MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

April 29, 1996

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on April 29, 1996, at 5:30 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 St. Johns Street, Melbourne, Florida. Present were: Chairman Mark Cook, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O?Brien, Nancy Higgs, and Scott Ellis, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

 

Chairman Mark Cook led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

DISCUSSION, RE: JASON CAMPBELL v. BREVARD COUNTY

County Attorney Scott Knox advised he sent a memorandum to the Board outlining what happened in the case of Jason Campbell v. Brevard County where the Magistrate?s recommended order to the Federal District Court Judge recommended the preliminary injunction of the County?s continued use of its Park Use Ordinance. He requested direction from the Board whether to object to the Magistrate?s report or revise the Ordinance, which has been scheduled for May 14, 1996; and recommended the Board revise the Ordinance which would moot the lawsuit.

Chairman Cook inquired if the County will still be liable for the attorney?s fees; with Mr. Knox responding yes, it will still be an outstanding issue. Chairman Cook stated he read the Magistrate?s report; Mr. Campbell was told by Parks and Recreation that he would be denied; he appealed to the Board which sustained that denial; but in the report, it indicates the Board made the initial decision where it should have been a ministerial decision. Mr. Knox advised there was no written decision by the Parks and Recreation staff as the Ordinance seems to call for; they made the determination and told the individual that he has a right to appeal the decision without putting anything in writing; and that opportunity was exercised by the applicant. He stated the Park Use Ordinance and Festival Ordinance were two things the Board was considering at the time the application came up; the Festival Ordinance generated the request coming before the Board; and the Park Use Ordinance was an afterthought because the permit comes out of the natural flow of things if the Board grants the waiver of the Festival Ordinance. Mr. Knox advised the Magistrate did not get into addressing the Festival Ordinance other than to say he had questions about whether it was constitutional; he focused on the Park Use Ordinance which had too much discretion vested in staff; and amendment to that Ordinance would take care of that problem. He noted once the problem is taken care of, the case would probably go away except for the attorney?s fees and costs.

Chairman Cook advised there could be some items in the Ordinance that need to be looked at, but Mr. Campbell said the $3,000 that was collected at the last hemp festival was put into a private bank account, and the money was collected to further a political cause; however, there is no evidence of that; and inquired at what point does the Board have some discretion about not turning a County park into a commercial activity. Mr. Knox advised he disagrees with the Magistrate over the characterization of the Festival Ordinance because it has some clearly defined standards and clear points of entry where the Board can say it can require this and that; but that was not the Ordinance he focused on; so the Board needs to address the Park Use Ordinance because even Chairman DISCUSSION, RE: JASON CAMPBELL v. BREVARD COUNTY (CONTINUED)

Cook at one point had some questions about the constitutionality of the Park Use Ordinance, and predicted what would happen. He stated the Festival Ordinance has more standards set forth that the Board can look at and require, which is what the Constitution requires; and the Park Use Ordinance does not have that, so that is a problem. Chairman Cook stated their right to free speech was not infringed on as they were free to use the Park; but he understands the argument of prior restraint as the permitting scheme could be construed as that. He stated if the Board responds to what the Magistrate recommended in ten days it would allow the judge to issue a decision; the attorney?s fees should not escalate since the County would be responding to what the Magistrate said; and there are issues the Magistrate put in the report that he would not characterize the same way. He stated the Board had a memo from the Park Ranger saying that people in groups of 20 each at the last festival were going into wooded areas, and he perceived them to be smoking marijuana because there was a strong odor when he arrived, but he did not catch anyone in the act; one of the speakers tried to incite a riot by telling people they were not breaking the law; so he wonders if it is to the County?s benefit to contest it, otherwise it will have to pay the attorney?s fees of the plaintiff. Chairman Cook stated either way the Board will look at amending the Ordinance, but it may be an advantage to at least respond to the report and bring up additional arguments to see what the judge says. He inquired how would that put the Board in a worst position; with Mr. Knox responding it would not and it would not cause the other side to incur additional attorney?s fees. He stated they are going to respond to it; so if the Board responds to it, it will not hurt anything; the only impact that would have is possibly to change the District Court Judge?s mind; and if that happens, then they will come back to the Board to see where it wants to go from there. Chairman Cook repeated previous statements of making a response and not incurring additional legal fees. He stated it was not the intent to deny anyone?s protected rights; there were legitimate concerns used in the decision-making; and recommended the Board respond.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize the County Attorney to respond to the Magistrate?s recommended order to the District Court Judge regarding a preliminary injunction of the County?s continued use of the Park Use Ordinance.

 

Commissioner Ellis inquired what will be achieved by contesting; with Mr. Knox responding the Board would have to equate it to the administrative law process where it gets a hearing officer who will make proposed findings of facts and conclusions of law to the department; in this case the District Court Judge sits in the same role as the department; he will look at the Magistrate?s proposed findings and ruling on the law, and will either adopt it, change it, or modify it; and they can respond to the objections. He stated it is only a preliminary injunction; there would actually have to be a hearing to present all the evidence; and the judge could reverse it at that point if he decides the evidence did not support the original injunction. He stated what the Board is trying to accomplish is to persuade the judge that the temporary injunction should not be issued.

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

 

DISCUSSION, RE: LOSS OF WATER PRESSURE AT MIMS WATER PLANT

Commissioner Scarborough advised there was a problem with loss of water pressure in the Mims Water Plant; and they followed all the rules and notified the Press, but there were people who were drinking the water through mid-day the next day because they did not read the paper or watch the news. He stated the problem was not a problem when it was tested because there was no seepage into the lines; but if notice is to be given, it should be effective enough so that if there was a problem people would know about it. He requested Mr. Martens prepare a report on some mechanisms the Board could consider in the future to give proper notice for public safety.

Chairman Cook advised that will be fine.

 

DISCUSSION, RE: 1996 BOARD MEETING SCHEDULE

Commissioner O?Brien advised the revised 1996 Board Meeting Schedule has a workshop and meeting on July 9, 1996; and originally workshops were to be scheduled on Tuesdays where there were no regular meetings so they could continue until an appropriate time or when they were over. He stated the September 4 budget workshop is on a Wednesday and should be moved to Thursday September 5; and September 18 which is a Wednesday should be moved to September 19 so that all workshops are on Thursdays to be more consistent. He stated it is unfair to have a workshop from 1:30 p.m. to 5:29 p.m. then race downstairs for a regular meeting at 5:30 p.m. until midnight; it does not serve the public well; and some workshops had to be cut off during good debate. He requested the Board consider moving July 9 to July 11, September 4 to September 5, September 18 to September 19 and October 15 to October 17, 1996.

Chairman Cook stated he does not have a problem with it, but changes should be coordinated with each Commissioner?s Office; and recommended the County Manager be authorized to do that.

Commissioner O?Brien advised the Manatee Protection Plan Workshop is scheduled for May 14 at 1:30 p.m. and the evening meeting is scheduled on the same day; it will not be an easy workshop because of the strong interest; and recommended moving it to May 16, 1996 at 10:00 a.m.

Chairman Cook stated that probably can be done, but Commissioners do not have their schedules so he cannot say for sure. Commissioner Ellis recommended if the Manatee Protection Plan Workshop is moved, the County Manager call each Commission Office tomorrow. Chairman Cook stated it should be a stand alone workshop; and there is a lot of interest, so it may have to be held in the Board room which will hold the most people.

Commissioner Higgs advised of phone calls inquiring if the Board will take public comments at the Manatee Protection Plan Workshop; and stated the Board needs to make a decision on that at the next meeting. Chairman Cook advised the Board could decide that now.

Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to allow three minutes for each speaker to provide public comments at the Manatee Protection Plan Workshop.

DISCUSSION, RE: 1996 BOARD MEETING SCHEDULE (CONTINUED)

Commissioner Ellis advised the Board does not need comments why they hate or like manatees, but should have comments on specifics of the Plan that the public is concerned about. Commissioner O?Brien stated the Chairman should announce that the Board will not solicit comments in support of or against the Plan, or comments that have nothing to do with the Plan. Commissioner Scarborough recommended people be allowed to stand in support or opposition to the Plan, but comment on specifics and provide suggestions for changes. He stated the Chair has authority to rule them out of order if they are redundant because it is unfair to the people who want to know what is occurring if the Board never gets to the major portions of the subject.

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

 

Chairman Cook advised the Board has a meeting scheduled with the Titusville City Council on May 9, 1996; and inquired if there is a specific purpose for the meeting and if it should continue.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised there is nothing firm from the County, but he will be talking to City Manager Sam Ackley to identify the topics, and will report back on May 7, 1996. Commissioner Scarborough stated if there is nothing specific, it should be continued to a later time because the Board has a lot of things on its agenda, and the City does also, so the time may be better spent on their own activities.

