and he handles the finances for the companies.

Chairperson Colon inquired where does that put the County if the gentleman is no longer part of the board of directors. Mr. Kenna stated staff’s analysis of the Code of Regulations and discussions with HUD representatives in the Jacksonville office offer the Board the opportunity, upon verification of removal of the board member from the Hope Properties board, as confirmed by the State Department of Business Regulations, Division of Corporations, to consider this a cure and render Hope Properties eligible for further consideration of this award.

Commissioner Higgs stated the market value on the property being considered for purchase is $74,000; but the agenda item says they are going to purchase the property for $340,000; and requested an explanation of the difference. Mr. Gilbert advised Mr. Pickett will explain; stated he submitted a site plan; the first stage will be 14 individual units for 14 individuals; the second phase is an additional 84 units, for a total of 98 units in the City of Palm Bay; and they are leveraging those funds from the DCF grant and the County grant to purchase the property and are writing a tax credit application to the State to build a $5 million facility. Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Gilbert is proceeding with the $340,000 that is being allocated tonight to buy the 5.3 acres, but there is no assurance beyond this that there will be additional use of the property. Mr. Gilbert stated the property is required; they are going to need that much property in order to provide that many units; there are no assurances today that they will be awarded future funding; but they will continue to make applications until they do achieve the required funding. Commissioner Higgs stated the property will be purchased; and inquired what will happen to the property if they never get the additional funding; with Mr. Gilbert responding at a minimum, they will have the 14 units. Commissioner Higgs noted they will have additional land; with Mr. Gilbert agreeing.

Robert Pickett advised he has been with Hope Properties since the end of the last calendar year; and submitted a handout including a memorandum from MAI appraiser William Benson showing several listings of real property and verifying their research.

Commissioner Higgs stated there is a property value on the Property Appraiser’s record of $74,000; and inquired why is Hope Properties going to pay far in excess of that. Mr. Pickett stated most people in the real estate or appraisal profession will advise they do not rely on the Property Appraiser’s value for a purchase price or recommendation of value for property; the standard textbook definition of market value is what someone is willing to sell and buy for; and his research indicates the average selling price in the area is between $60,000 and $70,000 an acre, as indicated by the spreadsheet provided. He commented on the cost of an alternate site, assessments of properties in the area, and market values. He stated value of vacant land is dependent on the last time it was sold and on what the market is doing at the time; and value to the use must also be considered. He stated the property is of sufficient size to get enough units on the property, and it has proximity to schools, medical facilities, bus stops, grocery stores, and pharmacies; so it is valuable to their use as well as comparable to what is on the market.

Commissioner Higgs stated the values given were on pending contracts; and inquired how Mr. Pickett has knowledge of them. Mr. Pickett responded he has done some research with Mr. Benson and probed the sellers; they have talked to every property owner within a one-mile radius; and he has spoken to out-of-state sellers who were not willing to sell. He stated he looked at the Property Appraiser’s records, found out who owned the properties, and contacted them to ask to buy the property; and they did a thorough search.

Commissioner Carlson stated the spreadsheet says there are 5.6 acres in question and it gives the figures, $66,118 and $60,7114; and inquired if that is per acre. Mr. Pickett responded if they close in December 2003 the contract price would be $370,000; but they negotiated a discount to $340,000 if they could close a little quicker; and they need to get the property built to comply with the DCF constraints. Commissioner Carlson stated her point is it is not $60,000 for all five acres; so it is in line with other properties. Mr. Gilbert stated two of the properties that were listed have been awarded funds from the County and are going forward to the State level for tax credit applications; the applications that were submitted are public knowledge and the contracts have already been endorsed; and they were available for review so they got the exact numbers of what the land sold for.

Commissioner Higgs inquired what happens to the five acres if further awards are not given to Hope Properties to build further; with Mr. Kenna responding the land use restrictions would indicate that it could only be used for an affordable housing project for the 50-year lien period; so if no other funds were obtained, there would only be 14 units on the property. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the owner would maintain control of the land and it would sit without anything although it would be under their ownership; with Mr. Kenna responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Affordable Housing Council made the recommendation for the $340,000 purchase based on the assumption that further units would be built beyond the 14; with Mr. Kenna responding he does not believe so, but they were briefed by Mr. Gilbert during the process. Mr. Gilbert stated they made the application based strictly on the 14 units that they knew they could provide today and for which funding is in place; and they did inform the Affordable Housing Council of their future plan for the rest of the property. Commissioner Higgs stated the zoning is RM-10; with Mr. Gilbert advising it is RM-20. Commissioner Higgs stated it would be 20 units an acre; one would assume that the surrounding properties are intending to put a large number of units there; she knows there is an application before the City Council for another unit, so she can understand the purchase price if one were building a large number of units, but all they have assurance of at this point is 14 units.

Mr. Gilbert stated that is what is on the application; the City of Palm Bay is very much in support of this; a site plan is in for review on 98 units for the entire site; and the City has been making parking lot concessions, and has written a letter of acceptance that this would be acceptable. He stated when they started the process, they went to the City of Palm Bay to ask the Planning and Zoning Department where would be the best suitable place to build a shelter for women and children. He stated there is no shelter in Palm Bay, nor in Titusville; there is no place for individuals who are victims of domestic violence or spousal abuse, or sexual abuse of their children; and that is the group of homeless people that has grown the most rapidly. He stated a lot of the homeless are women who are working, but they become homeless because they cannot make enough money to support their families.

Commissioner Higgs stated no one questions the need for the shelter; but they are looking at an acquisition with some assurances made, and whether or not the purchase of the property is at a reasonable price. Mr. Gilbert reiterated they presented it to the Affordable Housing Council as 14 units because that is what they can provide today.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he met this morning with Sherry Gilbert, and was presented with application packages as well as a development package; and he has never seen application packages with more irregularities. He stated the person who resigned from the board of directors was apparently the person who had the experience necessary in order to move forward with the project; yet he had all the issues dealing with a potential debarment as well as a bankruptcy. He stated he has a note on Florida Health Care Foundation letterhead, not with Ms. Gilbert’s signature; and he only picked up a couple of the pieces. He stated the Board needs to review the application process because he is concerned that the application was not properly filled out; he does not know if there was any intent to deliberately falsify or why the application was filled out as it was; but there are many issues the Board needs to address. He stated he does not want to participate in something that may not have been appropriate and filled out in the correct manner; and the Board can take three positions today, approve, refer it back, or deny based upon a potential falsification of the documents. He stated at this point he is inclined to deny based on the information he received this morning and lack of opportunity to review that information.

Chairperson Colon stated she is comfortable with moving this item forward; she has not heard from staff regarding any impropriety of the application; if there is something she was not briefed on, she would want to know that now; and the only issue with which she had concerns was the appraisal of the land and that has been answered. Mr. Kenna responded some of this is new information to staff as Commissioner Pritchard indicated; the information before the Board today was not available to the Affordable Housing Council when it made its selection; and advised there are three best options for the Board to consider. He stated the first option is to agree that this is curable should the board member be removed and things made right; and the Board could consider the award further in that case. He stated the second option would be to deny based on the false certification; and the third option would be to refer it back to the Affordable Housing Council with all of the new information, allow the group to review it again along with staff, and bring it back to the Board.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the memorandum that was produced by Mr. Kenna yesterday reiterates in paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 that the president of Hope Properties signed an affidavit certifying that neither he nor any principals were ineligible or federally debarred based on this requirement; staff discovered that a board member of Hope Properties, identified as the Director of Property Acquisition and Development has five indictments; staff reviewed the regulatory requirements; an analysis of the requirements indicates that Hope Properties is not currently debarred; but eligibility for debarment would render Sonrise Haven ineligible for federal funding. He stated this did not just happen; when the application package is reviewed, the dates on which certain activities occurred were prior to applications being filed; some of the other irregularities were also prior or continued through the process; there is a history of irregularities that was included in the application process; and that is what he has a problem with. He stated the game should be played on a fair and level playing field; but that is not what happened. He stated he is not against building facilities that are going to provide safe havens; he is not opposed to going after grants; but he is opposed to not having a level and responsible playing field.

Mr. Gilbert stated he would like to answer some of the allegations; Sherry Gilbert is his soon-to-be ex-wife; they are going through a bitter divorce; and what she displayed to Commissioner Pritchard is the fruition of a threat she made to try and destroy the application and the process of the homeless facility they are trying to build. He noted she works for a competitor; and it was very self-serving of her to come forward with that type of information and put that type of allegation before the Board. He commented on a letter from Florida Health Care, the fact sheet, everything being aboveboard and in compliance with the application, and receiving top score on the application. He stated they kept everything in compliance exactly the way it was supposed to be; and if there are any improprieties, they were not done on an intentional basis or with his knowledge.

The meeting recessed at 6:20 p.m. and reconvened at 6:30 p.m.

Chairperson Colon stated the Board has heard testimony from both sides; and inquired what are the wishes of the Board.

Commissioner Pritchard stated there are three options that he discussed, and Mr. Kenna for the most part reiterated those; and there are two to consider, refer it back to the Affordable Housing Council for review and bring it back to the Board, or deny the request until the Board has an opportunity to review the issues of concern. He stated the better option may be to refer it back to the Housing Council; he would be comfortable with either option; but he would not be comfortable approving this item.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to refer the item back to the Affordable Housing Council for review.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he will not be voting in favor; if the Board refers it back, it is not an appropriate action; the Board should not reward someone who does not tell the truth on an application; and commented on Enron and WorldCom.

Commissioner Pritchard withdrew his second.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to deny allocation of $340,000 to Sonrise Haven (Hope Properties, Inc.) in HOME and HOME CHDO funds for affordable rental housing for persons with special needs. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH MORDEHAY AND JEANNINE LANIADO, RE:
SHOPPING PLAZA

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated the item is to change the trustee name in the Laniado case; Mr. Spielvogel has retired; and this will allow moving forward with construction of the site.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Amendment to Agreement with Mordehay and Jeannine Laniado, changing escrow agent from Attorney Leonard Spielvogel to Attorney Mason Hedman. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Amendment to Agreement.)

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: TABLED ITEMS FROM PLANNING AND ZONING MEETINGS OF
OCTOBER 7, 2002, NOVEMBER 4, 2002, AND JANUARY 6, 2003

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider tabled items from the Planning and Zoning meetings of October 7, 2002, November 4, 2002, and January 6, 2003, as follows:

Item 1. (Z0210403) The Pantry, Inc. Tabled earlier in the meeting to May 22, 2003 Board of County Commissioners meeting.

Item 2. Section 12, Township 26, Range 36, Parcels 3 and 19, owned by Swiss Lakes Development Corporation, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of CUP Z-5666 for Borrow Pit.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if this is just for removal of the conditional use permit; with Zoning Official Rick Enos responding that is correct.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 2 as recommended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 3. (Z0210302) Old Catholic Church in America’s request for CUP for a Church in an SR zone, removing the existing CUP for a Residential Social Service Facility on 1.57 acres located on the southwest corner of Florida Avenue and Dairy Road, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley stated there were questions about the ownership and issuance of a quitclaim deed; and that item has been resolved satisfactorily.

Attorney Richard Torpy, representing the Old Catholic Church in America, stated he has been before the Board previously requesting a conditional use permit for Father Conway and his church to put a small church at the location; and there has been some opposition, particularly from the neighbors immediately to the west and concern from other neighbors. He requested the members of the church to stand in support of the project; with approximately 12 people standing.

Chairperson Colon inquired if the members live in the area; with Mr. Torpy responding some do and some do not. Mr. Torpy requested the church members who live in the area raise their hands; with approximately half of the group raising their hands.