 

REPORT, RE: DUST FROM CONSTRUCTION OF WINDSOR ESTATES

Chairman Cook advised of complaints from homeowners about the dust being created from the construction of Windsor Estates; and recommended the County Manager check on it.

 

RESOLUTION, RE: ENDORSING INTERGOVERNMENTAL TASK FORCE AND DELAY

OF COUNTY BILLING FOR HMO MEDICAID HOSPITAL ADMISSIONS

Chairman Cook advised the Board needs to act on a resolution regarding HMO Medicaid hospital admissions, because the Legislative Session is ending, and it needs to take a position; there is a proposed bill that will cost in excess of half a million dollars from the County?s General Fund if it passes; and recommended the Board adopt the resolution that will ask the Legislature to delay the bill for one year until a task force is created to work out cost saving measures with the State and County regarding Medicaid funding.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution endorsing establishment of an intergovernmental task force to develop a cost-saving county Medicaid funding methodology for HMO Medicaid hospital admissions, and requesting delay of implementation until a funding mechanism is developed by the task force. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 96-123.)

SELECTION OF NOMINEES FOR PRIVATE SECTOR REPRESENTATIVES, RE:

JOBS AND EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP (JEP) BOARD

Linda South advised the Jobs and Education Partnership (JEP), through an Executive Order by the Governor, seeks to redesign the method by which workforce development is delivered in all counties in the State; the initiative has been a long and arduous process held up by no funding from the federal government; however, the State has chosen to proceed and designated the JEP as the entity that will oversee workforce development issues in Brevard County. She stated the only funding stream that is going to be affected at this time is the JEP dollars; the Board understands that process through the Private Industry Council (PIC); and JEP has asked that the current PIC be redesignated, and a nomination process be implemented to set a new board to oversee the Jobs and Training Partnership Act (JTPA). Ms. South advised they have been meeting as a charter community group since October, 1995, to address the issues of workforce development needs in Brevard County, and prepared an opportunity for Brevard County to go forward in workforce development issues; and what they need from the Board is an appointment process to seat the new JEP Board to replace the existing PIC Board and assume the role and responsibilities of that Board under the JTPA. She stated the Economic Development Council was the convening agency to lead the restructuring of the JEP; and they need a new board seated to take on the role of the JTPA.

Chairman Cook inquired if the Board needs to select 15 names from the first page and endorse the second page to give the amount of people who will be needed to fulfill the requirement; with Ms. South responding yes, it will meet the expanded vision of what the Governor wants for the State of Florida in workforce development and comply with the federal regulations. Chairman Cook recommended Commissioners rank the nominees and the County Manager compile the top 15. Ms. South stated they are behind schedule the State has set; they are mandated to have the JEP process completed by May 22, 1996; and they have a lot of work to do before then. Chairman Cook inquired if all the agencies that are a part of the process were given an opportunity to respond; with Ms. South responding yes, they had multiple County partners participating in the JEP charter process; and a time line that was sent to Tallahassee was co-signed by seven major partners, including Brevard Workforce Development Board, Jobs and Education Partnership, Brevard Community College, Brevard School System, Vocational Rehabilitation, AFL-CIO, and Economic Development Council. Chairman Cook inquired if it meets all the requirements set forth by the Governor; with Ms. South responding yes. She stated one of the items in the Executive Summary is that the Board needs to be cognizant of the population diversification and ethnic diversification in the County. Chairman Cook inquired if over 60% of the representatives on the JEP Board will be from the business community; with Ms. South responding they were unable to get a sufficient number of business nominations to comply with the JTPA law, so the charter group downgraded the participation of the business community; and at this point it represents 52% business which meets the requirements. Chairman Cook stated he does not remember being notified of that and 60% is important because not all business people will attend every meeting and the users will dominate the process. He stated with 60% there is a margin to meet what the Governor meant which was to have business people in charge of the process. Ms. South stated the problem is the strict time line; and there is an opportunity to increase the board after they get the initial board seated and not risk losing the funding. She noted it was the consensus of the charter group that they could go back and revisit the number of seats and percentages.

SELECTION OF NOMINEES FOR PRIVATE SECTOR REPRESENTATIVES, RE:

JOBS AND EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP (JEP) BOARD (CONTINUED)

EDC Executive Director Lynda Weatherman indicated they were having trouble getting the total numbers for business; a suggestion was to have the Commissioners submit business names, but the statute does not allow that; and she spoke to Chairman Cook?s secretary about downsizing, but it was not done in writing.

Discussion ensued on the 60% business representation, the time lines to accomplish the task, the two-year plan, letter from Secretary Jamerson on the number of tasks that needed to be accomplished, the transition plan to increase the Board to 60% business seats, JTPA law requirements of three nominations for every two seats available and specific general business organizations, the importance of the board because of the millions of dollars it will disburse, and the concept and theory of the Governor?s Executive Order.

Ms. South advised they contacted four Chambers, the Port Authority, Brevard Manufacturers Association, Aerospace Consortium, and Brevard Human Resources Consortium to make recommendations. She stated it is an important board and its scope will increase if block grants pass and it receives the money for all training in Brevard County.

Commissioner Higgs advised if the Board will be involved at various points in the JEP process, and will have input along the line more than it has had in the past, and with the assurance they have given the Board, it will get the 60% because the leverage will be there to achieve that goal. Ms. South stated the Board has an extraordinarily important role to play in the JEP process.

Chairman Cook inquired if a County Commissioner will serve on the board; with Ms. South responding Joan Madden is on the PIC Board representing the County; and there is a request from the JEP charter group that the Board appoint a representative from the Commissioners or staff to continue to represent the County. Chairman Cook stated the Governor specifically asked for a commissioner. Ms. South stated in the early process they did ask for that, but in the legislation that requirement has been removed; however, the Governor and JEP process emphasize the need for local control; so the Board can decide if it wants a Commissioner on the Board.

Commissioner O?Brien advised Group 2 does not include NASA which is the County?s biggest employer; with Ms. South responding it is a government agency. Commissioner O?Brien stated the Department of Labor, Brevard Community College, and the Brevard County Public Schools are public agencies; and inquired if anyone contacted NASA; with Ms. South responding yes, and they can be added on.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to add NASA in Group 2, Public Sector, approve Groups 2 and 3, and authorize the Chairman to appoint a Commissioner and that Commissioner be authorized to appoint a designee to the JEP Board.

 

Commissioner Higgs suggested leaving to the discretion of the Chairman, the appointment of a staff person; with Commissioners Cook, O?Brien, and Scarborough responding affirmatively.

SELECTION OF NOMINEES FOR PRIVATE SECTOR REPRESENTATIVES, RE:

JOBS AND EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP (JEP) BOARD (CONTINUED)

Commissioner Higgs advised she will not vote on the motion or issue and will disclose that a company which she has stock and interest in has had contract under the JTPA, and it could be perceived as a potential conflict of interest.

Chairman Cook called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs abstained. (See page for Memorandum of Voting Conflict.)

 

REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL?S OPINION, RE: COUNTY ELECTIONS

Commissioner O?Brien advised the Board should require an Attorney General?s Opinion on the non-partisan County Elections, because the Charter had no intent of having a candidate run for office and be unable to reveal to anyone what his political leanings were because it is ludicrous.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Ellis, to request an Attorney General?s Opinion on the County?s Charter regarding elections.

 

Chairman Cook advised this is the first election under the Charter; one item of concern is that judges are precluded from making political speeches on issues as they are non-partisan; another item is the time of the election and whether or not it takes place in September or November; and the Attorney General?s Opinion (AGO) is needed to make sure the County is complying with General laws and the State Constitution and knows what it can and cannot do in conducting elections.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if all the items addressed in Commissioner Ellis? memo need clarification; with Chairman Cook responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired how long will it take; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding two or three months. Commissioner Higgs stated in the absence of that opinion, it will leave questions hanging. Commissioner Scarborough stated conceivably the primary election could be the final election; and if the AGO came in after the September election, it would be too late. Chairman Cook inquired if the Board can ask for an accelerated opinion; with Mr. Knox responding yes. Commissioner Ellis recommended the goal be mid-July when qualifying is completed; and if the AGO is not received by then, the Board should agree to stand by Mr. Knox?s opinion that if there are only two people in a race, it would go to the November election, because it would be too late for the candidates in the middle of August to tell them the election is September 3, 1996.

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

 

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

Chairman Cook called for the public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board made at its public hearing on April 1, 1996, as follows:

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Zoning Official Rick Enos advised William T. McInarnay requested Item 7 be tabled for one month, pending a possible contract for sale.