Mr. Torpy stated the first time they came to the Board, they proposed a binding development plan or agreement to address some of the neighbor’s concerns with regard to buffering; and he will remind the Board of some of those items. He stated they agreed there would be no more than 115 persons at any one time collectively for all the structures on the property; there will be a couple of different structures on the property when it is completed, each with its own individual occupancy of approximately 90 to 110 people; and they do not want there to be concern that there would be as many as 200+ people on the site at any one time, so they agreed to the maximum use of the site at 115 people at any one time. He stated they also agreed there would not be more than 45% impervious surface on the site; that is consistent with County Code; and it addresses the concern raised about how much of the site was going to be used by structures and parking. Mr. Torpy stated they have also agreed to construct, at the church’s expense, a six-foot high concrete wall running down the entire western boundary of the property, specifically between the Tsamoutales property and the church; and they have agreed the wall will be finished on both sides to be consistent with the elevation of the church. He noted Mr. and Mrs. Tsamoutales are requesting eight feet; but he does not think that can be done and would open Pandora’s box because many neighbors get concerned when there is a wall that is too high. He noted six feet is what County Code will currently allow. He stated they also wanted to address the traffic concern; ingress only to the church site will be on Florida Avenue; one of the concerns of the neighbors was when church lets out, if egress is allowed onto Florida Avenue, it might create a congested situation, so they have agreed that egress will be to Dairy Road only. He stated the initial binding development agreement said the hours of operation would be consistent with County Code; the issue was raised that there may not be a specific County Code on the operation of a church; so they have modified the hours of operation to no later than 10:30 p.m. on a weekend, and no later than 10:00 p.m. on a weekday. He stated at no time, barring events of natural disaster, will the facility be used as a soup kitchen or transient residential accommodation; and it will comply with all County Codes and regulations. He advised he had several conversations with the Tsamoutales family and their representative regarding attempts to resolve the disputed issues; they have asked to have the retention pond as well as the block wall on the western boundary; but they had to respectfully decline because the neighbor to the south is entitled to some sort of buffering; and putting the retention pond and the wall on the west is unfair. He stated they have attempted to accommodate Mr. and Mrs. Tsamoutales, but they have not been able to reach an agreement. He stated the use is consistent and compatible; it would not be consistent and compatible for use as single-family residential; and requested the Board consider this and approve the conditional use permit.

Steven Kellner, Past President of the Whisperwoods Subdivision, stated he is currently a member of the eight-member board of directors for the subdivision; and he is here tonight speaking on behalf of the board members as well as the majority of the homeowners in Whisperwoods Subdivision. He stated they held a meeting in January 2003 where the rezoning of this property was brought up; approximately 30% of the families were represented at that meeting; many families spoke out against the rezoning; and no one at the meeting spoke in support of the rezoning, so the majority of the homeowners of Whisperwoods are against the rezoning of this property. He stated the first reason they oppose it is the traffic concern; and the concern with the solution presented by Mr. Torpy is if all traffic is egressing onto Dairy Road, they will all be forced to turn right or go south on Dairy Road because of the median that is in front of the property on Dairy Road. He stated anyone wishing to go north on Dairy Road will be forced to go right and make a U-turn to go north; the most likely place for them to make the U-turn is at the front entrance to their subdivision; and he understands Mr. and Mrs. Tsamoutales do not want the egress onto Florida Avenue, but they are not crazy about it being on Dairy Road because of the concern about making a U-turn in front of their subdivision. He stated there were implications that the home is not currently inhabitable, but somebody is living in that home now; the three new homes built on Dairy Road to the north of the property are even closer to Dairy Road than this home; and all three homes sold very quickly and are inhabited now, so he is not sure why there would be a claim that the property is not habitable. He stated the property is surrounded by residential properties on all sides; and it does not seem right to use a property in the center of residential properties for non-residential purposes. He stated they are concerned about the size of the property and whether it is large enough to accommodate the building that is there, the home that is there, the garage, and the 4,000 square-foot building they intend to put on the property plus parking and retention pond. He stated they are sympathetic to Mr. and Mrs. Tsamoutales; he would not want this type of property next to his home; and he would not want to look at a parking lot, retention pond, or a large building not intended for residential purposes. He stated the biggest concern is the conditional use permit, which says they would be able to use this property as a church, club, or senior center with a 4,000 square-foot structure on it; and inquired what happens if they have to close their doors. He stated one would think the property would go back to being residential; but they do not see how it could be considered residential with a 4,000 square-foot building, parking lot, and retention pond on it. He stated they do not know how it would be called a conditional use permit once all the additional structures are built on the property; and they do not see how it could be used in the future as a residential property. He advised a church a block south of the property closed its doors in the last two years because it did not have the support necessary to continue as a viable church; and it went unused for quite some time. He stated if this church does not succeed, they are concerned about what would happen to the property; they are concerned the property would be used as a stepping stone for further uses that are not consistent with the area; and requested these concerns be taken into account.

Carlton Holder stated he lives in the neighborhood just west of this property; and expressed appreciation to Commissioner Higgs for her assistance in helping to alleviate the traffic problems on the west end of Florida Avenue. He stated his major concern is the traffic that will be accumulating at the corner of Dairy Road and Florida Avenue; they are proposing to have ingress off of Florida Avenue onto the property; it is approximately six car lengths from Dairy Road; a large new neighborhood is going up just to the west that will have a lot of traffic coming onto Dairy Road; and it is going to be a major problem. He stated they will have six or seven cars backed up there; they will be coming off of Dairy Road, turning right to head west onto Florida, and then left into the church; and their entrance is going to be blocked. He stated he foresees major traffic problems at the intersection.

Chic Brown stated he is not against the church; there are other churches within a block; but those churches are on large pieces of land with plenty of space for parking, grass, and trees. He stated if another building is put on the property in question with 115 parking spaces, he does not think there will be grass or trees left in the area. He stated he thinks of a church as being busy on Wednesday nights, Sunday mornings, and Sunday nights; but Father Conway mentioned he intends to put a running track around the property so people can attend in the mornings, do their exercises out there, and have coffee and a meeting inside the big meeting building. He stated there is a big boat there now, which is not very church-like; and inquired will they also be getting trucks, trailers, and things like that parked out there. He inquired is it going to be a place that is used daily and many times during the week besides just the church services; and is it going to be like a club and meeting area; and stated if so, that is going to add to the traffic problem. He stated when 260 new homes go in at the end of the road, they are going to open the street to Hollywood Boulevard; that is going to become a busy thoroughfare with people cutting through to avoid Eber Road; and all of the traffic and congestion will be at the corner where the church is proposed to be located.

Nick Tsamoutales submitted paperwork to the Board and Mr. Torpy; stated he and his wife purchased the property next door to the property in question; and he is going to discuss some of the provisions of the County Ordinances that make reference to what must be established and the responsibilities of a conditional use permit. He stated Section 62-1901 indicates the initial burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that all applicable standards and criteria are met; applications that do not satisfy this burden cannot be approved; and the Board has heard no evidence on any of the items of concern that are set out in the Ordnance relative to approval of a conditional use permit. He noted Mr. Torpy’s eloquent comments are not evidence; the Ordinance requires that the site plan must depict the structure, parking, ingress and egress, landscaping, screening, and buffering; but none of that has been done with the exception of some attention being paid to parking. He stated according to the Ordinance, the applicant must show the effect on the nearby, adjacent, and abutting properties with regard to traffic matters and pedestrian flow; and the traffic matters are horrendous. He stated the distance between the proposed ingress and egress on Florida Avenue is three to four car lengths, so there is no place for them to back up; and the applicant must show the concerns given to safety, curb cuts, off-street parking, glare, noise, and economic impact on nearby properties, but none of this has been shown. He stated the burden is on the applicant; it must be presented by competent substantial evidence; Section 62-1901(c) requires the Commissioners to base their denial or approval on the factors specified in Section 67-1151, which requires a plan with a written description of the particular conditions and restrictions; and none of that is before the Board. He stated Section (c)(1) provides that the Commissioners shall base their decision upon a determination of a list of standards; one is that the use will not result in a substantial adverse impact and not cause a substantial diminution in value of abutting residential properties; and his property is an abutting property. He stated the Board has Mr. King’s letter on the value issue; and there is also a letter from the H. A. Benson Company, an MAI appraiser, which indicates the proposed institutional use will negatively affect the marketability and value of the residential property located at 3015 Florida Avenue, which is his property. He stated the letter continues, “The conditional use application provides for no limitations on hours of use, frequency of use, and duration of the use. In my opinion, the best measure of the damages associated with the proposed adverse influence is the cost to cure”; and the appraiser makes reference to the wall as a cure. He stated his submittal includes an offer to build a wall for $26,900; and an appraisal of his property is $160,000, which is significantly more than the 15% set out in the County Ordinances. He stated County Code also provides that where a public road is to be used, in this case Florida Avenue, it has to be demonstrated that there will not be damage to the road, that the road is capable of accommodating the kind of traffic anticipated, and that conditional use permits cannot be approved without a commitment to improve the road to a standard adequate to handle the proposed traffic or to maintain the road through a maintenance bond; and this has not been addressed. He stated there is also a requirement to determine what the proposed screening will be with reference to type, dimension, and character. He advised the applicant has complained that his five and six and one-half year old children were bothering him; but now the applicant is suggesting he can build a church with 100+ people and it will not impact his residence at all, which is grossly improper. Mr. Tsamoutales stated Section D requires the hours of operation of a proposed use to be consistent with the use and enjoyment of property in the surrounding residential community; the applicant stated at a meeting where Commissioner Higgs was present that he wanted to have a club there; but a club is not a church use. He stated he can understand that a church may have an occasional gathering, but a club is something that provides for an accommodation for people on a daily use basis; that is not appropriate; and the applicant has refused to exclude the club or some other uses that are not consistent with church use from the agreement. He stated the Code gives the Board the authority, as part of the approval of the CUP, to prescribe appropriate and reasonable conditions and safeguards to reduce the impact of the proposed use on the adjacent and nearby property in the neighborhoods; and he objects to what has been presented to the Board. He requested, if the Board chooses to grant this request, that it use its powers under the Ordinance, consider that the Board has not heard any competent substantial evidence, and prohibit the use of the property as a retreat center, soup kitchen, transient facility, senior center, or drug rehab center. He commented on a survey he did of eight churches without schools over a period of 14 days, which between 8:30 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. averaged 1.5 cars and in the evening between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m., averaged approximately six cars parked.

Chairperson Colon advised Mr. Tsamoutales’ time has expired.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to extend the speaking time of Mr. Tsamoutales. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Tsamoutales stated he also checked the parking at the Palm Bay Senior Center; between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:30 a.m., the average number of cars for the 14 day period was 79; and in the evening between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. the average was 57 cars. He stated a club or senior center is not a church; the applicant’s comments indicated he did not want to have children related to the church and that he wanted to have the club for non-parishioners; and he is deeply concerned, in conjunction with the misrepresentations that have been made, that is what is going to happen on this property. He stated he checked 32 churches to determine their general configuration; none had walkways around them, although a few had playgrounds; and none had residences or provisions for people to live there; and he requested, if the Board is going to grant the CUP, that it exclude those uses he mentioned and set the hours of operation. He stated credibility is an issue before the Board.