Item 7. William T. McInarnay?s request for change from EU-2 to RU-1-13 on 0.4 acre located on the south side of Westchester Avenue, southeast of High Point Drive, which was approved by the P&Z Board with a binding development plan limiting house size to no less than 1,500 square feet as voluntarily agreed to by the applicant.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to table Item 7 until May 29, 1996 as requested by the applicant. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Item 1. Daniel J. Herman?s request for Mixed Use District Expansion and change from RP to BU-1 on .98 acre located on the west side of Minton Road, south of Henry Avenue, which was approved by the Local Planning Agency for MUD expansion and approved as BU-1 by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Mixed Use District Expansion as recommended by the Local Planning Agency.

 

Commissioner Higgs inquired if under the MUD they can get BU-1; with Mr. Enos responding yes. Planner Todd Corwin advised approximately 50 feet of the property is designated residential on the Land Use Map. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the designation of the MUD goes along Minton Road and if existing properties that have BU-1 zoning are at the same footage as exist on this property; with Mr. Corwin responding the MUD was established as part of the Minton Road study in 1990; it is currently 250 feet; and that is consistent with the depth of the Time Square Shopping Center that is in the City of West Melbourne. Commissioner Higgs inquired if there is anything unique about this situation other than the parcel being deeper; with Mr. Corwin responding the remaining 50 feet is residential and staff has no other concerns.

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

 

Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve change from RP to BU-1 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Item 2. Brevard County Board of County Commissioners? request for change from GU to GML on 21.44 acres located west of Minton Road and southwest of I-95, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

 

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Item 2 as recommended by the P&Z Board.

 

Commissioner Scarborough advised the Board has been rezoning its own property for some time, but it will not have to do that any more because it will be allowed in any classification. Mr. Enos advised the Board will not have to do it for most park facilities, depending on the extent of the facility.

Pam Hughes, 3145 Ellis Drive, Melbourne, inquired what is the intended long-term public access to the property; with Terry Stoms responding the property was deeded to the County, and as part of the deed there was a dedicated access from Carriage Gate Road to the property. He stated the Board has accepted that access; and it is the only access to the property. Ms. Hughes stated she was told it would be Tennessee Avenue which does not exist on current maps; and she cannot tell where on Carriage Gate Road the access is; with Mr. Stoms responding the soccer complex is south of the two existing borrow pits; and the access comes up the west side of the borrow pit across the northern portion and comes out on an existing right-of-way that intersects Carriage Gate Road.

Bart DeNitto, 3620 Killdear Court, Melbourne, advised the new entrance will be in front of the entranceway to Carriage Gate Subdivision; they were building Carriage Gate II and could not get an entrance because there would be too much traffic going up Carriage Gate Drive from Minton Road; and three years later the access will be right in front of the entranceway of 162 homesites with 300 to 400 cars. He stated with seven soccer fields in that entranceway, they will have another 1,000 cars because of the park and another development; and inquired why go that way when there is an easy access off Minton Road along the power lines that go right into the park. He stated it is a band entrance for a park; it should be on the south side of Minton Road; there will be a massive traffic jam with no light; and they currently have problems making right turns or getting across to Minton Road to U.S. 192. He requested the Board look into another entrance for the park.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he has a problem talking about designing a park which is not a zoning decision but a planning decision; and inquired if the plan for the park will come back to the Board as a planning decision for soccer fields and how they will be designed and where the entrance will be; with Mr. Stoms responding the ingress/egress to the site has been dedicated and is the only entrance. Commissioner Scarborough stated because it is dedicated does not mean it has to be used; and the two issues need to be separated and let the community know the Board is willing to listen to the planning decision separate from the classification of GML.

Commissioner Ellis advised the property was donated to the Greater Melbourne Soccer Association; it had $20,000 to build soccer fields; and since the Board could not waive the impact fees, even though it was a not-for-profit organization, they had to donate the property to the County. He stated Mr. Shields did not donate the property to the County; and the County has to build the fields or it reverts back. Chairman Cook stated that is a planning decision that the Board can look at, but tonight it is rezoning the land to GML.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Commissioner Higgs advised the Board also allocated funds to help with the development of the soccer fields, but it does not have to have the access road that is being discussed. Mr. DeNitto stated that is their major concern; and inquired if they will be notified. Commissioner Higgs recommended Mr. Stoms be directed to contact Carriage Gate homeowners when they have the site plan for review. Mr. Stoms stated they are working to get plans for the access so this is a good time to address it if there are concerns. Commissioner Ellis recommended the residents along Minton and Ellis Roads also be contacted.

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

 

Item 3. Petty?s of Suntree, Inc.?s request for CUP for alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in PIP zoning on 1.2 acres located on the northeast corner of Wickham Road and Promenade Drive, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 3 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Item 4. Leonard Spielvogel, as personal representative of the Estate of Doris L. Wolfe?s request for Small Scale Plan Amendment from Mixed Use to Heavy/Light Industrial and CUP for truss manufacturing plant in IU zoning on 9.86? acres located on the west side of Cox Road and north of SR 520, which was sent to the Board without recommendations by the Local Planning Agency and P&Z Board.

Attorney Leonard Spielvogel, representing the Estate of Doris L. Wolfe and Space Coast Truss, advised the Estate of Doris L. Wolfe owns the property that is under contract to Space Coast Truss; he did not represent the applicant before the CRG nor before the P&Z Board or Local Planning Agency; he did speak at the Local Planning Agency as representative of the Estate; but he now represents Space Coast Truss. He stated Space Coast Truss is presently located at 900 Cox Road which is approximately 3,000 feet of the property before the Board; it occupies an approximate five-acre tract which is under lease; the Truss Company has been a tenant there since February, 1989; previous to it being occupied by the Company, it was a Ford Tractor Dealership; and the Truss Company simply occupied the premises that were previously used as a tractor distributorship. He stated there were no revisions or rebuilding of the site, nor planning and landscaping. Mr. Spielvogel advised Space Coast Truss presently employs 105 employees with annual payroll of 1.7 million dollars; it had six million dollars in sales in 1995; it manufactures trusses for residential and commercial buildings; more than 50% of the work product is shipped out of the County; and the location is important because of the transportation accessibility to SR 520 and I-95. He stated the Company has outgrown its present site; it has a contract to purchase the ten-acre parcel which is down the road in the general vicinity of where it is presently; and it wants to build a new facility there. He stated if the Board grants the request, it anticipates more than doubling its annual sales, increasing its employment by 50 to 60 full-time employees, and increasing annual payroll to 2.25

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

million dollars. Mr. Spielvogel advised Mrs. Wolfe purchased the property in December, 1967; it has been zoned light industrial since 1968; the request is consistent with the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies; they are contiguous to an industrial park usage and zoning; and the parcel has been zoned light industrial in excess of ten years. He stated there is natural vegetation along the south line that would screen the property from the transportation corridor of SR 520; only 40 feet of the 325 feet lies within 660 feet from SR 520; and those are the technical arguments if the Board sees fit to grant the request. He advised the real question is whether or not Space Coast Truss is going to be a noisy or bad neighbor at the new location; inquired was it noisy or bad at its present location; and recommended looking at the track record. He stated they have had no noise complaints over the years and have been at the location since February, 1989 which is remarkable; and the Board should question why it is about to hear a number of complaints about noise. He read an excerpt from the CRG Meeting Minutes as follows: "Mr. Chhabra said that the people whom are residing at the Budget Inn are complaining about the noise they hear from the truss plant during the night. Victor Watson representing Chris Chhabra who owns the Budget Inn stated that there were 25 units in the Budget Inn that are facing the side that the noise is being generated from. Mr. Watson stated that the truss company is asking the Board for approval to move their open building with a lot of machinery closer to his client?s existing business, namely Budget Inn, which has been there for over 30 years and is a tourist use. Karen Kessel, Budget Inn, stated that the Budget Inn was open 24 hours a day and there was loud noises being created late at night from the truss plant which can be heard from the Budget Inn. Ms. Kessel said this noise is very disturbing and goes on all night long." Mr. Spielvogel advised the Budget Inn is 3,625 feet south of Space Coast Truss Company; if noise from the property travels 3,625 feet all night long or any part of the night, there would be complaints to the Sheriff?s Department, Code Enforcement, or County Commissioners; and that has not taken place. He noted that is the rumor going around the community that frightened everybody enough to provoke them to be here tonight. He stated the Budget Inn had filed a complaint with Code Enforcement against Mid-Florida Steel that was making noise into the night; and presented a document to the Board depicting the location of the proposed site, the Budget Inn, SR 520 and Mid-Florida Steel which is in a Planned Industrial Park located immediately adjacent to the Budget Inn. He stated part of the problem is the extremes to which the opposition has gone and painted this as noisy; it is far from reality that truss manufacturing makes that much noise; but there is a noise factor connected with it; and that is why they have to apply for a CUP. He stated to address the noise, they propose to try and eliminate the noise from their operation; at the present time they operate from buildings without walls because those are the buildings that were there when they took occupancy of the site in 1989; they are going to build a whole new facility at the new location; and they anticipate spending approximately one million dollars just for the improvements plus half a million dollars on equipment. Mr. Spielvogel presented and explained a drawing of what they intend to build if the Board allows it; and proposed submitting it as a binding development plan.

Commissioner Higgs questioned the drawing presented by Mr. Spielvogel and the document she received from staff; with Mr. Corwin responding the shaded portion is the entire parcel; the heavy lines designate part of the parcel currently as Mixed Use District (MUD) land use; the northern section, which is a different pattern, is heavy/light industrial; so the land use amendment is for the south 225 feet for a change from MUD to heavy/light industrial land use.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Mr. Spielvogel advised they have two applications contingent on each other; the BDP he submitted to the Board will be carried into reality if the Board allows it; at the south end of the property 15 feet of natural foliage is required, and they have 22 feet; and they will have one state-of-the-art building for manufacturing insulated with acoustic insulation following the format laid out by specifications of International Cellulose Corporation. He stated they are going to eliminate the noise from the facility; and as part of the BDP, they will agree and stipulate to be bound by a noise ordinance at such time as one is adopted by the Board. He stated if the Board grants their request tonight, it may not be able to make the noise ordinance retroactive should it adopt a noise ordinance; but they agree to be bound by that because his client has enough confidence in his ability to design the building or have his consultant design the facility so as to eliminate the noise factor which is what the neighbors are concerned about. He stated it is hard to give assurance that will give people peace of mind, but they are willing to take a chance that whatever the Board adopts will be fair enough and will treat everyone fairly in the industrial classification that will be bound by it. Mr. Spielvogel gave the Board a copy of the zoning map showing the location of the current site 3,000 feet north of the proposed site, and residential zoning in close proximity to the present site; stated as the area continues to grow as residential, they could do a better job of engineering the facility by being allowed to build it according to the latest specifications of acoustical control; and requested that opportunity.

Attorney Victor Watson, 1970 Michigan Avenue, Cocoa, representing Chris Chhabra and HRS Hotel Corporation, owners of the 84-unit motel known as the Budget Inn, located 300 feet south of the subject parcel, advised he met and spoke to numerous homeowners and business owners in the area; a couple of them are most aware of the situation; some of them live near the present operation, and others live closer to the proposed site; and they can tell the Board what the operations are, what the noise is, and what the complaints are they have been making with no response. He stated they will tell the Board the plant is a bad neighbor, and it should not receive the change in land use designation and should not receive the CUP. Mr. Watson advised Mr. Spielvogel made some quotes and misquoted the wrong people; the people who made those statements were not his clients; they were the people who live close to where the existing use is now; and it would make more sense to do it in a different order.

Commissioner Ellis inquired if the people Mr. Watson has to speak are people who live near the proposed site or existing site; with Mr. Watson responding one lives near the existing site who can tell the Board exactly what it is like; and there are others who live in the middle and up and down Cox Road. Commissioner Ellis inquired if the intent is to keep both sites open or build the new plant and close the old one; with Mr. Spielvogel responding the old site will go back to the landowner. Commissioner Ellis stated if they live across the street from the old site, it may be to their benefit to have it relocated.

Mr. Watson advised they are here to speak to what has been going on at the plant which says a lot for them; and inquired if there are other areas already categorized heavy/light industrial which are available to the applicants. He stated he understands they looked at other sites; Cadillac Gage is available in a much more industrial area; and although the truss plant is categorized as light industrial, it does require a CUP because it is more heavy industrial use, very noisy, and operates

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. He stated they were asked to operate regular business hours and said they cannot; they plan to expand and have more people and more noise; and they said they will design it to reduce the noise, but they said that before and have not followed through, so they are not true to their word. Mr. Watson stated it should be in an area surrounded by industrial uses; where it is now it affects the people across the street; and if it were to move, it would affect homeowners across the street and businesses to the south of them. He stated to the west is zoned TU, so the proposal is strongly incompatible. He advised when the recommendation was made by staff, they looked at adjacent properties and not beyond that; surrounding means more than just next door; and it could mean 300 feet away or further, especially in this case when a sound person did tests and determined the use is making noises up to 120 decibels, and peaks regularly at 90, 100 and 110 decibels. He stated the people who are here to speak are not against business, commercial or industry; they live on the other side of the road; there are a great number of businesses and some industrial uses; many are BU-1 and BU-2 uses in the Mixed Use District; and they understand that and want to be good neighbors. Mr. Watson stated the County has a policy that industrial uses not be within 660 feet of tourist thoroughfares; part of this site is that close; he knows there are exceptions to the policy; but if the Board grants this exception, it is swallowing the rule. He noted there will be people who will be within 300 feet of a very noisy operation; and if the Board does not want people seeing industry as they drive by, the people do not want to try and sleep next to it. Mr. Watson requested permission to speak at the end; with Chairman Cook responding it is normally only the applicant that the Board hears at the end.

Bryan Callahan, 500 Cox Road, Cocoa, advised he has a horse stable at 500 Cox Road in Cocoa which is two lots north of the proposed site and his concern is the loud noise; he boards 25 to 35 horses; and with all the noise at 2:00 a.m. it will be hard and bad for his business. He stated he is for business and industry, but it should be in a place that is for industrial use and not where they are proposing it. Chairman Cook inquired how far is Mr. Callahan from the proposed site; with Mr. Callahan responding the second parcel north of the site behind the Auto Auction, and the noise would be tremendous for horses.

Pam Cheney, 4180 Fenner Road, Cocoa, advised she lives under 1,000 feet from the facility and will be across from it if the application is approved; she is outraged by what she heard about the noise; they live there because they love the country and quiet charm of country life; and they are very tolerant people who have not called a lot and complained. She stated she is angry that she did not because this is the result of it; and she will complain in the future about the radios playing so loud until 2:00 a.m. She stated they are not considerate of the neighbors; if they have a larger facility it will be worse; and the use of air guns is part of the manufacturing. Chairman Cook inquired if the present facility is closer to Ms. Cheney than the proposed site; with Ms. Cheney responding the proposed facility will be directly opposite her home; the existing site is around the corner but loud enough to wake her up sometimes; and the management is not considerate of them now, so why would they be in the future.

Arthur P. Eide, 595 Cox Road, Cocoa, stated he is concerned about the noise; he lives 1,500 feet from the present plant and it will be less than that if the application is approved; they do not complain

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

and try to co-exist with business; but the truss plant keeps running through the night when there is no other noise out there after 6:00 p.m.

Karen Desrocher, 4190 Fenner Road, Cocoa, advised they have been very tolerant and have not complained; they hear hammering and radios into the late hours of the night; most of the time they turn their air conditioners on and close the windows; and she has small children and is concerned about the increased traffic. She stated the larger plant will cause her home to depreciate in value; and requested they check other areas that are more industrial and better suited for the plant.

Nancy Schultz, 4140 Fenner Road, Cocoa, advised the noise is very loud; she has gotten up several times at 3:30 a.m. and the noise kept her from going back to sleep; it sounds like guns going off and loud riveting and hammering; and recently the radios have not been as bad because of this meeting. She stated it is annoying; it is a shame they cannot keep the country quiet that is there; and she has a letter from a neighbor to read. "I?m unable to attend the meeting this evening Monday, April 29. I?m strongly against the building of Space Coast Truss plant. I reside at 749 Monday Court in Cocoa, just behind Cox Road. The noise the truss plant makes now is very disturbing as they work until very early morning hours with loud hammering and nails and guns. It keeps me as well as my children awake. Please do not continue to disturb our once quiet country neighborhood. They should operate in an industrial park not in a neighborhood. We have invested a lot of money to have peace and quiet. Kathleen Waters."

Janice Eide, 595 Cox Road, Cocoa, advised she lives about four tenths of a mile from the present site and will be within 1,00 feet if it goes as planned. She stated they were told at the P&Z Board meeting there will be no walls; now they are saying there will be walls with insulation; so they changed plans since then. She stated she tried to watch TV with the window open and it was very annoying because the noise could be heard over the television; if it is closer, it will be worst; and her husband closed the north windows because he could not sleep from hearing the noise. She stated after 10:00 p.m. until 6:00 a.m. should be quiet time and people should be able to go to bed and leave their windows open if they want to. Ms. Eide stated they have 7.5 acres zoned RR-1; she did not buy it to live on the whole acreage for the rest of her life; she bought it as a future investment; and the truss plant will devalue her property. She indicated the person who owns the truss plant would not want it across the street from his house; and where it is proposed is right across the street from an elderly lady, Annie Griner, who has been there before industrial and all the other zoning. She stated she does not hear the noise all the time, but Wednesday night it was worst and interfered with her watching television; and it is an annoying noise, even worst than a dog barking. She inquired if the insulation and walls do not work, will they close and move.