Sharolyn Tsamoutales stated she and her husband are concerned and frightened; they have had to come to some possible compromise; but still some things remain unanswered. She stated traffic is a concern, especially to Whisperwoods Subdivisions, as well as other things that her husband just mentioned. She stated there are a few things she wants to touch on before bringing into evidence the letter she submitted to the Board through fax and email; even though the Board is not obligated to consider them, misrepresentations have been made, such as the statement of a young lady at the last meeting, who represented that on her first meeting with Father Conway she said she did not want a church. She advised that is not the case; she did not know anything about Father Conway’s church; she did advise that rezoning would be necessary because the property was residential; they checked that before buying their home; and Father Conway advised his idea of a church was to have the garage be the church. She stated when they went to get the building permit for their home, they discovered there would be a larger than 4,000 square-foot extra structure on the property; and she was quite concerned at that point. She stated Father Conway said he opened 18 churches and that he generally stays two to three years to establish the church; if this is the case and Father Conway is approximately 51 years old, he would have had to start the church when he was very young; and she does not understand that. She stated they had a lengthy conversation at Christmas when Father Conway explained a lot about the church history, the proposed church, the senior center, and club; but the CUP is for a church, and not a senior club, which would be a separate business. She stated she asked to see pictures of one of the established churches; and Father Conway then stopped talking to her and refused to give her any information, but told her when the rezoning was approved by the Board, he would give her a mailbox full of information. She stated she suggested the Board makes the final decision, but it would be in his best interest to not have opposition; and she did not want to have a problem with her neighbor. She stated there is no maximum resident capacity for the property yet; there are restrictions on that; and the priest has been living there, as well as another non-family member. She stated the traffic concerns have not been resolved; and one neighbor suggested having no ingress or egress from Florida Avenue because of the bottleneck that would be created as the property is so close to the traffic light. She requested the Commissioners put themselves in her position; and inquired how they would feel if someone asked to rezone to accommodate a business with approximately 8,500 square feet of building on a very small acre and one-half parcel within 30 feet of their homes. She noted her home was there prior to Father Conway’s request; he is not entitled to the rezoning by law, but is entitled to apply for the rezoning if he meets certain needs of the neighborhood; but they feel he does not. She noted there have been many different meetings; eleven people are present tonight in opposition; and she hopes the people’s petition speaks for them because they did not sign it without thought. She stated they want to be assured when entering into the binding agreement that there will be no other club or business run from the parcel, and only the church. She stated they understand there will be seniors gathered in a meeting, and do not consider that a club; but requested wording be inserted so there is not a club of non-parishioners and heavy influx of traffic as her husband observed at the other senior centers, which would be a gross change to the neighborhood. She stated, as Mr. Kellner said, it would never be able to revert back; the home is still very habitable; and if the Board approves the request today, from this day forward, the neighborhood will be forever changed because a building of that size will never be a residence again.

Commissioner Higgs stated she attended a meeting at the church, talked to people, and had conversations with Mr. Kellner and Mr. Tsamoutales; the same issues they raised tonight were raised tonight at that meeting; and she has that in writing and will put in on the record. She stated Mr. Tsamoutales asked about the distance to driveways in regard to commercial properties; she checked that; and it is 40 feet average. Chairperson Colon stated for the record, she also spoke to the applicatant and the neighbors.

Mr. Torpy stated he would like to address the comments that were made by the individuals who spoke, starting with Mr. Tsamoutales who alleged that the applicant has not met the burden of providing substantial competent evidence. He stated the fact is raised in the Conditional Use Permit Ordinance; they have been before the Board several times; and he has, on the record, replied on the comments made in the County staff’s report that address the relative requirements of the Conditional Use Permit. He stated the law says that his comments to the Board are not substantial competent evidence, nor are Mr. Tsamoutales’, Ms. Tsamoutales’, or the residents’ comments evidence; and what the Board has to rely on is staff or any other individual who has been qualified as an expert on the issues of traffic or planning. He stated a report was submitted by the Tsamoutaleses; but he is not aware of any individual being qualified in front of the Board as an expert in any of the areas, so the Board is left with opinion on whether or not this is an appropriate use of a corner parcel at the intersection of Florida Avenue and Dairy Road. He noted Dairy Road is a six-lane, divided highway, including a turning lane at this location. He stated the senior center, referred to as the club, is being blown way out of proportion; the church is planning on putting a walking path around the perimeter to allow seniors to get some exercise on a daily basis; the room being referred to as the club can hold a maximum of 16 people; and it is disingenuous to suggest that it is similar to the Palm Bay Senior Center. He stated they are not forming a senior center; and this is just an activity for the senior members of the church, to encourage them to get exercise. He stated Mr. Kellner’s comments are troublesome; this is not something new; letters have been sent out many times, and neither he nor Father Conway have received any calls or requests from the Homeowners Association and the subdivision across the street, which is a divided highway. He stated just as Mr. and Mrs. Tsamoutales want them to avoid Florida Avenue, Mr. Kellner's Homeowners Association wants them to avoid Dairy Road; they cannot please everyone; and they have attempted to come up with a solution, by allowing egress onto Dairy Road as opposed to going to a two-laned highway. He stated similarly with the height of the wall, they cannot please everyone. He stated Mrs. Tsamoutales spent a great deal of time trying to question the credibility of Father Conway; but that is inappropriate and unsubstantiated; and recommended everyone deal in facts. He stated it is a small church with a maximum of 52 parking spots; concerns have been raised about the number of buildings and size of the structure; but the binding agreement says they will meet the Brevard County Code in terms of maximum pervious surface; and they cannot do better than that. He stated the question has become whether the use is appropriate; they have limited hours to 10:30 p.m. on weekends and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays; they have limited the number of people who will be at the building to 115; they have said they will not have a soup kitchen or transient living facilities; and they have agreed to make this a small community-minded church. He stated there are very few people raising the issues; this has been discussed for months now; Commissioner Higgs has been to a meeting as have they; they have sent letters; there have been at least four public hearings; and before the Board are basically the same 15 to 20 people. He stated the Board is left to play Solomon and decide if this is a fair use; and he is requesting the Board approve the use, which is appropriate, considering the buffering, nature of the site, and being on a multi-laned divided highway with high traffic from a residential district. He stated that is a zoning problem the County inherits in many locations, and it looks for buffer zoning; although there is concern about putting a small family church at this location, there is more concern about putting a single-family residence there. He stated the church is appropriate, consistent, and compatible; and Father Conway and his parishioners are doing everything they can to minimize the impact on the surrounding neighbors. He stated if the Board has further questions or wishes to impose further restrictions, they would be happy to entertain those. He stated they have agreed to other things with Mr. and Mrs. Tsamoutales, but they have not been able to come to a collective agreement; and all he has placed on the record are the ones that he initially put on the record.

Commissioner Higgs stated the evidence before the Board includes a report from Lawandales Planning Associates; Ms. Lawandales has appeared before the Board on a number of occasions as an expert witness; and inquired is the Board able to accept that report as expert testimony; with Attorney Bentley responding she believes so. Commissioner Higgs stated there is a letter from Allen King, a real estate broker and salesman with National Realty; she has known Mr. King for many years and knows him to be an experienced realtor; and inquired can the Board accept his letter as expert testimony; with Attorney Bentley responding she believes the Board can, as the applicant had the opportunity to address that issue, but did not. She stated those items were in their package from previous testimony and previous hearings; tonight they were given a letter from Mr. Benson, who is an MAI appraiser with W. H. Benson and Company; she recognizes the name as someone who has presented testimony in this regard before and may have done appraisals for the County; and inquired if the Board can accept this as expert testimony. Attorney Bentley advised the Board could accept that without challenge from the applicant; Mr. Torpy questioned the qualification procedure used; and the Board can ask Mr. Torpy if he is familiar with Mr. Benson and whether he is an MAI appraiser.

Mr. Torpy stated his objection is to the fact that there are written reports and not testimony; therefore they are not subject to cross-examination; and he would object to any opinion with regard to value. He stated they should be here to make oral statements for cross-examination in a quasi-judicial proceeding; and he objects to the process that was used, and therefore the opinions that have been given.

Attorney Bentley advised the County’s Ordinance allows live testimony or appraisals; and if Mr. Torpy wishes to attack the appraisal evidence that has been provided in writing, he may do so.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Ordinance allows the Board to accept written testimony; with Attorney Bentley responding affirmatively. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board requires cross-examination in its quasi-judicial hearings; with Attorney Bentley responding the Board has not been requiring that.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there was a memorandum recently when that issue was raised by Mr. Spielvogel; and requested Attorney Bentley reiterate her opinion on that. Attorney Bentley advised it was found to not be essential; there have been differing opinions throughout the State; and of the fifteen bodies they checked with, eight were not conducting cross-examination, three did not respond, and several others were conducting cross-examination. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if cross-examination is a requirement for a quasi-judicial proceeding; with Attorney Bentley responding it is not.

Commissioner Higgs commented on language concerning diminution of property and value and desire to handle the testimony appropriately; and inquired if Attorney Bentley has any concern that the Board should take further steps regarding the testimony; with Attorney Bentley advising the Board should give Mr. Torpy an opportunity to challenge it at this time, if he would like to do so, in terms of why he believes it is inadequate.

Mr. Torpy stated the appraisal was given to the Board this evening; this is the first he has heard of it; and he is unable to attack Mr. Benson’s appraisal at this time. He stated this is the third tabling; the date of the appraisal is February 12, 2003, which is long after the initial meetings; and had they been able to proceed without the issues concerning the title, that would not have been before the Board. He stated if it is the Board’s inclination tonight to deny the application because of the appraisal that was submitted in writing without their having an opportunity to address or rebut it, they would request the Board table and allow them the opportunity to rebut the appraisal because they have serious concerns. He stated his client has previously submitted to the Board documents regarding valuation; due to the duration of the meeting dragging out for months, that is not before the Board; and it is a last bite of the apple issue. He stated the Board is hearing from Mr. Tsamoutales tonight; many of the things that have been brought to the Board in the past are not fresh in the Commissioners’ minds; and Mr. Benson’s appraisal is a new issue to them, so they cannot attack it. He stated if the Board is inclined to rely on that appraisal as a basis for denial, he requests the opportunity to table the issue so it can be addressed. He stated if the Board is not inclined to deny based on that, he would prefer to move forward this evening, rather than tabling again.

Commissioner Higgs stated she has reviewed the minutes of the previous meeting where testimony was given, and is familiar with what testimony came before; and requested additional guidance from Attorney Bentley. Attorney Bentley advised if the Board is inclined to table, it could limit future discussion to the appraisal issue, appraisal testimony, and value testimony; and that would give Mr. Torpy an opportunity to raise the issue he requested tonight. Commissioner Higgs stated this has been before the Board three times with testimony in regard to the appraisal made by Mr. Benson; at the meeting on December 5, 2002, Mr. Torpy did make comments regarding information and valuation, so it has been raised in the December meeting; and inquired if Attorney Bentley still believes an additional opportunity is needed for this information to be reviewed and some sort of rebuttal by the applicant, and will this end up with dueling appraisals. Attorney Bentley stated she thinks it will end up with dueling appraisals; that is where it is headed if this is tabled; but the Board could take the position that it was the applicant’s burden to come in and prove these issues, and that he had multiple opportunities to do it and should have brought an appraiser tonight. She stated a prudent approach would be to let Mr. Torpy have the opportunity at another time; if there is an appeal of this item, if it were denied on this basis, the applicant will make an argument about this point; and that can be avoided by tabling; but there are arguments on the other side as well, if the Board wishes to deny at this point. Commissioner Higgs stated Item C says the applicant may rebut the findings with his own expert witness; and inquired does that mean they have to drag out the process forever, and at what point does rebuttal end. Attorney Bentley advised that is the question before the Board. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board has spent a lot of time on this item; it does not want to make a mistake because it did not allow rebuttal of testimony; however, it has received substantial testimony from competent witnesses who have previously testified before the Board, so she does not see a question in terms of the competence of the evidence or the staff report regarding the Future Land Use Map and the zoning.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to table Item 4 to March 18, 2003, and allow the applicant five minutes to rebut and give testimony on the one issue of the appraisal.