James Schultz, 4140 Fenner Road, Cocoa, stated he has a 3,300 square foot home and do not need to close his windows all the time and air condition it just to keep the noise out; the existing plant has one acre of open ground where they stack the lumber now; they use forklifts to take the lumber off the trucks; and forklifts must have backup alarms which is OSHA approved and the sound is about 90 decibels or better. He stated if they double the size of the plant, there will be flatbed trucks lined

up at 4:00 a.m. pre-loaded and ready to unload; they did not complain about the noise of staple guns PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

and radios because they felt they were working on trusses for the homes damaged by the hurricane; but it has continued until 4:00 a.m., and they should not have to suffer through it any more. He stated he called the plant and complained about the noise but they never called back or did anything.

Richard Jarnagin, 475 Cox Road, Cocoa, stated the noise is one issue and the sawdust and devaluation of property are also issues; it will be right across the street from his house and next door to the elderly lady who is in poor health; and it would be a great injustice to the property owners along Cox Road to allow them to move there. He stated they do not need the extra traffic; there are small children on one side of his property; and most people are established residents and it would not be fair to devalue their property.

Mike Jandreau, 485 Cox Road, Cocoa, advised he has two children ages 5 and 2; he congratulates the truss company for its success and plan to double in size; they have outgrown the neighborhood; and the 3,999 trips on Cox road are not all cars, they are heavy trucks from Watson, the Truss Company and every other trucker who takes a short cut from SR 520 to SR 524. He stated he is concerned for his neighbor who has a horse stable; there are also riders up and down Cox Road; the horses have to be exercised; and there are school buses that pick up and drop off students on that road. Mr. Jandreau advised the traffic is a hazard; there are no sidewalks on the road; and recommended the Board reconsider the request and impose limitations on the area that never had a plan. He stated they need to start planning for the area; and this issue has wakened the homeowners and they are going to start getting together to see what they can do to make it a better neighborhood. He stated they are not shutting out business, and will tolerate some businesses, but this truss plant is over the line.

Craig Kessel, 1258 Fern Street, Cocoa, advised he worked for a truss plant for about seven or eight years; and they asked him to come and let the Board know about the noise and how a truss plant operates. He stated Space Coast has five big saws that operate almost 24 hours a day; they have two long metal tables and have presses that come down and push the plates on the trusses; some have to tack the plates down with hammers; and at the end they have three or four wooden tables where they have to use nail guns and stable guns to put all the plates on plus hammer them and tag them and run them through rollers. He stated that is basically how a truss plant operates and it gets noisy; they have three forklifts that run all night moving trusses in and out, unloading trucks, and moving lumber from one place to another. He stated he worked at one plant for three years where trusses were built indoors, and from the outside they could not hear it much with everything inside the building.

Vern Bonsall, 4156 Fisherman?s Place, Cocoa, advised while in the military he was trained extensively in the effects of sound and sound pollution on human beings, but he does not need that level of training to know the characterization of Space Coast Truss as a good neighbor is unbelievable. He stated he would like to invite the lawyer for Space Coast Truss to come over in the evening and appreciate the fine dance music produced by AC/DC, Metalica, the Scorpions, and shrilling saws and back up sirens on trucks. He stated complaints have been made; he spoke to them personally, and it quieted down for a few nights; and his neighbor filed complaints with the PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Sheriff?s Department; but they cannot do anything about it. Mr. Bonsall stated when he hears of the great things Space Coast Truss is planning to do, he is skeptical because of things it has done in the past; they are not good neighbors; and the noisy operation affects his dogs and grandchildren. He stated he would look skeptically on any plan they would propose for future development. Chairman Cook inquired if Mr. Bonsall will be closer or farther from the new plant; with Mr. Bonsall responding it would be farther away, but he would still have to drive past it, and it would be spectacular when the auction is operating also.

Roger Chhabra, 4150 W. King Street, Cocoa, advised his father owns the Budget Inn; Space Coast Truss is 3,000 feet from the property; and explained a map of the area, identifying residences, businesses, industry, and green areas. He stated he had a sound engineer, and he bought a decibel reader and took readings for three and a half weeks; and explained the drawing, noting each ring represents 300 feet, and he got readings of 115 to 120 decibels. He stated Space Coast Truss employees have threatened him for taking the readings; and presented photos to the Board, indicating the man with a fist was threatening him. Mr. Chhabra stated that is the character of the company; and there is no guarantee they will enclose the plant, and the sound will continue to travel. He stated at his last meeting with Space Coast Truss they mentioned resolving the sound problem with myrtle trees; and recently they have come up with this enclosure.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired what is an acceptable decibel reading for a motel; with Mr. Chhabra responding 66 to 72 decibels is normal. He stated the proposed parcel is closer to the motel; I-95 runs on the west side of the property; and because there is so much obstruction, they do not get much sound from the traffic, with 72 decibels being the highest. He stated the infuriating hammering will not let people sleep; there is no insulation that will destroy that sound; and sound duplicates 100 times more because it is geometric. He stated 60 decibels is normal speech; 80 decibels is 100 times more sound; and 110 decibels is like a jet airplane engine.

Chairman Cook inquired if the motel property abuts a steel plant; with Mr. Chhabra responding it is directly behind the motel; they contacted Code Enforcement because the plant operated late at night; they spoke to the owners and have come to a reasonable arrangement to operate during normal business hours; and they do more welding than banging.

Terry Hall, 1021 Jupiter Boulevard, Palm Bay, owner of American Building Inspectors, advised he did the sound test near the motel property on March 30, 1996; the sound levels reached were from 95 to 115 decibles, and occasionally above that; and the level of sound from a jet aircraft is 120 decibels. Commissioner Higgs asked Mr. Hall to clarify his qualifications; with Mr. Hall responding he is a commercial general contractor and roofing contractor; he has a Florida real estate license; and he does sound tests for individuals who are locating near highways, businesses, etc. Commissioner Higgs inquired how long Mr. Hall has been in the sound testing business; with Mr. Hall responding several years, mostly in Brevard County groves. Chairman Cook inquired what type of equipment he uses; with Mr. Hall responding an X-tech sound meter that is state-of-the-art sound equipment. He stated it is basically a point and shoot, pick the distance and register the sound levels; and the interpretation of the sound levels are more difficult than taking the tests. PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Commissioner Higgs inquired if background noises cause a problem; with Mr. Hall responding no, there is compensation for those noises built into the equipment. Chairman Cook inquired what would the difficulty be with interpretation; with Mr. Hall responding they have to take an average number of the tests to be fair to both parties; they cannot stand in one spot and shoot for 15 minutes and have to take tests in several different areas, staying within the limits, which is 300 to 400 feet, to be accurate.

Attorney Spielvogel stated it is amazing that 300 to 400 feet away the reading was 120 decibels; that is the threshold for pain, as specified in the handbook; and what is more amazing is nobody complained. He stated they said they made complaints, and he wanted to know if they really did so he contacted Code Enforcement and asked; one can say in the wild west of Cocoa westerners believe in live and let live, but if anybody had to suffer that much since 1989, and never thought to call Code Enforcement to stop the abuse, they have more charity than is intended for man. He presented a letter from Code Enforcement to the Board. Mr. Spielvogel advised since Code Enforcement may not work at night, he called the Sheriff?s Department and asked for complaints for the last two years since somebody at 2:00 a.m. would call the Sheriff?s Department; however, no noise complaint was the result. He stated Attorney Watson said complaints were made to his client; his client is here and prepared to swear he received one phone call on March 12, 1996, well after the time this application was filed, complaining of noise at 2:00 a.m.; and the party did not leave a name or return number so his client could not respond to the call. He stated he is not here to talk about the present location; he made the best offer he could make; the County wants economic growth; and here is a business that has experienced growth and wants to continue to grow in the County, but the neighbors are saying they do not want bad growth, they want good growth and good business and this is a bad business that should go elsewhere. Mr. Spielvogel advised the zoning map shows everything on the west side of Cox Road as IU, BU-2 and PIP all the way up Cox Road; on the east side is a lot of BU-2 especially as it approaches SR 520; there is more residential to the north where his client is presently located than there is at the proposed location; and the only offer he can make is to stipulate they will be bound by a noise ordinance when the Board sees fit to adopt one and will not claim being grandfathered in. He stated the risk is theirs; if they violate the noise ordinance they will be cited and fined on a daily basis until it is remedied; they want to grow on Cox Road because it is accessible to I-95; and they are not looking to relocate further away from I-95. He stated Mr. Kessel said he worked for a facility that did not have walls which was very noisy and he worked for a facility that was internal and was not that bad; and that is what his client is offering, to move from a leased location that does not have walls and build a new plant that is state-of-the-art. Commissioner Scarborough inquired after the new plant is built, what are the decibels that are anticipated from 300 feet outside of the building; with Attorney Spielvogel responding zero.