Commissioner Higgs stated she does not want to see the issue thrown out of court because the Board did not allow rebuttal.

Chairperson Colon advised Mr. Torpy there will be only five minutes rebuttal. Mr. Torpy stated his rebuttal will be on the appraisal issue only. Commissioner Higgs stated on the other side of the issue, the Board will not open up the public hearing for other items. Commissioner Scarborough stated that would be the question; and if information is coming, someone on the other side could question the basis. Chairperson Colon stated five minutes and five minutes would be fair. Attorney Bentley stated the Board can do it either way; it can look at the record very carefully, and determine whether or not the applicant presented any evidence on the issue because it is his burden; and if the Board feels there is any issue there, it can look at the item presented today and determine whether it is something the Board is going to rely on or whether it will rely on the evidence provided by the applicant. She stated if the Board needs that in order to support its decisions, then in an extreme abundance of caution, she would recommend five and five at the subsequent hearing.

Chairperson Scarborough inquired if Mr. Tsamoutales understands both sides will be given an opportunity to speak.

Mr. Torpy reiterated the rebuttal on the appraisal issue will be all that he will prepare for; and five minutes on each side would be fair.

Mr. Tsamoutales stated the Ordinance says it is unrebuttable; and there has already been a failure to meet that burden. Chairperson Colon stated they would like to make sure that everything is taken care of in the findings of fact. Commissioner Higgs stated it says specifically the applicant may rebut the findings with his own expert witness.

Chairperson Colon called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Tsamoutales inquired if March 18 is a Thursday night; with Chairperson Colon responding the meeting will be on Tuesday, March 18, 2003 at 9:00 a.m.

Item 4. (Z0301203) Yves Clerk, as Trustee. Tabled earlier in the meeting to April 10, 2003 Board of County Commissioners meeting.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
OF FEBRUARY 10, 2003

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider recommendations of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board made at its meeting on February 10, 2003, as follows:

Item 4. (Z0302301) Robert and Ronna Greason’s request for change from GU and AU to RU-1-11 on 2.42 acres located on both sides of US 1, south of Senne Street, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board with a BDP limiting development to two residential homesites.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval with a Binding Development Plan limiting development to two residential homesites; and inquired if Mr. Greason is in agreement with that; with Robert Greason responding yes.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 4 with a Binding Development Plan limiting development to two residential homesites as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 1. (Z0302101) John D. and Maude D. Nichols’ request for change from RU-1-11 to AU on 5.23 acres located on the east side of Glendale Boulevard, north of Parrish Road, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Item 1 as recommended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 2. (Z0302201) Robert J. Halbing and Margaret L. Moore’s request for Small Scale Amendment (03S.3) to change the Future Land Use Map designation from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial; and change from GU to GU-2 on 4 acres located approximately 150 feet north of SR 520 and east of Range Road, which was recommended for approval of Community Commercial by the Local Planning Agency and as BU-2 by the P&Z Board.

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

Item 3. (Z0302202) Brother Auto Repair, Inc.’s request for change from BU-1 to BU-2, removing the existing CUP for Trailer and Truck Rental on 0.62 acre, located on the northwest corner of Queensland Avenue and SR 3, which was recommended for denial by the P&Z Board.

Duyet Hoang appeared representing the item.

Commissioner Pritchard stated this is a BU-1 zoning; the request is to go to BU-2; it is a converted gasoline station that had U-Haul rentals at one time; and the applicant is interested in making it into more of a commercial venture with body repair and major engine repair. He stated it is his opinion and that of the P&Z Board that this sort of change should not be approved, given the compatibility of the neighborhood.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to deny Item 3 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 5. (Z0302401) Michael A. and Colette T. DiChristopher’s request for change from AU to EU on 0.6 acre located approximately 160 feet east of U.S. 1 and south of Barnes Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board with a BDP limited to one unit.

Commissioner Carlson stated the P&Z Board recommended approval with a Binding Development Plan limiting it to one unit, so there is no school capacity issue.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 5 as recommended by the P&Z Board, with a Binding Development Plan limiting to one unit. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 6. (Z0203402) Joseph R. and Nana L. Tyler and Randolph McCurry and Sally M. King’s request for change from AU and RR-1 to all RR-1 with a BDP limiting development to three residential homesites on 4.23 acres located on the northwest corner of Turtle Mound Road and Lakebreeze Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board with a BDP limiting development to three residential homesites.

Commissioner Carlson stated this is also subject to a Binding Development Plan limiting development to three residential homesites, with a net increase of one; and inquired how is the eagle’s nest being handled on the property. Zoning Official Rick Enos stated the Binding Development Plan has changed; they received a new plan today; the one that was heard and approved by the P&Z Board increased the number of units from two to three, thereby eliminating the school capacity issue; but the new BDP proposes an increase from two to four, which is different than what was heard by the P&Z Board and would raise the school capacity issue. Commissioner Carlson stated that goes against the school overcrowding policy; and she would have to deny it.

Joseph Tyler stated the Binding Development Plan has not been changed since the application; he worked with staff all the way; and the intention is to give his daughter a lot on the back part of the property. Commissioner Carlson inquired if he has increased the density by one unit; with Mr. Tyler responding yes. Commissioner Carlson inquired what is the change; with Mr. Enos responding the original Binding Development Plan had a handwritten note saying they would increase the number of lots from two to three, which is an increase of one; but the amendment received today changed that statement to, “shall limit density to one unit per acre,” and there are four acres, so it would allow four lots. Mr. Enos stated if the intent is just to allow three lots, the Binding Development Plan should say limited to three lots. Mr. Tyler advised he has 3.2 acres. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Binding Development Plan can be changed, and the Board move it with that condition as it is still the original intent.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board gets the Binding Development Plans back; so the Board can approve it and it will have a second bite of the apple to be sure the plan is correct.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Item 6 with original Binding Development Plan limiting development to three residential homesites as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Binding Development Plan will come back to the Board to review the wording.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the P&Z comment sheet says limiting development to three residential homesites, acreage 4.23 acres; and the draft binding development plan says one unit per acre, but the map shows and the applicant says it is 3.2 acres. Mr. Enos advised there are two parcels; the larger one, which is currently zoned AU is 3.2 acres; but the smaller one that is currently zoned RR-1 is 1± acre; and both parcels were included in the application, so there is a total of four acres. He recommended clarifying what the Board is talking about. Commissioner Carlson stated the whole application is 4.23 acres.

Mr. Tyler advised Mr. and Mrs. King own the one acre parcel; and they had to redraw the lines to make the property rectangular to give their daughter an acre. He stated he owns 3.23 acres. Commissioner Carlson state the zoning item is 4.23 acres; and all they can have on the 4.23 acres is three homesites.

Item 7. (Z0302501) Scott J. Palmer and Robert A. and Sandra Johnson. Tabled earlier in the meeting to April 10, 2003 Board of County Commissioners meeting.

(See pages for Zoning Resolutions.)

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RECOMMENDATION OF THE PORT ST. JOHN DEPENDENT
SPECIAL DISTRICT BOARD OF FEBRUARY 12, 2003

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a recommendation from the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board made at its meeting of February 12, 2003 as follows:

Item 1. (PSJ30201) Stephen and Mary Jo Barkaszi’s request for change from RU-1-9 and RR-1 to all RR-1 on 3.83 acres located north of Cinema Street and west of Carrillon Avenue, which was recommended for approval by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board, with a Binding Development Plan to allow up to 14 horses.

Zoning Official Rick Enos stated this was previously tabled; it was heard by the Planning and Zoning Board; and the Board has a recommendation for approval with a Binding Development Plan to allow up to 14 horses.

Mary Jo Barkaszi submitted a packet; and stated the first aerial photograph shows the 7-acre property. She stated the property to the north is three acres that is already zoned RR-1, which they currently own, live on, and have 11 horses; the south part of the property is approximately four acres that is currently zoned RU-1-9; and they would like to rezone that property to RR-1 to match their existing three acres. She described the surrounding properties and properties she owns; and pointed them out on a diagram. She identified properties owned by people who signed the petition; advised the owners of Lots 15 and 16 on Carilllon spoke in favor at the Port St. John District Board meeting; and presented a letter from Robert and Jill Cheney who recently moved to Carillon Avenue, and had no objections to the horses. She stated that property sold for the asking price of $140,000 within two days of going on the market; and another house on Carillon is for sale at $159,000. She stated at the Port St. John District Board meeting the opposition was not necessarily against the horses they have now, but the potential to have 15 more horses; and they are willing to enter into a Binding Development Agreement to limit the entire seven acres to 14 horses.

Charles Thompson stated he lives on Camilla Road, which is next door to the other side; and he has no problems with horses, but does have problems with horse waste. He stated when he goes into his backyard since they got the horses, it has become smelly and he has more flies than before. He protested the Port St. John Advisory Board’s standing on this item; stated he was at a meeting on February 26, when there were not enough members for a quorum; and they interviewed four or five people to become members. He stated they asked if anyone had an interest in this; one person did; and when asked if he would abstain from the vote on the issue on Monday, he said he would; but at the meeting last Monday, that individual voted, which discredits that advisory board and the person ethically and morally. He stated he has been living there for 12 years with no problems; he only met the neighbors once, but they got more resolved talking to each other than they did at any other time; and his main objection is the smell and the flies. He stated they spread the horse manure back by his property; the property is an enclave surrounded by houses; and to have horses on your back fence does not seem to be fair to homeowners. He stated he was there 12 years before the property was sold; and he is not concerned about it devaluing his property, but he cannot go into his backyard. He inquired what is the proper way to get rid of horse manure; and would the Commissioners like to have that in their back yards. He stated he has nothing against the Barkaszis or horses, but he does not want the smell and the flies; and requested the Board take that into consideration.

Richard Smith stated he is the newly appointed member of the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board; and explained that he did not abstain on the advice of staff. He advised abstention is the proper term to use when one has a financial interest in a matter and should abstain for that reason; at the meeting on Monday he advised he would be voting based on the evidence and not on his personal knowledge of the specifics of this particular case; and it was the opinion of staff and the rest of the board that he vote. He stated the four acres are part of a ten-acre tract that was owned by some related family members; and it is an oasis of natural areas that are surrounded by homes, which most of the people like. He stated there is not a lot of that sort of land left in Port St. John; the majority of the people support the rezoning; and in the ten years the Barkaszis had horses there, only one complaint has been filed because of odors, and it was found by the inspector to be unfounded. He stated it is difficult to satisfy all the people; but there have been no complaints to the County about noise, lighting, or activities at times other than those consistent with the neighborhood. He stated one speaker on Monday spoke about concerns about declining property values; but recently an adjacent homeowner sold his property within four hours of putting up a sign. He stated property values are going up; people who bought their property for $12,000, now cannot find a comparable piece of land in Port St. John for less than $25,000. He stated the Barkaszis will have an extra four acres to spread out the same number of horses; only 11 horses are currently on the property, but they will be allowed to have 14; and many of the concerns that have been raised by those who are opposed to it will be solved by having a small number of horses on a larger piece of property. He stated he and his family support the rezoning.

Michael Woltman stated he lives adjacent to the Barkaszis property; one of the things that drove he and his wife to buy the property was the natural look behind them; and having the Barkaszis back there in the open area has been a good thing. He commented on how fast Port St. John is growing and removal of trees; and stated the Barkaszis are great neighbors who maintain a clean facility. He stated it is his understanding they will have a binding development agreement to keep the number of horses to 14, or approximately two per acre; they have lived there for ten years; and there has only been one complaint, which was discovered to be unfounded. He recommended the Board approve the rezoning.

Matthew Hixson stated he does not live in the neighborhood, but is familiar with the property owners; and expressed support for the rezoning. He stated the property does have limited access; there is no devaluation of the surrounding properties; the property is well-maintained and clean; and they have the support of the neighbors with a few exceptions. He stated the issue the gentleman raised about the spreading of the manure has not been an issue with others; and with the area more than doubled, it should not be an issue. He stated it is just a matter of making some adjustments; and he is sure the owners and Mr. Thompson could work the matter out. He expressed support for the rezoning.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the only issue was the issue of manure spreading.

Stephen Barkaszi stated with the binding development agreement that has been mentioned they are decreasing the density of animals by 50% while increasing the carrying capacity by 130%; and advised of various fly control programs that are being implemented. He stated they did talk to Mr. Thompson about his concerns; it is not nice to hear they have made someone unhappy; and they are making an effort to address the concerns. He stated they look forward to strengthening relationships they already have and building others with new neighbors.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired what are the horses used for; with Mr. Barkaszi responding for riding. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Barkaszis are the only ones using them; with Mr. Barkaszi responding yes. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the manure is spread, and if so, where; with Mr. Barkaszi responding it is spread thinly around the pasture areas and in the open areas. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is a binding development agreement yet; with Zoning Official Rick Enos responding there is a binding development agreement, which does not directly discuss where or how the manure is spread, but there will be a 20-foot buffer for all residential abutting properties. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Barkaszi, as part of the binding development agreement, would be willing to get into the issues of the odor and flies; with Mr. Barkaszi responding affirmatively. Commissioner Scarborough stated that binding development agreement will come back to the Board. Ms. Barkaszi stated the worst time they had was last year when there were drought conditions and things were not breaking down like they normally do; and they will install sprinklers where they are not currently installed. Ms. Barkaszi inquired when will the agreement come back to the Board; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he will expedite it, and it will not be necessary for the applicants to be present at that meeting.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Item 1 with a Binding Development Plan limiting to 14 horses; and recommend the applicatant and objecting party meet in Commissioner Scarborough’s office to work out final details of the Binding Development Plan, which will be returned to the Board for approval. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Zoning Resolution.)

PUBLIC HEARINGS, RE: ADMINISTRATIVE REZONINGS OF FEBRUARY 10, 2003

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board, made at its meeting of February 10, 2003, on administrative rezonings as follows:

Zoning Official Rick Enos stated one person is present who wishes to do something different than what the P&Z Board recommended; but all the other cards are in agreement with the P&Z Board.

Item 1. Section 13, Township 21, Range 34, Parcels 765, 759, owned by John J. Greene, Trustee, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6526 for Sewer Facilities.

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

Item 2. Section 5, Township 21, Range 35, Parcels 1, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 23, 24, owned by Keith M. Skalet; Edward L. and Glenna Hall; Terry K. and Roberta Jo Brandeberry; Kenneth L. and Renee E. Bowman; Douglas and Debra Iff; Glen L. and Tamara A. Sabins; Tamara D. Craddock; Donald J. Legare; and David M. Luman, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6465 for Tenant Dwelling (Mobile Home).

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

Item 3. Section 17, Township 21, Range 35, Parcels 760, 793, 804, owned by Eugene and Lois Brown, Katrina C. Darden and Earl Kenneth and Mary Ann Brown, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6562 for Landscaping Business.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 3 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 4. Item Withdrawn.

Item 5. Item Withdrawn.

Item 6. Section 17, Township 21, Range 35, Parcel 283, Section 18, Township 21, Range 35, Parcels 28, 32, 36, owned by Eagle Eye Development, LLC; Lillian M. Barnes Trustee; Fuel Tech, Inc.; and Burnie Whitten, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6437 for Electronic Assembly.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 6 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 7. Section 18, Township 21, Range 35, Parcel 517, owned by Diocese of Orlando, Norbert M. Dorsey, Bishop, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6439 for Private Club & School.

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

Item 8. Section 18, Township 22, Range 35, Sub. AV, Lot 33.01, owned by John Pinter, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permits Z-6725 for Mini-Warehouse and Z-8379 for Mini-Warehouses.

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

Item 9. Item Withdrawn.

Item 10. Section 33, Township 22, Range 35, Parcels 82, 85 (PIP Portion only), owned by Bernard B. Burklund, Jr., Trustee; and Francis Kay Burklund, Trustee; and Condev Corporation, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6393.

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

Item 11. Section 25, Township 23, Range 35, Parcels 500, 527, 549, owned by Brevard County, c/o Property Control; State of Florida IITF; and City of Cocoa, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permits Z-6869 for Sewer Facilities, Public Buildings, Power Plant/Substation, Telephone Exchange & Clinic and Z-8777 for Clinic (Hospital). Retaining Conditional Use Permits Z-8777 for Correctional Facilities, Waste Water Treatment Plant and Tower & Antennae and Z-6869 for Towers & Antennae & Prison Camp Facilities.

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

Item 12. Section 36, Township 23, Range 35, Parcel 754.1, owned Mabel D. Gresset and Burnice E. Searcy, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6838 for Telephone Exchange.

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

Item 13. Section 30, Township 23, Range 36, Sub. BI, Block T, Lot 8, owned by Southern Bell Tel & Tel, c/o Bellsouth Tel, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6567 for Telephone Switching Center.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 13 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 14. Section 31, Township 23, Range 36, Parcel 10, owned by Albino Y. and Christine S. Kuon, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6568 for Cabinet & Carpentry Shop.

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

Item 15. Item Withdrawn.

Item 16. Section 09, Township 24, Range 35, Sub. 25, Block 16, Lot 15, owned by US Sprint Communications Company, Limited Partnership, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z- 6935 for Telephone Switching Center.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 16 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 17. Section 22, Township 24, Range 35, Parcel 502, owned by Lawrence L. Fleckinger, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6612 for Sewer Plant.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 17 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 18. Section 26, Township 24, Range 35, Parcel 521, owned by Cocoa Expo, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6687 for Tower and retaining Z-6821 for Permanent Commercial Entertainment and Amusement Enterprises and Sale of Alcoholic Beverages.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 18 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 19. Section 06, Township 24, Range 36, Parcels 762, 818, owned by First Assembly of God of Cocoa, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6719 for Outside Sale of Mobile Homes or Trailers.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 19 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 20. Section 07, Township 24, Range 36, Sub. 50, Lots 29, 30; Parcels 252 thru 257, 500, 533, owned by Melvin E. and Margaret A. Adair; Cocoa Auto Salvage U-Pull-It, Inc.; Interymer North, Inc.; B C Products, Inc.; Fidelia K. Matranga; and Tarmac Florida, Inc. c/o Tarmac America Inc. Tax Dept., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6994a for Cement, Concrete & Concrete Building Products on Sub. 50, Lot 29, Parcels 252, 253, 254, 255, 257, 500, 533; Z-6994b for Metal Salvage & Junk Yards on Sub. 50, Lot 29, and Parcels 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 500, 533; Z-7172 for Cement, Concrete & Concrete Building Products on Sub. 50, Lot 29, and Parcel 533; and retaining Conditional Use Permits Z-10397 for Towers & Antennae (200 ft. self-supporting) on Parcel 257, and Z-6994a for Cement, Concrete & Concrete Building Products on Parcel 256. Parcel 256 was withdrawn by staff.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 20 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 21. Section 22, Township 24, Range 35, Parcels 5, 28, owned by Evelyn Craig and Southern Bell Tel & Tel, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6843 for Telephone Exchange.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 21 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 22. Section 25, Township 24, Range 35, Parcel 754, owned by Brian K. Lund, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6499 for Boarding of Horses and Horses for Hire.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 22 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 23. Item Withdrawn.

Item 24. Section 36, Township 24, Range 35, Parcel 37, owned by Guardian Personal Storage, LC, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6932 for Mini-Warehouses.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 24 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 25. Section 36, Township 24, Range 35, Parcel 262, owned by Brevard County, c/o Property Control, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6993 for Public Buildings.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 25 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 27. Section 20, Township 24, Range 36, Sub. 54, Block 1, Lots 19.05 and 19.06, owned by MCSP, Inc. and Johnny Fred and Eunita Bailey, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6714 for Adult Congregate Living Facilities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 27 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 28. Section 22, Township 24, Range 36, Sub. 01, Lot 1, owned by Rueben E. Williams and Vincent C. King, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6792 for Snack Bar.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 28 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 29. Section 23, Township 24, Range 36, Parcel 254, owned by United States Postal Service, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permits Z-6703 for Sewer Facilities and Z-7434 for Public Buildings.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 29 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 30. Section 23, Township 24, Range 36, Sub. BX, Lots 7.02, 7.03, owned by O&K of Brevard, Inc. and Repco Sales, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6519 for Alcoholic Beverages; Bars & Cocktail Lounges.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 30 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 31. Section 26, Township 24, Range 36, Sub. 60, Lots 16 thru 21, owned by Hector L. Serrano and Mirna Malave; Martin H. Merbitz and Sharon L. Merbitz, Trustees; Bryan C. and Rita M. Butler; Louis and Griselda Goldin; Virginia E. Bennett; and Gary Behagg and William Behagg, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6736 for Towers & Antennae.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 31 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 32. Item withdrawn.

Item 33. Section 35, Township 24, Range 36, Parcel 3, owned by Good News Of Brevard, Inc. and Margaret Broward, Trustee, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6580 for Mini-Warehouse.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 33 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 34. Section 35, Township 24, Range 36, Parcel 262.1, owned by Richard B. and Mary Conforti, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6829 for Professional Services Office Building.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 34 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 35. Section 35, Township 24, Range 36, Sub. 52, Lot 18, owned by James C. and Ro. Johnson Giebink, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6791 for Servants Quarters.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 35 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 36. Section 36, Township 24, Range 36, Parcels 283 thru 290.9, 293 thru 295.Y, 551 thru 553.I, owned by Helen Tishken; Cindy L. and Robert L. Maggart; Louis J. and Paulette S. Davidson; Stewart A. and Victoria W. La Roche; Irene Derosa, Life Estate; Betty J. Wittekind; Ann B. Sampson; Marcella C. Ford; Leon R. Cayer and Velma M. Cayer; Mitchell S. Ribak; Jewel B. Mintz and Wilma M. Mintz, Trustees; Nancy A. Kennedy and Terry W. Kennedy, Co-Trustees; Joann M. Kennedy; Susan Bubenas; Manuel Dasilva; Jerry Wiggington; Arnold G. and Kathleen J. Happersett; Jane A. Harris and Edward A. Patrick; George J. and Susan L. Jolley; Morris Felsot; Gretchen E. Karmazin; Robert E. and Lana C. Shubert; William C. Lippincott, Jr. and J.P. Lippincott, Co-Trustees; Edward M. and Lucille Gray Eastburn; Carl William (Jr.) and Barbara H. Hertzog; Lewis Scott Sharpe and Janet R. Sharpe, Trustees; Suzanne Gritti and Kay Marie De Meritt; Rosellen C. Eaton; Shirley Lefebvre; Bert P. and Louise W. Trytko; Gerald L. Gibson and Elaine L. Gibson, Co-Trustees; Owen L. and Bettenan C. Laroche; Rose and Abraham Kraman; Ronald C. and Elizabeth L. Buddemeyer; Dorothy M. Spuckler, Life Estate; Timothy D. and Gail Engelgau; Janie H. Crawford, Trustee; George E. Connolly and Dolores Connolly, Co-Trustees; Kenneth S. Barbour; Aloysius F. (Jr.) and Grace K. Harter; Linda D. Vanallen; Ernest R. Donnelly and David Donnelly; Annamarie Horen; Peggy F. Noble; Henry Cruz, Jr.; Thomas R. Knollinger, Trustee; Anna K. Drinkwater; Edward A. and Barbara O'Connor; Kenneth L. and Michael S. Nugent; Audrey N. and Earl H. Wilson; Jimmy V. Hawley; Glen Cheek and Virginia J. Cheek, Trust; Esther G. Clark; Dorothy F. Foote, Trustee; Caryl A. Grzyll, Trustee; Donald M. Howard, Trustee; Petra Gonzalez and Kathryn J. Wirkus; Clarice Telechan and Nancy L. Telechan-Pegram Margaret S. Rhoads, Trustee; Linda B. Hartley and Williard W. Hartley; Thomas R. Napton; Patricia Ann Harris, Life Estate; Fred X. Hartman, Sr.; Bennett Family Trust; Jean Rien; Francis Robert Olenek, Jr.; Harold W. Oppenhuizen, Trustee; Charles W. and Betty A. Liska; Margaret C. McDonald, Trustee; Thomas E. and L. Susie Wasdin; Edwin A. and Birgitta E. Golebiewski; J. Brooks and Jeanne B. Scoville; Patrick J. O'Carroll; Louise M. Cattani, Trustee; Jean L. Bennett, Trustee; 1993 Preston Trust; Noel R. and Veronica Harris, Life Estate; Raymond N. McGhee; Daniel V. and Joyce S. Burdo; Virginia B. Croft, Trustee; Ethel B. Asbury; Angela Corsillo, Trustee; John R. Devore, Family Trust; Anna D'Aquino Martin and Jerry V. D'Aquino; Marie S. Smith and Diane M. Pattillo; James O. and Jo Anne D. Bilella; Vera D. Devlin, Trustee; Kristie Balado; Helen D. Squares, Trustee; M. Sandra Kuhn, Trust; Mary Helen Heberer, Trustee; Jeffrey Michael and Linda Eileen Moses; Charles A. and Faith E. Sipple; Elizabeth A. and Herbert A. Thurston; Norma Jean Smith, Trustee; William A. and Margery A. Schuster; John B. Vomela, Trustee; Robert and Lucille Vautour; Edgar E. and Rebecca R. Mercer; Milton E. and Marian R. Candee; Roy A. Shroble and Norma K. Shroble, Trustees; Beatrice A. Dedering; Rita L. Rimm, Trustee; Glen V. and Greta A. Kirby; Birger Johnsen and Bertha Johnsen; Margaret Menard, Life Estate; Mary E. Ryan, Life Estate; Sidney and Louise H. Sherman; Patricia E. Lynch, Trustee; Gerard P. Drew; Dorothy S. Hough; Audrey E. Grayson; Betty J. Mockler and Hubert B. Mockler, Co-Trustees; Virginia S. Sholar; Alice Lee and Peter Lee; Mary Louise Dornbush; Bert P. and Louise W. Trytko; Grace S. Dall and Roberta M. Getchell; Virginia Schafer; Louis G. and Sandy J. Marchica; Cesare and Aurore Marchesini, Life Estate; Marjorie L. and William A. Dellicker, Co-Trustees; Louis K. Hannett and Ruth G. Hannett, Co-Trustees; Robert A. and Helen R. U. Nelson, Trustees; Harold F. and Jacqueline B. Elenz; James T. and Elizabeth Byrne; Paul C. and Joan A. Hagy; Agnes Oberg Ennis, Trustee; William P. and Julia M. Berges; David J. Powel and Judith Gordon; Robert H. Powel and David J. Powel; Roland C. and Sandra A. Smith, Trustees; Adelia B. Long; James C. and Freida F. Rachal; John S. Powel and Norma E. Powel, Life Estate; Mildred A. Fraser; Helen A. Rush, Trustee; Marie A. Cook; V. William Pennanen and Blanca M. Del Valle Pennanen; Lawrence and Muriel Biener; Florence F. Scott and Dale S. Gralla; Rose M. Duca, Trustee; Nancy O. Veerman; Pasquale and Jean Alba; John P. J. and Edda Dussich; Hazel G. Rowden; Manlio V. and Maria S. Dussich; Sadie C. Taylor, Life Estate; Robert L. Woody and Karol S. Woody; Ruby Merle Clark; Kenneth A. and Mary Ann Demmer; M. Ruth Bradley; Doris A. and Charles E. Malone; Roy R. (Jr.) and Patricia J. Schlemmer; Henry D. Keller, Trustee; W. J. Dugan and Maureen S. Dugan, Trustees; Alexander Z. and Nonna L. Shekhel; Emil D. Pittner; Henry D. Keller and Rita M. Aiello-Keller; Robbye L. Oden, Trustee; Lowell H. Humburg and Ethel Z. Balch; Shilah K. Felder; John Zwick, Trustee; Robert and Carol A. Daria; Donald G. and Caroloyn E. Eri, Trustees; Cecil W. and Faith R. Stoughton; Frank J. Schweitzer, Trustee and Marisabel W. Schweitzer, Trustee; Hazel A. Danner, Life Estate; Evelyn N. Knickle, Trustee; Rebecca Jane Slack and Vivian P. Slack, Estate; Leroy E. Bailey; John S. and Eileen Zopff; John P. Welcher and F. Ione Welcher, Life Estate; Nancy B. Labroad; Mary Jane H. Law; Clyde and Bonnie Pursifull; First Union National Bank, Margaret A. Tullgren, Trustees; Donald R. Frenk, Trustee; Esther J. Pacatte, Life Estate; Beatrice Reim; Audrey Lee Silipo and Henry Grady Crunk, III; Harold G. and Julia W. Peterson; Linda W. Parks and Roger L. Mattioli; Marcia L. Geyer and Duane T. Bluhm; Esther P. Betances; Kenneth T. and Alice M. Daly; Richard L. and Ginger G. Apple; Donald F. and Patricia A. Kirby; Joseph W. and Blanche Rimm, Life Estate; Joseph S. and Tatiana Grecheck, Life Estate; Walter Stripen and Evelyn J. Favorite; Margarete M. Nead; John M. and Nydia C. Albert; Bonna F. Roberts, Trustee; Diane P. Daly; Patricia A. Crawford, Trustee; Marilyn Schmiege; Kenneth K. Lance; Charles F. and Marjorie W. Green, Life Estate; Carol B. Morrisey and George L. Morrisey, Co-Trustees; Martha J. Bridges; Willetta M. Franklin, Life Estate; Jean J. Mitchell, Trust; Dorothy K. Phelps, Trustee; Florence Sill, Trustee; John A. and Beatrice A. Pink; Polly Chase; Helen S. Steger; V. William and Blanca M. Pennanen; Paul S. Roberts and Venedia L. Roberts; Glenice A. Fablinger, Trustee; Costas and Vasilichi Voltis; Robert and Betty Prisendorf; Arnold Edward Cooper and Peter-Otto Uhr; Ann Gatti, Trustee; Richard C. and Rebecca G. Kirkpatrick; Luis A. Morales and Mary P. Morales, Co-Trustees; Julian M. and Cheryl M. Coppage; Samuel J. and Ruby G. Yates; Rhoda Solano; Dorsey E. and Marian J. Dean; John H. and Lucy D. Kaufmann; and Patricia E. Lynch, Trustee, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6509 for Sewer Facilities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 36 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 37. Section 35, Township 25, Range 37, Sub. 25, Block 2, Lot 1, owned by Gregory B. Winkler, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6427 for Garage Apartment.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 37 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 38. Section 06, Township 26, Range 37, Parcel 12, owned by Mark E. Tietig, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6745 for Guesthouse Without Kitchen Facilities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 38 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 39. Section 21, Township 28, Range 37, Parcel 21, owned by Storage Equities, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6865 for Mini-Warehouses.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 39 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 40. Section 28, Township 28, Range 38, Sub. 55, Lots 1 thru 11, and Parcels 760, 782, owned by Nigel A. A. Schultz; Jayne R. Jaccoma; Turtle Beach Trading, Inc.; Driftwood Plaza Phase II, LLC; Burdette Realty Improvements, Inc.; Design by Joys, Inc.; Donald C. Reynolds, Jr. and Brett C. Reynolds; Certified Building Corp.; and Interstate Oil, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6622 for Sewer Facilities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 40 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 41. Section 27, Township 29, Range 37, Parcel 341, owned by Shamsol Molouk Houshmand, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6891 for Private Club & Sale of Alcoholic Beverages Accessory to a Private Club.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 41 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 42. Section 34, Township 29, Range 37, all of Sub. 01, owned by David J. Ross; Rebecca A. and Frank De Santis; Edward S. and Dorothy J. Jones; Robert L. Leichtenberg and Deborah A. Bingham; Henry W. and Carol A. Baron; Robert S. and Livia J. Thiem, Life Estate; Stephen G. Baker; Robert L. and Sharon M. Clark; David A. and Sandra A. Rice; Joseph M. and Carole Ault; Frank R. and Diane H. Presley; Michael A. Daniels; Rudy J. and Mary Baggiani; Theodore F. (Sr.) Helm and Priscilla Wallace Helm; Audry Gene and Patricia L. Farmer; Thomas H. and Margaret M. Trevelino; Robert Baldwin Mapp, II; Andrew M. and Shara L. Benhase; Joseph R. (Jr.) and Nancy L. Regan; Raymond A. Sawe; Robert Lee Josephs; Lake Ridge Development Co.; Patricia J. and Raymond P. (III) Lentz; and Lake Ridge Subdivision Homeowners Association, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6822 for Commercial Borrow Pit.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 42 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 43. Section 14, Township 29, Range 38, Sub. 50, Lots 1, 2, 7 thru 14, 20, 21, 30, owned by Mark Stewart Griffith; Lawrence D. and Marianne K. Russell; William J. and Judith K. Rolan; Peter and Susan Margaritondo; John and Tammy Carnegie; Robert E. and Kim R. Davis, Danestone Bridge of Don; Les and Catherine Gash; Jeffrey R. Southland; Joseph K. and Bonnie E. Angy; James N. and Margaret J. O'Gara; William S. and Mary Jo Didden; Paavo and Ann Sepri; and Justin S. and Anna P. Heuer, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6848 for Sewer Facilities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 43 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 44. Section 14, Township 29, Range 38, Sub. 50, Lot 23, owned by Richard F. Fincke, Trustee, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z- 6842 for Water Treatment Plant.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 44 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 45. Section 23, Township 29, Range 38, Parcels 2 and 250, owned by State of Florida, IITF; and Flower Blossom, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z- 6407 for Water Plant & Sewer Facilities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 45 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 46. Section 34, Township 29, Range 38, Parcel 501, owned by Kevin Chittenden, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6823 for Mini-Warehouses.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 46 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 47. Section 11, Township 30, Range 38, Parcel 500, owned by Frangar, LLC, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6909 for Outside Sale of Mobile Homes.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 47 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 48. Section 11, Township 30, Range 38, Parcels 510, 513, 515, 516, 517, 523, 524, 525, 531, 539, owned by Abbott Manufactured Housing, Inc.; Amos Marlow, Life Estate; Joe J. McCarthy; Emil Pizzulo and Emil C. Pizzulo; Carol Lee Tinkler and Paula Ann Lear; Peggy M. Davis and Ernestine Turner; and AW Properties of Barefoot Bay, LLC, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6192 for Outside Sale of Mobile Homes on Parcel 515 only; Z-7834 for Sale of Alcoholic Beverages on Parcels 523, 524, 525; Z-7835 for Outside Sale of Mobile Homes on Parcels 510, 539; Z-8294 for Sale of Alcoholic Beverages on Parcels 510, 515, 516, 517, 523, 524, 525, 531, 539; Z-8368 for Water Plant and Sale of Alcoholic Beverages on Parcels 510, 539; and Z-8459 for Water Plant and Sewer Facilities on Parcels 510, 513, 515, 516, 517, 525, 531, 539.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 48 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 49. Section 11, Township 30, Range 38, Parcel 538, owned by Walter Janke, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6945 for Outside Sale of Mobile Homes.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 49 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 50. Section 14, Township 30, Range 38, Parcel 272, owned by Eugene R. Lomando and Anthony Lopes, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6927 for Outside Sale of Mobile Homes.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 50 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 51. Section 14, Township 30, Range 38, Parcels 509, 519, owned by Micco Properties, LLC, and San Sebastian Water LLC, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6552 for Water Plant.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 51 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 52. Item withdrawn.

Item 53. Section 23, Township 30, Range 38, Parcel 257, owned by American Telephone & Telegraph Company, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6926 for Telephone Switching Center.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 53 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 54. Section 8, Township 30, Range 39, Parcels 501, 506, 510 thru 516; Section 17, Township 30, Range 39, Parcels 250, 266 thru 277, 283, owned by State of Florida, TIITF; Lloyd S. and Michelle M. Richman; Christopher J. Giordano; Bowers Espy; Ferguson Peters, Jr.; State of Florida, TIITF; Robert James and Beverly Ann Bozung; C. Richard and Elizabeth Donovan; Gerald L. Giacomino, Life Estate; Thomas J. and Lee Ann McCormick; Martin J. and Sharee Budnick, Life Estate; Hamish and Christine Osborne; Kenneth S. and Zollie P. Reed; John and Sheila W. McCarthy; Jack and Edith Dinnan; Nils M. and Catherine Ingebrigtsen; Barry Scott Garcia and Tamara J. Garrison; and Kent D. Hamilton and Ann L. Hamilton, Co-Trustees, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6485 for Water Plant and Sewer Facilities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 54 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 55. Section 01, Township 25, Range 35, Parcel 1, owned by CG Reed Land Clearing, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6990 for Commercial Borrow Pit and Z-8363 for Tenant Dwelling Mobile Home.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 55 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 56. Section 06, Township 25, Range 36, Parcel 251, owned by David S. and Barbara Y. Moody, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6686 for Permanent Commercial Entertainment & Amusement Enterprises.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 56 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 57. Section 18, Township 25, Range 36, Parcels 751, 753, owned by Martin Lake Corporation and The Suntree Partners, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permits Z-6643 for Commercial Borrow Pit on both parcels and Z-8009 for Towers & Antennae on Parcel 753 only, retaining Z-8845 for Towers & Antennae.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 57 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 58. Section 02, Township 26, Range 36, Parcels 500, 502, owned by Brevard County, c/o Property Control, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6914 for Sewer Facilities and retaining Z-8777 for Waste Water Treatment Plant.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 58 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 59. Section 12, Township 26, Range 36, Parcel 1, owned by Spiro, Fl, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-5666 for Borrow Pit.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 59 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 60. Item withdrawn.

Item 61. Section 12, Township 26, Range 36, Sub. DE, Block 37, Lot 3, owned by US. Sprint Communications Company, Limited Partnership, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6939 for Telephone Switching Center.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 61 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 62. Item withdrawn

Item 63. Section 23, Township 26, Range 37, Sub. 26, Block 14, Lot 13, owned by GNB Properties, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permits Z-6547 for Sewer Facilities and Z-7868 for Sale of Alcoholic Beverages.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 63 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 64. Section 30, Township 26, Range 37, Parcel 505, owned by Hoff of Brevard LC, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6811 for School.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 64 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 65. Section 01, Township 27, Range 36, Parcel 760, owned by Talwil Corporation, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6876 for Zero Lot Line Subdivision.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 65 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 66. Item withdrawn.

Item 67. Section 36, Township 25, Range 36, Parcels 514.1 thru 521.7, 522 thru 524.C, 527 thru 530.D, owned by Tammy S. Lien; Kimberly R. and Mark E. Williams; Robert H. and Judith N. Glaudel; Dawn G. Schmalenberger; Randall C. and Susan R. Highsmith; Gilberto and Francisca Padua; Thomas J. Macaulay; Suzanne C. Sabo; Geoffrey and Joan A. Coombes; John P. and Linda Glenday; Walter R. and Charla A. Anderson; George T. Leace; Robert D. and Charlotte A. Giles; John E. and Mary L. Thomas; Charles E. Knight; Michael L. and Patricia P. Murray; Crawford L. Grove and Geraldine A. Grove, Living Trust; Mary P. Trout; John F. and Mary A. Oppermann; William Bunyak and Edward Bunyak; Christel E. Siedler and Sabine Zabaroni; Ruth I. Vinuya; William J. (Jr.) and Toni R. Steele; Keith R. Johnson; James T. West; Marion B. Blake and Beverly Wall; Macon C. and Geraldine N. Ballard; Theresa L. Vester; Saverio J. Barbieri and Eli Thortveit; Jeanne E. Rockefeller; Terry C. Collins and Gina M. Carpenter-Collins; Gordon H. and Karen M. Lee; Sandra J. Price; Antonio and Regina Didomenico; Robert E. and Elizabeth Gustafson; Martin J. Schnetzer; AG Edwards Trust Company, Trustee of the DB Peterson Trust; Ann B. Earnest; Sharon K. Beni, c/o Sharon K. Johnson; Paul M. Furtado; Kenneth M. Meyer; Eddie G. and Patricia J. Lovins; Loretta M. Medina; Donald Leitner; Janet E Sokolowski; Linda Bronson; Sara A. Sands; Elizabeth Denise Ames; Jane R. and James R. (Jr.) Heaps; Henrik Eskesen; Mark J. Drollinger; Gertrude C. Hart; Ethel Bradford and Joanne Bradford; Mary O. Hales-Snyder; John and Sue Ellen Rennicks; Howard J. and Julianne M. Whalen; John R. Laviska, Jr. and Nancy A. Laviska; Thomas W. Latonik and Linda Marie Mantos; Mark A. Underwood and Holly A. Christmas; William F. and Carol A. Frost; Robert J. Condon, Trustee; Patrick A. Begley; Daniel P. Nebel and Mary Abell; Eric R. Bronson; Stephen C. Harding; Russell L. Partlo; Gregory P. and Cheryl A. Doxey; Sally J. Jecmen; Steven B. Walker; Steven P. and Gail E. Sheppard; Virginia A. Tarbox; John J. Kelly; Edward W. and Maureen E. Bunyak; Glenn R. and Karen A. Schuster; Cherie Harris and Timothy Patrick Shumway; Zane G. and K. Nancy Tomlinson; Glenn A. and Sandra L. Ferguson; Victoria Abchal; Huey Napier; Paul J. (Jr.) and Christine Z. Dewitte; Steven W. Smith; Arthur W. McLaughlin and Louise M. Huyck; T. Roger Allan; Reginald A. and Jacqueline D. Parris; William Albert and Helen Mae Hedge; Laurie A. Lashomb; Norman G. and Donna F. Powers; Ronald J. and Joanne Fretwell; Suellen Maull; Dianna Daprile; James T. Loring and Daniel C. Loring; Martha H. Sheppard, Trustee; Christopher E. and Bobby C. Chambers; Patrick Begley; Annette M. Salamone; Dennis R. and Carol L. Cole; Fred D. Zarzour; John B. and Dorel J. Gresty; Allan S. and Sandra S. Susten; Danny E. and Sandra A. Hall; Linda S. Weiss; John C. and Julie K. England, Life Estate; Matthew and Juliette F. Nelson; Sharon E. Eichorn and Herbert F. Gay; Cecil H. and Ruth S. Brown; Cleveland B. Bronner and Edith J. Bronner, Trustees; H. Ennis Jones, Jr.; C. Leonard and Frances N. Hippler; Carol R. Brooks and Jason W. Salley; Patricia Y. Bing; Patricia Yeatman Bing and Janos Veszeli; Michael Chaly and Olimpiada Chaly, Trustee; James R. and Shirley M. Cowell, Life Estate; Nancy H. Sprinkle and John A. Sprinkle, Co-Trustees; Lloyd H. and Andrea G. Worster; Elizabeth B. King; Stephen A. Wojcik; Robin S. Wengert; Katherine G. Ellis; Alan B. and Bonnie L. Campion; Salvatore A. and Mary C. Tusa; John P. and Lisa M. Arsenault; Francisco Odzimowski; Frances Anne Berryhill; Joseph F. and Adrin E. Weedel; Mark and Patricia G. Kepic; John M. (Jr.) and Beverly M. Smialek; Chester E. and Kathleen B. Parker; John G. and Charlene M. Ponder; Wayne M. and Dorothy P. Adcox; Lynn W. (Jr.) and Carol J. Kling; Lonnie M. and Margaret G. Pell; Gaetano and Arlene Saccente; William L. (Sr.) and Catherine M. Bussey; Sam D. and Dolores M. Latham; Charles E. Walker, Estate; Harry W. Watkins; Carlos Calix; Steven W. Vester; Robert and Elaine Schaeffer; Nan Joi Cumming; Darlene T. Votry; Alexander N. and Janice E. Grillo; Marlene C. Kelly; James D. Hughey, Jr.; Ronald L. and Carol J. Rummel; Gordon I. and Heather K. Coty; Dorothy W. Porter; Thomas P. Reilly; Gerald R. and Rita C. Pennisi; Michael A. Lipani; Frank J. and Jean Len; Lenard D. and Faith A. Sweeting; Edward J. and Kathleen O. Walsh; Sarah M. Renno; William H. Beck and Frances G. Cato-Beck, Trustees; Betty L. MacGaunn and Cheryl E. Zeman; Joseph A. and Frances E. Gillis; Carol J. Boyd; Deborah A. Speidel; Monica DeVargas; Doug J. and Barbara L. Brace; Charles A. Wilson and Shirley M. Wilson, Trustee; Louise M. Alles and Bruce C. Alles; Donald and Lillian Miller; William J. and Kathleen P. Kearney; Sarah K. Weaver; John P. and Teresa E. Adams; Nancy M. Thompson, Trustee; Eugene C. and Myrna S. Phillips; Walter L. and Margaret A. Pitt; Dorothy J. Richardson; Gerald B. and Elsie L. Reimer; James P. and Janice C. Walsh; Catherine J. Chipman; Carol A. Crisman; Michael W. Daly; Charles and Kathleen M. Watson; Joseph T. and R. Jean Chalhoub; Anthony and Patricia Perna; William F. and Carol A. Frost; Carol A. Martin and Mary Lee Aronson; James D. Tschannen; Rodney P. Bornefeld; Robert B. Ericson and Robin J. Dye; Catherine E. and Gary L. Hollar; John B. Judge, Trustee and Geraldine L. Judge, Trustee; Charles and Kathleen Watson; Cheryl E. and James J. Zeman; Charles E. and Ellen Marie Gauthier; Bruce Desoe; Joan B. Weidner; James A. McEwan, IV; Richard W. and Rose M. ; Leonhart; Mary L. Rudzinski; Harley Dale Cox; Nancy Moss Thompson, Trustee; Walter Potthoff, Jr. and Deborah A. MacDougall; Norman R. and Marie E. Hynes; Robert E. Stevens; John K. and Patricia M. Hemphill; James R. Hoover; Leonard P. and Jane M. Brunotte; Diana L. Greco, Trustee; Robbin and Steven R. Foucault; Lois M. Schaper, Life Estate; Edward J. and Marjorie Cerro; John W. Berryhill; W. Michael Rogers and Judy Rogers; Marshall and Suzanne Frank; Marsha J. Steele; and William and Constance Van Doren, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6426 for Tower .

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 67 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 68. Section 13, Township 27, Range 37, Sub. 02, Block 1, Lots 1, 4.02, 12.01 thru 13.73; Sub. 75, Block 1, Lot 2.01, owned by State of Florida IITF; Brevard County, c/o Property Control; Telemak, Inc.; Nicholas Telemachos, Trustee; Ernest Mutterer; Harold and Anna McElyea, Trustees; John and Mary F. Ferrandino; Paul A. Dieguez; Christopher P. Comfort; Ray E. Darling; John and Angelique Ballauer; Virginia B. Olsen, Trustee; Reita L. Erler and Holly L. Kahler; Robert M. and Betty J. Smith; Charles W. and Phyllis A. Epps; Frank and Michelle Krause; Richard D. and Meredith L. McIntyre; Orris O. Rollie, Co-Trustee and David J. Eng; Henry J. and Martha A. Baskin; Kit Garfield Cottrell and Jean Cottrell; McKinney Family, LTD; George Irish; Societe Anonyme Vermont-Parc; Matilda Eva Keenan, Trustee; Donald G. and Mary J. Hudson, Trustees; Ramior and Antigone Dieguez; Peter A. Charlay; Florence Murphy; Ingeborg F. Chard, Trustee; Roger W. Moro and Burton Bornstein; H. Jack and Martha A. Baskin; Robert F. and Jean R. Kelley; John H. McKinley, Jr.; Billy R. and Anne Fairbank Cooper; George E. and Jeannine V. Irish; Delta Omega, Inc.; Robert F. and Jean R. Kelley; Robert F. Kelley; Frank C. and Helen E. Burtnett, Burtnett Revocable Living Trust; Richard G. Elmslie and Mary D. Elmslie, Trustees; Brian Watson; Charter Bank Custodian for the Ronald R. Stempien IRA; Richard A. and Susan Leavitt; Enrique and Nilda Caracciolo; Anthony J. and Elise Anne Rufino; Fred and Elaine C. Paniccia; Joyce L. Bumgarner; Patrick Minnock; Kenneth Phares; Robert Kelley; Richard J. Lapp; Edward P. (Sr.) and Reita L. Erler; Rolando Bernui and Resorts by the Sea, Inc.; Geraldine McDonald; Robert M. Smith and Betty J. Smith; Dominick Algeria, Jr., Resorts by the Sea, Inc.; Bobby Morris, Trustee; David G. Stempien and Ronald R. Stempien; Azfar M. and Maheen Malik; William H. Baker; Edward B. Wiechowski and Carl A. Padovano; Ronald G. and Ann M. Ruel; Jay M. and Rose Y. Eldridge; Joel A. Bornstein and Gerald J. Bornstein; Russell M. Solt, II and Leslie A. Scott Solt; John R. and Jo Ann Patton; Enrique E. Caracciolo-Trejos and Nilda Lidia Caracciolo; Catherine W. Kligler; Delta-Omega, Inc., Employee Profit Sharing Plan; Lawrence G. and Diantha M. Schear; Ronald R. and Geraldine M. Stempien; Diane D. Nadolny, Trustee; Charles J. Cote; Rachel F. Clark; and Brevard County, c/o Property Control, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permits Z-6490 for Tourist Efficiencies, Kitchen Facilities in 100% of the units and Sewer Facilities on all except Sub. 2, Block 1, Lots 1, 4.02; Removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6542 for Tourist Efficiencies, Kitchen Facilities in 100% of the units and Sewer Facilities on all except Sub. 2, Block 1, Lots 1, 4.02 and Sub. 75, Block 1, Lot 2.01; Removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6812 for Tourist Efficiencies and Kitchen Facilities in 100% of the Units on all except Sub. 2, Block 1, Lots 1, 4.02 and Sub. 75, Block 1, Lot 2.01; Removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6815 for Tourist Efficiencies and Kitchen Facilities in 100% of the Units on all except Sub. 02, Block 1, Lot 4.02 and Sub. 75, Block 1, Lot 2.01; Removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-7750 for Sale of Alcoholic Beverages on Sub. 75, Block 1, Lot 2.01; Removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6543 for Tourist Efficiencies, Kitchen Facilities in 100% of the Units, Sewer Facilities and Cocktail Lounge on Sub. 02, Block 1, Lots 1, 4.02 only; Removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6814 for Tourist Efficiencies and Kitchen Facilities in 100% of the Units on Sub. 02, Block 1, Lot 1 only.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 68 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 69. Section 18, Township 27, Range 37, Parcels 509, 520 (BU-1 portion only), owned by Gordana Petrovich, Trustee and Hal L. Snow and Joanna P. Snow, Co-Trustees, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6609 for Outside Sale of Mobile Homes & Trailers (Recreational Vehicles).

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 69 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 70. Section 25, Township 27, Range 37, Sub. EV, Lot 4, owned by Michael C. Gagnon and Waltraut Gaccione, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6452 for Convalescent Home.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 70 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 71. Section 30, Township 27, Range 38, Sub. 50, Lots B.03, B.38, owned by 3607 Broadway Realty Association LLC and Pizza Hut, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permits Z-6583 for Sewer Facilities and Z-7224 for Sale of Alcoholic Beverages (Lot B.03 only).

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 71 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 72. Section 04, Township 28, Range 35, Parcel 1, owned by Deer Park Ranch, Ltd., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6893 for Tenant Dwelling Mobile Home.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 72 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 73. Section 03, Township 28, Range 36, Parcel 9.2, owned by John M. and Elizabeth F. Bovis, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6474 for Cocktail Lounge.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 73 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 74. Section 12, Township 28, Range 36, Sub. 50, Block 41, Lots 1 through 6, 9 through 33, 36, 37, 40 through 46; Block 42, Lots 1 through 11, 14 through 46; all of Block 43; Block 44, Lots 1 through 9, 12 through 31, 37 through 46; Block 45, Lots 1 through 19, 24, 25, 28 through 46; Block 46, Lots 1 through 15, 17 through 19, 24 through 30, 35 through 46; Block 47, Lots 1 through 27, 29 through 39, 41 through 46; Block 48, Lots 1 through 23, 28 through 38, 43 through 46; all of Block 49; Block 50, Lots 1 through 10, 12 through 46; Block 51, Lots 1 through 17, 24 through 46; Block 52, Lots 1 through 42; Block 53, Lots 1 through 19, 25, 28 through 46; Block 54, Lots 1 through 14, 17 through 40; Block 55, Lots 1 through 12, 16, 17, 24 through 34, 39 through 46; Block 55, Lot 15; all of Block 56; Block 57, Lots 1 through 23, 28 to 46; Block 58, Lots 1 through 17, 21 through 29, 32 through 46; all of Block 59; all of Block 60; Block 61, Lots 5 through 16, 18 to 46, ex. I-95 R/W; Block 62, Lots 1 through 46, ex. I-95 R/W; Block 63, Lots 1 through 6, 14 through 17, 20 through 34, 35, 36 through 39, 42 through 46; Block 64, Lots 1 through 11, 14, 15, 20 through 23, 28 through 46; all of Block 65; Block 66, Lots 1 through 11, 14 through 46; Block 67, Lots 1 through 17, 24 through 46; Block 68, Lots 1 through 4, 11 through 29, 32 through 46; all of Block 69; all of Block 70; Block 72, Lots 1 through 6, 16 through 31, 40 through 46, ex. I-95 R/W; Block 73, Lots 1 through 46, ex. I-95 R/W; Block 74, Lots 1 through 46, ex. I-95 R/W; Block 75, Lots 1 through 19, 24 to 34, 37, 38, 43 through 46; Block 76, Lots 1 through 11, 20 through 46; all of Block 77; Block 78, Lots 1 through 6, 17 through 29, 32 through 46; all of Block 79; Block 80, Lots 1 through 4, 20 to 33, 39 to 42, 43 through 46; Blocks 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 99, 100, lying N & E of I-95; Section 13, Township 28, Range 36, Sub. 25, Block 101, Lot 1, owned by Bertram Schild and Frederick Zacharias and Stephen Ehrhardt and Deborah L. Ehrhardt, Co-Trustees, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6894 for Sewer Facilities and Water Plant.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 74 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 75. Section 15, Township 28, Range 36, Parcels 1, 5, 6, 754, owned by Errorhead, Inc. and Florida Gas Transmission Company, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permits Z-6594 for Tenant Dwelling (Mobile Home) on all except 754, and Z-8761 for Transmission Facilities on all; retaining Z-9769 for Towers & Antennae on Parcel 1.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item 75 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Item 26. Section 14, Township 24, Range 36, Parcel 259, owned by Wuesthoff Memorial Hospital, Inc., which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board for removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6584 for Clinic & Hospital.

John Van Gorp, Vice President of Finance and Strategic Planning for Wuesthoff Hospital, stated they received a notice of removal of Conditional Use Permit for property the hospital owns on Merritt Island; it owns 11 acres that are currently not developed surrounding an existing surgery center and clinic; and the plan is to expand that facility when the needs of the community require that. He stated most of the properties they purchase, they develop a portion and set aside certain portions for future development; that is the plan in Merritt Island; and requested a continuation of the Conditional Use Permit. He stated the property is currently permitted for a clinic and hospital; it has been that way for many years; and it is consistent with what the residents of the community expect. He stated if the permit is removed, it would raise some issues.

Commissioner Pritchard requested Mr. Enos or Mr. Corwin comment on the ability of the Wuesthoff complex on Merritt Island to initiate expansion in the future and the compatibility of an expansion in the neighborhood. Zoning Official Rick Enos stated the Conditional Use Permit is still a valid permit in the Code; and if the Board wishes to deny the application to remove the permit, the provision is still valid and would allow expansion of the current facility onto this parcel. Commissioner Pritchard inquired about the size of the expansion and the effect it might have, and whether it would be five, ten, or fifteen years down the road. Mr. Van Gorp responded it would probably be within five years, but he does not know the size. He advised they developed a new hospital in Melbourne; that has been the primary focus for the last couple of years; and with that being developed, the opportunities will present themselves for other parcels to be developed. He noted it would potentially be doubling the size of the current facility. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the location of the current facility; with Mr. Van Gorp responding approximately a quarter mile south of SR 528 on North Courtenay. Commissioner Pritchard stated he would support not removing the CUP for the facility; stated medical care enhances the neighborhoods; if someone needs medical care, the closeness of the facility would be an asset; and Wuesthoff has been a good neighbor.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to deny Item 26, removal of Conditional Use Permit Z-6584 for Clinic & Hospital on property owned by Wuesthoff memorial Hospital, Inc. (See pages for Zoning Resolutions.)

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m.

_________________________________
JACKIE COLON, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)