Joseph Jeffrey Macik, 1252 Water Lily Lane, Rockledge, General Manager of Space Coast Truss, advised he consulted with Acousti Engineering in Rockledge; they have done many projects similar to his at the Space Center; and because noise will reflect off a metal skin building and amplify what is going on inside, they are proposing fiberglass insulation. He submitted brochures on the insulation to the Board; and stated the fiberglass insulation reduces sound reverberation and transmission. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Scarborough and Mr. Macik regarding decibels.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Chairman Cook inquired how thick the insulation will be; with Mr. Macik responding the standard two inch, and in conjunction with that, they will put cellulose insulation. Chairman Cook inquired if that is sprayed insulation on top of the fiberglass; with Mr. Macik responding yes, because he knows they are noisy, so not only does he want to do that for the neighbors, but also to meet OSHA concerns and avoid long-term problems with employees. He stated spraying two inches over and above the thermo and acoustical insulation will give an NRC of 1.05.

Commissioner O?Brien inquired if Mr. Macik intends to air condition the building; with Mr. Macik responding no. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if they will work with the doors open; with Mr. Macik responding no, there will be fans. He stated the biggest concern is to the south; the doors are for access for the future if they are needed; and explained how they will operate, from receipt of raw lumber to the finished trusses.

Chairman Cook inquired if the east doors will remain open; with Mr. Macik responding yes, but he has a solid building for lumber storage as a buffer; and it is 400 feet back off Cox Road to the doors. Chairman Cook inquired if the noise will be less if the facility is enclosed; with Mr. Macik responding it will be considerably less. He stated he was opposed to having an enclosed building because of forklift accessibility, but he is trying to be a good neighbor and build a larger facility that is enclosed to address the neighbors? concerns on Cox Road and tributary roads. Chairman Cook inquired how many square feet is from the edge of Cox Road to the front of the facility; with Mr. Macik responding it is 225 feet to the warehouse and office. Chairman Cook inquired how far back to the manufacturing facility; with Mr. Macik responding 465 feet.

Commissioner Higgs stated if there is no more evidence than the brochures, it would be difficult to issue a CUP; with Mr. Macik responding if they do not adhere to a noise ordinance, the Board can take appropriate action. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board has not passed or considered an ordinance, so it has not been challenged in the courts. Mr. Macik stated moving to the proposed location will allow him to be a quieter neighbor; it is a choice of the operation continuing where it is and as noisy as it is, or the opportunity to prove they are good neighbors and being allowed to put the operation inside to cut down the noise.

Mr. Spielvogel advised Commissioner Higgs indicated the Board is a long way from adopting a noise ordinance; they are a long way of completing a new building; and if nothing else came out of this evening, the Board has been made aware that there is noise out there and it can be disquieting to the neighbors, and it can also be detrimental to business by imposing standards that are vague and subjective. He stated by agreeing to be subjected to an ordinance that has not been written yet shows considerable confidence on his client?s part; and he will be spending a lot of money on the new facility. He stated the Board can shut down the operation if it adopts an ordinance and they violate the ordinance and not conform; and he cannot ever recall making that kind of proposal. He stated he did not challenge credentials, and anybody can buy a sound machine, but they are committed to deliver a quiet operation and one that will be so much better for the community than staying where they are and continuing with a very poor facility.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Commissioner Ellis inquired if the enclosed facility will be part of the binding development plan (BDP); with Mr. Spielvogel responding yes. Commissioner Ellis inquired if part of the BDP will also be the closing of the old facility when the new facility opens; with Mr. Spielvogel responding that is their submittal and intended to be part of the BDP in addition to the stipulation they will submit to a noise ordinance if and when the County adopts one. Commissioner Ellis stated a noise ordinance does not mean that much; and what he is weighing is if approving a new facility will be an improvement over the old facility.

Commissioner Scarborough suggested having the contractor speak to what he anticipates achieving as far as abating noise. He stated creating a violation and having somebody go back and make substantial changes is not the way to do business; he prefers to handle the noise problem up front with the contractor certifying to the County that certain levels will be achieved outside; and inquired if the contractor certifies to the Board, will it have contractual rights on that certification to require that level of work be completed. County Attorney Scott Knox advised it is a CUP application and the Board can impose conditions on the permit; and if it chose a decibel that would limit the noise from the property line, it could do that.

Attorney Watson stated the discussion has been about an enclosed building, but he understands it will only be enclosed on three sides which he does not consider enclosed. He stated he also believes the doors will be open quite often. Commissioner Ellis stated realistically if they are bringing trusses in and out, they have to have a large open side, but the noise will be directed through the open area. Mr. Watson stated the noise will be directed towards the stables to the north.

Chairman Cook advised there is IU property to the north; the west side of Cox Road is very heavy commercial and industrial use; on the other side is more residential in character; and it creates a problem between the two conflicting uses. He inquired if there is a way to improve the situation from what exists now because the neighbors are saying it is not good now since they can hear the truss company. He stated there has to be a way to allow a successful business to expand and hire more employees, and still improve the situation; and maybe setting a decibel level could do that.

Commissioner O?Brien stated he would not support using decibel meters for a noise ordinance; and described an experience with his company in Cape Canaveral in a butler building with insulation and their inability to stop the noise. He stated they had to cease operations at 10:00 p.m. or lose their license; so they moved the operation to industrially-zoned property. He also mentioned draining an air compressor causes a terrible noise. He stated he does not think the building will solve the noise problem because on hot summer evenings the doors will open.

Chairman Cook inquired if the property is currently IU; with Mr. Enos responding yes, but it is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan on the south two-thirds of the property. Chairman Cook inquired what does the Comprehensive Plan call for; with Mr. Enos responding mixed use on the south two-thirds and heavy/light industrial on the north one third.

 

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Commissioner Scarborough recommended hearing expert testimony and discussions on decibels and how sound travels to be better informed before considering the application. He stated the Board may set a decibel level and find out it does not solve the problem because certain noises have a degree of irritation; and he does not know how to handle the problem tonight. Commissioner O?Brien stated he cannot support it because of his experience. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board could deny it and waive the six months waiting period and filing fee if it adopts a noise ordinance within that time. Commissioner O?Brien stated there are other places they can go. Chairman Cook stated he can understand the applicant moving down the street to be adjacent to I-95 because it is a convenient location for that type of work.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board?s ability to make a decision tonight is very limited based on the information the applicant presented regarding actual performance of the building; and she would be willing to table it until next month, and allow them to come back and demonstrate that the facility will perform in the way they are alleging.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to table Item 4 until May 29, 1996, to allow the applicant to return with more information so there will be a higher level of comfort whether or not they can accomplish what they say they can do.

 

Commissioner Ellis stated the noise ordinance is not applicable, and anything the Board does with decibels or noise has to be tied to the CUP. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board does not have a noise ordinance so it cannot apply; with Commissioner Ellis responding the Board has a noise ordinance but it is not applicable in IU zoning classifications; so it is not applicable in this situation.

Chairman Cook called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner O?Brien voted nay.

 

The meeting recessed at 8:19 p.m. and reconvened at 8:35 p.m.

 

Item 5. David Chanley?s request for change from RU-1-11 to BU-2 on 0.8 acre located west of U.S. 1 and south of Valkaria Road, abutting the east side of Florida East Coast Railway Company?s railroad, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

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

 

Item 6. Albert A. and Beverly A. Fournier and April M. Edwards? request for change from AU to RR-1 on 2.5 acres located on the north side of Chase Hammock Road, east of SR 3, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Item 6 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

Item 8. Bert P. and Louise W. Trytko?s request for change from BU-1-A with UOR for carpet cleaning business to BU-1 on 0.15 acre located on the south side of Merritt Avenue, east of North Tropical Trail, which was denied by the P&Z Board.

Louise Trytko, 565 N. Tropical Trail, Merritt Island, advised she has had a real estate office on the property since July, 1977; she was amazed by the inaccurate remarks in the letter from the Merritt Island Executive Council; and her attorney Leland Wooten sent a letter contradicting the statements in that letter. She stated the letter said there was no other BU-1 zoning on Merritt Avenue; however, according to the map there is BU-1 on the street and the date it was approved. She stated the Board denied her request in March, 1981, but gave her a permit because she had a carpet cleaner in the back as tenant; and he did not stay long, so she is back again for BU-1. She stated an antique store and gift shop wanted to rent but because they would have furniture it would require BU-1 zoning. She stated there were complaints from the neighbor she did not know she had problems with and thought they were friends for 19 years, but their children complained; all she had was her real estate office and Lightholder, Inc.; she sold some property five years ago, which was her last sale; and she has not been very active since she is 70 years old and not in good health. She stated there was a question about parking; there is room in the backyard, on the east side, in the front and in the carport for parking; and there was a question about being too close to the school; however, she took a picture of her front yard towards the school and could not see the school. She presented pictures to the Board. She pointed out the BU-1 zoning in the area approved by the Board, one directly across the street from the School, condos, duplexes, and fourplexes, drapery business on the corner of Merritt Avenue and Parnell, and other businesses. She stated the only person who lives alone on the street is Mrs. Venice. Ms. Trytko stated Mr. Champon has a business on Grove and Merritt Avenue, Mr. Markey asked her if she was going to put a bar or nightclub on the property, and she told him she could not and would not put a bar there. She stated it was brought up that BU-1 should not be on two-lane roads, but there are several BU-1 zoning to the south on two-lane roads. Ms. Trytko advised the Minutes contained remarks about Lightholder?s Southeast Crane putting materials on the property; there were two owners and a secretary in the office; all the materials went to a warehouse; and no trucks came to the office. She stated they also said the Lightholders trampled rose bushes and stole things from the yard; and they were upset about those remarks because they are not true. She noted she asked a person she admires what she is doing wrong; and he said he thought the Board was inconsistent approving one and turning others down, and that she may be discriminated against for some reason.

Sandra Natowich, 110 N. Tropical Trail, Merritt Island, Chairman of Merritt Park Place Group, Inc., advised they represent 200 plus businesses in old Merritt Park Place and were surprised when one of their members, the Trytkos were turned down because there is not much BU-1 in the area; it is about 98% BU-1; MIRA recommended approval of the BU-1; and what she is asking for is no more than what everybody else has there. She stated they are semi-retired and need it to keep them in

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

the ballpark. She stated most of the people in the area have done all they can do to maintain a business in a neighborhood; they live and work side-by-side with people who are still residents in the Park; and they encourage the residents to enjoy the safety of the area because the business people do not want them to go away; so she cannot imagine that anyone would be concerned that the Trytkos would put a neighbor at risk. Ms. Natowich stated the Group is concerned that someone can come into the primarily business area and cause a difficulty like this without making full disclosure; they have changed the complexion of an old area that was going down the tubes and got revitalization to occur; and people are spending thousands of dollars to upgrade and build new properties. She stated five awards are given by Keep Brevard Beautiful and two awards were given to two businesses in the Park; so there is a lot of positive growth in the area and they would like to continue. She requested the Board consider giving Mrs. Trytko the BU-1 zoning.

Marie Venice, 513 Seacrest Avenue, Merritt Island, President of Merritt Island Homeowners Executive Council, advised of a letter she sent to Mr. Jenkins referencing that the Council was approached for support in opposing the rezoning primarily because BU-1 is not compatible with residential. She stated they were informed that two residents on either side of the property were elderly and lived alone; and one of them is her mother-in-law. She stated Merritt Avenue is a two-lane road; it has a sidewalk on the north side and no easement for widening to the south; it is already heavily traveled; and when school is in session, the traffic will be even heavier. She stated BU-1 can allow businesses that are not compatible; she referenced there was no BU-1 on Merritt Avenue, but learned later the apartment complexes are zoned BU-1; and she was advised it was inappropriate zoning for apartments. Ms. Venice advised apartments and duplexes are residential because people live there; they do not do business there; the business across the street is not zoned BU-1, it is RP; and that is a far cry from BU-1. She stated the Trytkos may be good neighbors and not wish any harm, but if they sell the property and with it the BU-1, the new owner can put in whatever he chooses. She stated the majority of the businesses are boutique type; the road directly behind the properties are all residential; there are duplexes, single-family houses, and a professional building with no identification; and a lot of spot zoning that has been going on has not been compatible with things that have come down the road. She stated they do not need BU-1 next to residential; there needs to be some buffering; the interest of homeowners need to be taken into account; and they have every right to expect the Board and the P&Z Board to protect their interests.

John Venice, 513 Seacrest Avenue, Merritt Island, advised his interest is his mother who lives next door to the property; and he is opposed to BU-1 because it will infringe on his mother?s privacy, and she is in poor health. He stated the original CUP that was issued to Mrs. Trytko was abrogated by allowing a plethora of different businesses into her place without going before the P&Z Board to see if it was all right; and he has proof of the businesses that existed at 425 W. Merritt Avenue. He stated Dove Realty is owned by Ms. Trytko; and Southeast Train and Monorail Systems, Day Spring Ministries, and Lightholder, Inc. Screening Company are all businesses that were there for the past ten years. He stated the traffic count would increase with BU-1; Brevard County instituted a traffic count, but the results are not available at this time; and he has a video to present to the Board of all the businesses and residences on the street which are all professional type with no heavy business.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Mr. Venice stated one of the BU-1 businesses is owned by Mrs. Trytko; it is the fourplex or triplex that is improperly zoned; and presented copies of occupational licenses of people who were in the building. He stated the Lightholders had an office there, but the occupational license does not reflect it; and indicated they were trying to hide something. He stated they knew there was a CUP and consequently they were not allowed to operate at that address; the information was gathered by the County and submitted to him showing that for many years they were illegally operating there; and he had a personal friend who is an accountant call Ms. Trytko last week to inquire about renting the place, but she never bothered to call him back. He stated her intent was to get BU-1 zoning and possibly sell the property; he is trying to look out for his mother?s interest; and if it was financial, he would be happy to embrace BU-1 next to his mother?s house which is also in his name as it would be to his advantage; however, that is not what he wants. He stated he has documentation, city directories and phone books if the Board wants them.

Mrs. Trytko advised the man Mr. Venice referenced was called several times, but he could not make up his mind whether he wanted to rent or not; he asked the person he is renting from to do all the repairs at the building off Tropical Forest which is fairly new; and inquired if he complains about a new building, what would he do in her building. She stated it was not that she would not rent to him, he would not take it and did not want it. She stated Mrs. Venice is President of Merritt Island Executive Council and Mr. Venice is President of Merritt Ridge Homeowners Association; he has been doing television repairs in Merritt Ridge since 1963; and in his new ad he is now selling tubes with his repairs. She stated everyone on the street approved the BU-1 except Ms. Venice; and she has not talked to her or disagreed, but her children have even though they do not live there. She repeated previous comments about the carpet cleaner and Southeast Crane; and stated she could not do anything because she did not know it bothered anybody.

Commissioner Ellis inquired if all the properties to the rear are BU-1; with Mr. Enos responding that is correct, from the rear of the frontage lots all the way south to SR 520 are BU-1 or BU-2; and most are BU-1, except on the west side of Tropical Trail which has more BU-2.

Commissioner O?Brien advised originally BU-1-A zoning along Merritt Avenue was set as a buffer between BU-1 and RU-1-9; that has been violated on several occasions; and identified several areas of BU-1. He stated Merritt Park has done a marvelous job reconstructing the old rundown beat up neighborhood; all the properties except one is BU-1-A; and he does not know if BU-1 would do much for the neighborhood, but it was done before and that bothers him. He stated he would like to support Merritt Park Place because of what they are doing, but the plan for the future was to keep Merritt Avenue BU-1-A . He noted the property is too small for most anything; he understands they want an antique store with furniture which may be beneficial; but after it is gone, what else can go in there. Commissioner Ellis stated not much because one-fifth of an acre with parking spots would not accommodate much of anything; and if they demolished the existing building, they would not be able to build another building and meet all the required setbacks, etc., so whoever rents the property would have to work within the existing structure. He stated certain antique stores need BU-1 because of the way the Zoning Code is written.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Chairman Cook stated nobody has a problem with an antique store because it is not intense use, but once it is zoned, the concern is what else could come in there. Mr. Enos advised BU-1 is a fairly open retail professional service type zoning classification; it does not allow heavy commercial like major auto repair or roofing contractors or warehousing and storage; and it is intended for community retail community as opposed to BU-1-A which is neighborhood limited retail.

Commissioner Higgs advised there is very little control once zoning is in place on the uses that go in there; there are limited inspections and controls as to the different uses; and there is very little inspections from use to use. Mr. Enos advised they have some deficiencies in the procedures that deal with change of use; and there is very little review prior to occupation of any business or change of business in an existing structure zoned commercial. He stated zoning checks the zoning and makes sure the use is consistent with the zoning and that there is a structure on the property, but there is no review for site plan issues like parking, drainage, etc. Chairman Cook stated he would need a huge staff to do that. Commissioner Higgs gave a scenario of an old house turned into a restaurant without appropriate facilities to point out few controls once zoning is in place; and Chairman Cook stated they must have occupational licenses and the Health Department inspects restaurants so there are a lot of things in place to check it.

Discussion ensued on the size of the property, inspections, intent of BU-1-A as a buffer, uses, MIRA support, school, limited uses in BU-1-A, and violations.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to deny Item 8 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Ellis voted nay.

 

APPROVAL, RE: NOMINEES TO JOBS AND EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP BOARD

County Manager Tom Jenkins returned with the nominees to the JEP Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to recommend the following for appointment to the Jobs and Education Partnership (JEP) Board: Ina Brown, Kenneth Pinson, Dr. William VanEngelenburg, Harold Wilson, Moses Harvin, Rodger Ingram, Mike Menyhart, Monia Yust, Thomas Wasdin, James Dwight, Jamie Grotik, Gerald Hurley, Leo Roselip, Jeffery Schiff, and Jim Twombly. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs abstained. (See page

for Memorandum of Voting Conflict.)

 

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Item 9. Charlotte Hedleston Houser?s request for CUP for alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in BU-2 zoning classification on 0.91? acre located on the northeast corner of the intersection of SR 520 and Borman Road, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

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

 

Item 11. The B.D.M. Financial Corporation, and Jacob Aaron Corporation?s request for change from GU and RU-1-11 to BU-1 on 16 acres located on the west side of Grissom Parkway, south of Bridge Road, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

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

 

Item 12. The Power Swing Corporation?s request for change from TR-3 to TR-1 on 4.94 acres located on the west side of U.S. 1, south of E. R. Smyth Drive, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

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

 

Item 13. Christopher H. and Tammy L. Corbett?s request for change from TR-1 to TR-1-A on 0.24 acre located on the south side of Garvin Street, west of Cherry Street and east of Armark Avenue, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

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

 

Item 14. Brevard County Board of County Commissioners? request for change from RU-1-11 with SUP for all types of mobile campers, motor vehicles and tents, BU-1 with BSP and CUP, RVP with BSP to GML on 24? acres located on the east side of U.S. 1 north of Bellewood Street, which was approved by the P&Z Board.

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

 

Item 15. Zoning Director?s Report. None.

 

Item 16. Brevard Ventures, Inc., Leonard Spielvogel, Trustee of Fortenberry and Plumosa Land Trust, and IPCO, Inc.?s request for amendment to a binding development plan in BU-1 zoning

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

classification with BDP and CUP for permanent entertainment and amusement enterprises, and CUP for sale of alcoholic beverages on-premise consumption on 14.8 acres located on the east side of S. Plumosa Street, south of Fortenberry Road, which was withdrawn by the applicant.

The Board accepted withdrawal of Item 16.

 

Item 10. Jack H. Bray?s request for CUP for trailer and truck rental in BU-1 zoning classification on 4.95 acres located on the northeast corner of City Point Road and U.S. 1 which was approved by the P&Z Board.

Carmine Ferraro, 4265 Quechua Road, Cocoa, requested the Board approve the CUP; advised they have met with the homeowners; and he would like to have them speak then address their issues.

Joseph Griffin, 135 City Point Road, Cocoa, advised he has a petition with 36 signatures, but because of the lack of understanding of what was going on, many people who signed the petition had no idea what was happening and was not notified; however, they are concerned. He stated the gentleman wants to rent Ryder trucks and have trucks come in and out of his facility to use his scale; he has no objection to the use intended or variation being asked for; however, it is a very dangerous situation, but he can offer a solution. Mr. Griffin advised City Point Road is very narrow; water has undermined the road; the applicant is requesting to allow trucks in and out of his facility; and he has no problem with that, but has a problem with coming off U.S. 1 onto City Point Road and making a right turn onto the property. He stated City Point Road is the main access for many houses in the area and is extensively used; and explained a scenario with cars and trucks causing difficulties with turning and getting out on U.S. 1. He stated he talked to Mr. Kirklin and reached a compromise to have the trucks enter from U.S. 1 and exit at an angle onto City Point Road because they will be in position to do that and not entangle traffic. He stated Mr. Kirklin said he is willing to make the change; and other people in the area can live with that; they would prefer another use, but conversations with Mr. Kirklin shows he will be a good neighbor; he made concessions with the residents; and it is a good example of commercial people working with the community.

Jerry Davis, 101 S. Twin Lakes Road, Cocoa, representing people who live half a mile from City Point Road on Indian River Drive, advised they are against the CUP; adding trucks to that intersection will make a dangerous situation worst regardless of how they enter and exit; and he agrees Mr. Kirklin is willing to work with the residents and make the situation better, but he is making a dangerous situation worst by putting trucks in there. He stated it is the main point of entry for an established residential area; the next access is Black?s Road which is 2.5 to 3 miles north of the area; one block south of City Point Road and U.S. 1 is SR 528 and U.S. 1 which is one of the most dangerous intersections in the County; and City Point Road is narrow and deteriorating. He stated the homeowners feel it will make a bad situation worse no matter what they do, so they are opposed to the CUP for that parcel.

 

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Mike Denning, 100 City Point Road, Cocoa, reiterated it is going to be a dangerous situation; his wife travels that road several times a day with two children; and the slow moving trucks coming in and out will increase the danger to homeowners.

Barbara Griffin, 135 City Point Road, advised to go south to Cocoa, they have to cross two lanes of traffic going north and wait to cross one lane going south at the intersection of City Point Road and U.S. 1; and the curve going south is deceiving to drivers. She stated her neighbors on Indian River Road live on well water and are concerned about contamination from oil, chemicals used to wash cars and trucks, etc. because they are not deep wells; and they are also concerned about the aesthetics of the area, and whether the buildings will be well maintained and if there will be a buffer zone with landscaping. She stated the new egress/ingress might ease the traffic problem, but it will still be dangerous.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to table the application for a month and do a site review with Traffic Engineering Director Bill Osborne, the applicant, and the residents; and inquired if it will be a problem; with Mr. Ferraro responding they are down to the wire on their contract; they had to put a substantial non-refundable deposit down to stay until now; and they were told that is it. He stated they have to be out by the end of business April 30, 1996; they did not know there was opposition and met with the people a few hours before the meeting to work it out; and the property is zoned BU-1. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not hear profound opposition; and the main problem is traffic flow. He inquired if there is a way to stop all traffic from going on City Point Road and direct it on and off U.S. 1. Joe Kirklin explained a drawing of the ingress/egress; stated the most Ryder trucks he will have will be eight; right now he has four; and the trailer and car carrier has four wheels so there will not be gigantic trailers. He stated he would not have a problem restricting the trucks to enter and leave from U.S. 1, but he would like to have an entrance on City Point Road for vehicle access in the back of the property. Mr. Ferraro advised Shawn Ryan suggested entrance and exit only with signs posted to that effect to avoid potential confusion.

Commissioner Ellis inquired if Mr. Kirklin plans to subdivide the property since he is using less than half of it for the operation; with Mr. Kirklin responding no, he had to buy the whole parcel because they would not sell half of it.

Chairman Cook inquired if there will be two cuts off City Point Road at the present time; with Mr. Kirklin responding yes, one to get to the front of the property and the other to the rear of the property. Chairman Cook stated he prefers no trucks on City Point Road and only one cut for cars. Mr. Ferraro advised they are willing to do anything the County staff will approve; when they went through preliminary review, this proposal is what they came out with; they wanted two cuts on U.S. 1 and nothing on City Point Road; but that was not agreeable to FDOT which agreed to one cut.

Discussion ensued on truck egress/ingress from U.S. 1, safety, posting signs, weighing of trucks, and access for automobiles only on City Point Road.

 

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APRIL 1, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

(CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to approve Item 10, subject to trucks entering and exiting only off U.S. 1; there be one entrance only for limited use by automobiles approximately 90 to 100 feet back from the curb cut on U.S. 1; signage be placed advising trucks not to enter there; and all traffic encouraged to enter and exit from U.S. 1.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if he could have Mr. Osborne comment on the site plan; with Mr. Enos responding the Board could make the design of the entrance and exit subject to approval by Traffic Engineering Director. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to review it with the community also.

Chairman Cook called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages for Zoning Resolutions.)

 

DISCUSSION, RE: SPECIFIC USE PROVISION

County Attorney Scott Knox advised the Board has wrestled with proposed uses that may affect granting or denying requests because of what might happen in the future, such as the request of Ms. Trytko; there is a way to handle that; it is not in the Ordinance now; but there have been some jurisdictions that use what is called "specific use" provisions in their ordinances that allow applicants to come before the Board and agree to limit uses to a certain number of the potential ranges in the zoning classifications. He stated it is a good way to have neighbors negotiate out potential controversial uses before they get to the Board.

Zoning Official Rick Enos advised they have been doing that through the binding development plan, but the specific use provision may be easier to handle that problem.

Commissioner Higgs recommended the County Attorney draft a memo on the specific use provision and bring it back to the Board; and Chairman Cook concurred.

 

 

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 10:06 p.m.

 

 

ATTEST: _________________________________

MARK COOK, CHAIRMAN

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_________________________

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK