The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on May 21, 1998, at 5:34 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Helen Voltz, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O?Brien, Nancy Higgs, and Mark Cook, Environmental Services Administrator Stephen Peffer, and Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley.

The Invocation was given by Reverend Ron Meyr, Faith Lutheran Church, Melbourne.

Commissioner Nancy Higgs led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Environmental Services Administrator Stephen Peffer stated on May 19, 1998 the Board directed the County Manager to express to Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan the County?s concerns about rates in its Task Order for upcoming litigation; and Mr. Jenkins contacted John Shearer of Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, who provided information which has been forwarded to the Commissioners. He stated the Board also received a memorandum from Water Resources Director Dick Martens summarizing the importance of the pending Task Order as it prepares for significant litigation.

John Shearer, Executive Vice President of PBS&J, advised of his qualifications and background; and stated he provided information in the package detailing how the rates are developed.

Commissioner Cook expressed concern about $45 an hour for a secretary; stated it has been reduced to $40; but it is hard to fathom that is a reasonable amount. He stated he read the backup information that was submitted; PBS&J claims there is a 10% profit margin; at $40 an hour, $36 an hour would be for overhead; and he finds it hard to reconcile.

Mr. Shearer stated the secretary is actually an administrative assistant who makes $13.56 per hour; and based on the overhead rates and the target profit which they try to build in on every assignment, it brings the rate to $40 an hour. He stated it is standard practice in the industry to build rates for staff that way, but if that is a problem and the Board wants to move the process forward quickly, PBS&J can donate the time of that individual to get the process moving forward. He stated this is on a fast track; not much time was proposed in this assignment; and then the discussion about how the rates are built up can be left to when there is more time.

Commissioner O?Brien stated a $40 an hour secretary or administrative assistant is equivalent to $83,200 per year, which would make the individual the most expensive secretary or administrative assistant he has ever seen; and taking the 10% profit still leaves $75,000 annual pay. He stated the executives may be compensated in that range, but he is certain the lower echelon engineers and assistants are not. Mr. Shearer stated PBS&J?s rates are very competitive in the industry; they pay REPORT, RE: TASK ORDER WITH POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN (CONTINUED)

a fair price for professionals which allows them to attract some of the best people, but they do not pay exorbitant rates; and they do not look to make exorbitant profits. He explained the way the rates are constructed in standard practice in the industry; and explained how it is calculated. He stated the Board of Directors has directed him to look to a 10% profit margin on large environmental projects to cover some of the risk; and the calculation provided for the Board shows that on this assignment, if everything goes according to the plan, that the profit will only be approximately 5%.

Commissioner O?Brien stated 10% is more than fair and reasonable; but some of the rates for personnel are not fair nor reasonable, and they impact the County greatly. He suggested using the military methodology for a fair and reasonable price; and explained the methodology. Mr. Shearer stated he is not familiar with that methodology; but PBS&J overhead rates are built upon the federal standards for developing overhead; they do work for the U.S. Government and State of Florida using those rates; and invited the County to audit the rates.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the hourly rate is actually a $13 rate with an overhead multiplier and profit; with Mr. Shearer responding affirmatively. She stated if the Board went forward with the administrative assistant at $13, and line items for administrative overhead and profit, that would more accurately reflect the hourly rate.

Commissioner Cook stated it is the multiplier that strains this consideration; and if the County pays a secretary $12.63 an hour and uses a 26% benefit factor, it still is only $15.91 an hour. Commissioner Higgs stated if the Board broke down the cost of a project, it would take the actual salary paid, plus the costs of the fringe benefits and administrative overhead, without any profit; and that is what PBS&J is doing with the addition of 10% profit. Commissioner Cook stated if 10% is added to $16, it is less than half of what PBS&J is charging the County for a secretary. Chairman Voltz stated overhead is not being considered in that figure. Mr. Shearer stated there is a one-page summary in the package showing the audited overhead rate, done by Coopers & Lybrand which is accepted by other governmental entities. Commissioner Cook inquired if the County should pay overhead for each individual under the contract; and stated the multiplier may be acceptable to the federal government, but it strains common sense to be paying these kinds of rates.

Chairman Voltz stated this is not the first time the County has been charged these rates; with Mr. Martens responding that is correct, and they are comparable to the rates in other PBS&J contracts. Mr. Martens stated normally the contracts are lump sum with a flat fee that is negotiated to complete the project regardless of the amount of hours put into it; and all of the contracts contain a page showing individual salaries in the event some additional work is needed. Chairman Voltz stated what the Board is considering is not new or unusual, but is what the standard practice has been all along; with Mr. Martens advising that is correct, and it is comparable to contracts with other engineering firms. Mr. Peffer advised a lump sum contract was not brought to the Board because this has to do with litigation; if they are successful in an early settlement, the Task Order would be for a lesser amount; and it is impossible to say at this time what that number would be, so doing it on a time and material basis is the best way to go.

REPORT, RE: TASK ORDER WITH POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN (CONTINUED)

Commissioner Cook stated regardless of what the Board does with the PBS&J contract, it should review its process for these contracts; they are large contracts; and there is a need to review the process.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Task Order No. 4 with Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., for technical support in Brevard County v. Duda & Sons. Motion carried and ordered. Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, and Voltz voted aye; Commissioners O?Brien and Cook voted nay. (See page                                   for Task Order.)

Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to instruct the County Manager to review procedures for consultant contracts. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough distributed materials; and stated the Chairman of the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council called attention to the fact that half of the dues needs to be paid. He stated in discussion regarding the weighted voting, the counties would get 45% of the total council voted, which was suppose to bring counties like Orange County back into the fold; and there was discussion about what would happen if a county has not paid. He stated he asked about Brevard County; there was an assumption that the County was current; but the County is going to be denied the right to vote on the budget on June 24, 1998. He stated he suggested the County be put on notice; and advised that while there are concerns, four of the Commissioners are going to the summit with a positive attitude. He stated it was a lightly attended meeting; there were four people from Brevard County besides himself; only one of the gubernatorial appointments from the County spoke in the County?s favor; and apparently it was irrelevant that the County was losing its vote on the budget. He stated Lynn Hansel voted with him not to proceed; the other appointees, Robi Roberts, Charles Moehle, and Arthur Lamar, did not catch on to the significance of the timing; and he hoped they would have deferred doing anything until after the summit. He stated part of the problem is a lot of the people attending are not County Commissioners but gubernatorial appointments and city representatives; one city appointee advised of the need to be careful with Brevard County because his council is ready to back out too; the gubernatorial appointees have as much vote as he does, but they do not pay anything; and part of the process may be to move away from non-elected officials. Commissioner Higgs stated the State does provide some financial support; and that is considered to be their contribution. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board would be making a mistake to do anything; and suggested waiting to see what happens at the summit. He suggested letting the voting on the budget pass; stated if the Board responds to this without going to the summit, it will make a mistake and be less effective in the summit; and while the Board could get into litigation, it will probably be resolved through legislative change in the manner in which they are structured.

Commissioner Cook stated everyone agrees with regional planning; the idea of the summit is to find out if the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council is serving the needs of the communities; and while they are extracting $120,000 a year, they are giving almost nothing in return. He stated REPORT, RE: EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL (CONTINUED)

Brevard County is paying quarterly; Orange County just withdrew and refused to make taxpayers pay for duplication of services; and he agrees with Commissioner Scarborough that the answer may be a quarterly meeting of elected officials to discuss regional issues. He stated he was trying to keep an open mind, but it is an outrage that the County will not be able to vote on the budget because it pays quarterly.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there were not many Commissioners present; at the summit, there may be broader coverage; and it may be a mistake to believe that the group present at the last meeting represented the views of all of Central Florida.

Commissioner O?Brien stated his problem is the lack of accountable results; and he has a hard time going along to get along. He stated the County bears the responsibility for the taxpayers? dollars whether State, County or city dollars; the County puts in $120,000; and he does not know how much the municipalities pay. Chairman Voltz stated there are only two cities involved. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is voluntary for cities. Commissioner Higgs stated those cities that are members pay. Commissioner O?Brien stated the budget is close to $1 million; the money may be wasted; and one solution might be an annual summit meeting, without paying dues, and dissolution of the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council.

Commissioner Cook stated that is an option; most Commissioners will take an entire day to go to the summit; he is disappointed with what happened; but it may not be representative of the entire East Central Florida Regional Planning Council.

Commissioner O?Brien stated the $120,000 could be used to offset the cost of putting a third firefighter on the trucks or other places where it could be used. Commissioner Cook stated it could be used to reduce taxes. Commissioner Cook stated a planner from Orlando said if the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council was doing its job, counties would want to participate. He stated Orange County has withdrawn because it cannot justify it to the taxpayers; and that problem will be addressed at the summit.

Commissioner Higgs inquired when is the vote on the budget; with Commissioner Scarborough responding on June 24, 1998. Commissioner Scarborough advised it was moved back a little because of the summit; Orange and Brevard Counties will not be there; and that will give several entities strength on the budget. Commissioner Cook stated the counties that have been the most critical are the ones that will not be participating in the budget. Commissioner Higgs stated that is because they have not paid their dues. Commissioner Cook stated the County has paid quarterly. Commissioner Higgs stated she agrees, and it makes her angry that the Council did that because it is the same process the County has used for a number of years. Chairman Voltz inquired how long has the County been paying quarterly; with Commissioner Higgs responding several years. Chairman Voltz stated Greg Golgowski of the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council was advised the County was not going to do anything until after the summit.

Commissioner Higgs expressed disappointment at the Council?s action; and stated depending on what comes out of the summit, it could go to a zero-based budget and build from there. She stated

REPORT, RE: EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL (CONTINUED)

she supports regional planning; and she tried to find ways to make the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council work since she was first on it in 1993.

Chairman Voltz stated there was a time when the County did not have all that it needed, but it does now; and inquired what is reasonable. She stated the issues she dealt with at the Council were not regional. Commissioner Higgs stated there are some regional issues, and some things to do. Chairman Voltz stated none of the issues she dealt with were regional. Commissioner Cook suggested a letter from the Chairman to the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Commissioner Scarborough suggested saying nothing and going to the summit.

Commissioner Scarborough stated on the back of the Agenda for the regional summit, it lists who is coming and who is not; four Commissioners including the Chairman of the Orange County Commission are not attending; and the one county Brevard County wanted to interface with has opted not to attend. He advised Mayor Glenda Hood also will not be attending; and that is a shame because if it is going to deal with Central Florida, Orlando and Orange County cannot be cut out of the formula and still make it work.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to appoint Bob Hoffman to the Community Based Organization Funding Advisory Board replacing Jay Barbree. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to appoint Reverend Canon Rufus Kite-Powell to the Central Brevard Library and Reference Center Advisory Board, and Fred Boozer to the Affordable Housing Council. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Voltz called for the public hearing to consider the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board made at its May 5, 1997 meeting, on Item 6, as follows:

Z9705201. Ronald E. Dimenna?s request for change from Suburban Residential to Suburban Residential with a Binding Development Plan for a maximum of 1.23 units per acre on 21.24 acres located on the south side of North Tropical Trail, approximately 200 feet west of Colony Park Drive, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Commissioner O?Brien requested staff inform the Board of the problems; stated he has spoken to Mr. Dimenna, some of the North Merritt Island homeowners, and staff; and there was a meeting in his office to try to resolve some of the drainage problems. He stated the Commissioners have a primary responsibility concerning growth; and if the Board knows that permitting growth will cause damage, in this case flooding, to someone else?s land, it should take the appropriate steps now before it goes further.

Code Compliance Director Billy Osborne stated the St. Johns River Water Management District advises the applicant is submitting a revised plan with revised calculations for its review; and the engineering approval which was on the Agenda has been deleted until staff has an opportunity to review the revised plan and calculations. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if staff has problems with the plan; with Mr. Osborne responding staff wants to make sure there are no problems.

Drainage and Surface Water Director Ron Jones stated staff has reviewed the plans and calculations for the development, and will be working with the applicant?s engineer to address a few issues. He stated he has additional information which the applicant may not have been privy to as a result of the North Merritt Island Master Plan.

Commissioner O?Brien inquired if the applicant is present; with no response heard. Mr. Osborne advised staff informed the applicant that the item was being deleted from the Agenda.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to table Item Z9705201 to September 17, 1998.

Commissioner Higgs inquired why so long; with Commissioner O?Brien responding the item has been tabled for over a year and still has not resolved the flooding problem the development would cause.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if something is continued repeatedly, does it have to be readvertised; with Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley responding there are no cases addressing that, but it is a valid point.

Commissioner O?Brien stated hopefully between now and September 17, 1998, the applicant can get the proper permitting and a plan that everyone can live with.

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

Chairman Voltz called for the public hearing to consider the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board at its April 6, 1998 meeting as follows:

Z9804105. Rex D. and Peggy J. Conner?s request for change from AU to RR-1 on 8.99 acres located on the southeast corner of U.S. 1 and Grantline Road which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he met with staff and homeowners; and the concerns were with the development rather than the zoning.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z9804105 as recommended by the P&Z Board. (See page                                   for Zoning Resolution.)

Chairman Voltz stated Item 7 belongs to the Jaycees; and they requested it be heard first, if no one has any objections.

Commissioner Higgs advised of the difficulties in moving items; and suggested moving quickly through the Agenda.

Chairman Voltz called for the public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Board made at its May 4, 1998 meeting as follows:

Z9805101. Patricia K. McCutcheon?s request for change from AU to ARR on 1.10 acres located on the east side of Cactus Place, approximately ? mile east of Satellite Boulevard and 144 feet south of Breckinridge Avenue, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z9805101 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

Z9805102. Nicerja Enterprises, Inc.?s request for change from RRMH-1 to TR-2 on 35 acres located on the east side of Hammock Road, approximately 0.12 mile north of Wiley Avenue, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z9805102 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Z9805103. Robert G. & Agnes R. Adderley?s request for change from RU-1-11 to AU on 9 acres located on the east side of Glendale Boulevard approximately 0.23 mile north of Parrish Road, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z9805103 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Z9805104. Brevard County Board of County Commissioners on its own motion authorized administrative rezoning on property on which a development order had been submitted initiating a consideration of a change in zoning classification from GU to PIP in accordance with the provisions of Future Land Use Element XIII, Policy 10.2, Brevard County Comprehensive Plan as adopted on September 8, 1988, on 17.8 acres located on the west side of Grissom Parkway, approximately 0.21 mile north of Kings Highway, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z9805104 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Z9805105. Orlando Utilities Commission?s request for a Conditional Use Permit for Towers and Antennas (160-foot monopole) in a GU zone on 31? acres located on the west side of Grissom Parkway approximately 0.10 mile north of Kings Highway, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board subject to FAA approval.

Jack Kirschenbaum, representing Orlando Utilities Commission, stated they are seeking a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a 160-foot monopole tower; it was approved unanimously at the P&Z meeting subject to FAA approval; and they are also seeking three waivers from the Ordinance. He stated the first is a waiver of 140 feet from the 200-foot requirement; the property is on the west side of Grissom Parkway, behind the retention pond owned by the County; and the property is owned by the Orlando Utilities Commission. He stated to the north and south of the property are the almost 100-foot high tension power lines which run east and west; the site is between the two power lines; and they are seeking the 140-foot waiver because the only thing in the vicinity is the retention pond. He stated the second waiver is a 50-foot waiver from the five times the tower height requirement; they are 750 feet from residential zoning; and they need a 50-foot waiver. He stated the last waiver is from landscape requirements; the site is heavily wooded, and there is an existing access road which runs east and west from Grissom Parkway to the site along the north side of the retention pond; and the intent is to use the existing access with no further disturbance to the natural environment, and build the tower site at the northwest corner of the retention pond. He stated landscaping would serve no purpose other than to tear down the natural habitat.

Commissioner Cook inquired if Mr. Kirschenbaum is requesting an exemption from the landscaping requirements, and can the Board waive that. Zoning Official Rick Enos advised that provision cannot be waived by the Board; the Board can waive provisions in Sections 3 and 4 of the Ordinance; and

the provision in question is in Section 6. He stated the applicant was notified at the P&Z Board hearing that item cannot be waived; and the proper forum for that is through the Board of Adjustment.

Mr. Kirschenbaum stated he was under the impression the Planning and Zoning Board could not approve that, but the Commission could. He stated the property as a result of this request has triggered an administrative rezoning from GU to PIP; the original request for the tower was going to be 195 feet; but after considering a myriad of factors, it was decided 160 feet was the appropriate height. He stated it will be a monopole; and it will be located to not disturb the scrub jay habitat which is to the north and east.

Bill Hutto, representing Tico Airport Authority, stated the Authority is against the rezoning; there are serious safety concerns about locating a tower in this region; and pointed out runways and proposed runways on the map. He advised the tower is within the 200-foot area; it is on the approach to Runway 36 which is an instrument runway; and at the P&Z meeting he requested this item go for full review by the FAA and a study be done. He stated one study has been submitted, but the results have not yet been attained.

Commissioner Cook inquired if it would meet the Airport?s requirements if the permit was subject to FAA approval; with Mr. Hutto responding he would not support it because in the best interest of aviation all tall objects should be kept away from the airport, but he would not dispute it. Mr. Hutto stated the Ordinance calls for an FAA review; and if that comes back negative, the building permit can be issued.

Chairman Voltz inquired if there is any possibility of moving the tower to the west boundary. Mr. Kirschenbaum responded no, this is the site they have to use; if moved to the west, it would have to be so far to the west to comply with Mr. Hutto?s request that it would not be in the envelope; and they have submitted for FAA approval, which should be turned around within 60 days. He stated the FAA has to give some indication soon; if it is not approved, then there are more steps to go through; but if it is approved, all safety concerns would have been answered. He stated they are below the 200 feet which was a primary concern; if it was over 200 feet, a full study would have to be done; but it was kept under 200 feet. He stated the P&Z Board made the approval contingent upon FAA approval; and they would not expect a building permit unless the FAA approves it. He stated they have done dozens of towers; the FAA is the appropriate body to determine matters of safety; and requested the same type of approval, contingent upon FAA approval.

Robert Rupe stated his concern is the same as Mr. Hutto?s; Port St. John abuts the south side of Tico Airport; the long-range plan of the Airport is to have a runway going to the southwest; and the expansion should create a lot of jobs in North Brevard. He stated Cypress Woods in going in right beside the tower site; accidents do happen; there is a tower a mile to the east; and suggested co-locating on an existing tower.

Commissioner Cook inquired if Mr. Rupe?s concern is that the antenna might impact the expansion of the runway; with Mr. Rupe responding affirmatively.

Mr. Hutto stated it could have an impact on future growth; that is something the aeronautical study would point out; the 200-foot threshold is for towers and obstacles far away from the airport; but this tower is very close to an instrument approach. He stated he talked to the FAA today; it is putting this through all the rigors to see how it will affect existing and future runways; and that airspace and property is protected as if the runways were existing today.

Chairman Voltz stated the tower will be 160 feet tall; and normally there is a light on a tower 200 feet and above. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated the maximum height of the tower, antenna, lightning rod, etc. will not be over 160 feet. Chairman Voltz inquired if there is a chance of putting a light on the tower; with Mr. Kirschenbaum responding absolutely.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Kirschenbaum will be putting forth a witness to demonstrate the technical necessity; with Mr. Kirschenbaum responding affirmatively.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would be more comfortable with this if the FAA study could come back to the Board; and Mr. Hutto and Mr. Rupe are concerned about safety issues. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated the next time it could come to the Board would be in August; with Commissioner Scarborough advising he can table it to any meeting he wants. Mr. Enos advised the next zoning meeting is in July; with Commissioner Scarborough noting the Board has tabled such items to regular meetings. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated the FAA report would have to approve the site and be produced to the Building Department before a permit could be issued. Commissioner Scarborough stated once it moves beyond this point the Board is out of the loop, and he would prefer to know everything is in place. He stated he has not been through the FAA process before; and he would like to continue the item to the earliest meeting possible.

Commissioner Higgs requested the technical evidence be presented.

Brian Borgiet, Radio Frequency Engineer with Sprint, stated he designed the digital network for Brevard County and parts of Orange County. Mr. Kirschenbaum requested Mr. Borgiet describe the technical necessity for locating the tower on the site for which the application has been submitted; with Mr. Borgiet responding the site is required to provide coverage along the I-95 corridor, south of State Road 50 to SR 520. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired about co-locating on the tower to the east. Mr. Borgiet stated the tower was evaluated in the early stages, and it was discovered it would not work. He explained a certain signal level must be provided along the I-95 corridor; and the BellSouth site does not meet the requirements. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired if there is any other location further to the west that would supply the coverage necessary; with Mr. Borgiet responding not at this time. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired about studies to determine the technical necessity of the location; with Mr. Borgiet displaying and explaining a map of the search area. Commissioner Higgs stated she understands the coverage would be better with the tower; but she is interested in the technical necessity for this site; and inquired why does it have to go there. Mr. Borgiet responded the necessity is to provide coverage for I-95. Commissioner Higgs inquired what was the search area; with Mr. Borgiet responding an initial evaluation of the area is done; a site is needed within a quarter-mile radius; and all the possible locations were evaluated on a case-by-case basis. He stated the BellSouth tower which was mentioned earlier is not tall enough or close enough to I-95 to provide

the needed coverage; and Sprint tries to do all the co-location that it can. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired if Mr. Borgiet starts with co-locations whenever possible; with Mr. Borgiet responding affirmatively. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired how Mr. Borgiet designs the network and seeks areas for the gaps; with Mr. Borgiet explaining the process.

Commissioner O?Brien inquired how the competitors cover I-95 and where are their towers. Mr. Borgiet stated BellSouth is a different technology; it is analog, and requires fewer, higher towers at a higher power level; and he uses a digital technology which requires lower power, with lower towers. Commissioner O?Brien inquired about BellSouth Mobility or Motorola; with Mr. Borgiet responding he looked at the BellSouth tower, but it is analog.

Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired if the FCC license requires utilization of a certain power. Mr. Borgiet responded it requires negative 97 DBM, and it requires more towers, closer together. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired if that is different from the BellSouth Mobility system; with Mr. Borgiet responding they are a higher power system. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired if the coverage on I-95 in this area is required by the license from the FCC; with Mr. Borgiet responding they have to provide a certain amount of coverage based on a percentage of the population; and that is considered when the analysis is done. Mr. Borgiet advised without this site, a person could not use the system between SR 50 and SR 520 because there would not be coverage.

Commissioner O?Brien inquired if Sprint has the same type of equipment nationwide; with Mr. Borgiet responding it is the same technology, but different vendors are used in different markets. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if Mr. Borgiet and the applicant are a vendor for Sprint or are they Sprint; with Mr. Borgiet responding Sprint. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if Sprint uses towers further apart with more power anywhere; with Mr. Borgiet responding in this type of environment, they cannot. Mr. Borgiet stated in a rural environment there is less capacity; there is a certain amount of power; and the coverage area shrinks with more users. He commented on the difference between analog and digital; and stated with a lot of traffic on I-95, Grissom Parkway, and the general area, cell coverage shrinks, and that is why the towers are closer together and lower. He stated if there were taller towers and not a lot of capacity, the cell would grow and create noise. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated the more use by the population, the smaller the cell is.

Commissioner Scarborough advised of more detailed analysis presented by a previous applicant; and stated he does not see the analysis of other sites in the area. He inquired if Mr. Borgiet has maps showing other locations with the tower on it and what the coverage would be; with Mr. Borgiet responding no. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to see that; and suggested the applicant provide the Commissioners with an information packet showing why it must be at the proposed location.

Mr. Kirschenbaum stated what occurred in the previous case and why there were comparisons was due to a suggestion to not go to the primary site but look at a particular alternative site.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board has seen a number of towers; and advised of the information other applicants have submitted showing the search area demonstrating the tower is necessary to PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION OF

complete the system in an area. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated that document can be created, although it has not been used each time. He stated if there was no scrub jay area to the north, the tower could have perhaps been located there and be within the ring; and there are constraints that require it to be technically located where it is proposed, such as the habitat, retention pond, and neighborhood. He stated he can produce the document showing the search ring, but cannot show the coverage maps for every possible site within the search ring. Commissioner Higgs stated what the Board has seen in the past is areas where the search has taken place, and why it has to go there; and the applicant could get a permit to locate in the scrub jay area, although it would require mitigation and additional cost. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated when there is a search ring, they have to look at geography and other constraints to pick the best possible site; the colored studies are based on that site; it is impossible to study every potential site within the search ring; and they have to pick those sites that are, for instance, outside the scrub jay area.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are different levels of risk involved; and the FAA could indicate one site was preferable because of less risk. Mr. Hutto stated sometimes the FAA allows things but only under certain conditions such as eliminating the instrument approach, which would make the airport useless for corporate and commercial activities. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be silly to open a tower and close an airport in the process; and that is why this is premature tonight. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated he hopes to answer the Board?s questions; with Commissioner Scarborough advising the more he talks, the more his questions expand.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to table Item Z9805105 to July 7, 1998. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Z9805106. B. B. Nelson?s request for change of land use designation from Residential to Mixed Use and zoning from AU to BU-1 on .37 acre located on the northwest corner of Temple Street and Showdow Street, which was approved by the Citizens Resource Group, denied by the Local Planning Agency, and denied by the Planning and Zoning Board.

B. B. Nelson stated the site fronts on I-95, and is two lots in Canaveral Groves; there are no houses within 700 to 800 feet; it is a small strip of land; and he has searched for something to do with it. He stated he has offered it to Canaveral Groves Homeowners Association which did not want it; but the Boy Scouts want it. He stated he is going to give it to the Boy Scouts subject to a billboard on the north part of it; there are no billboards advertising the port, motels, and other tourist facilities; and advertisement in this area is needed. He described the property and the area; and stated he wants to vacate Temple Street. He stated the Boy Scouts would use the property; he does not know of any other use for it; the County needs to allow him to do something with it; and the tourist development people are interested in the billboard to attract tourists off I-95. He stated someone is going door to door to collect names; and presented a petition with 40 names supporting the contribution. He stated he has prepared a deed to the Boy Scouts and a petition to vacate Temple Street; he will pay to apply to vacate Temple Street; and submitted surveys of the area. He pointed out the property on the map. He noted he has four items on the Agenda; his total cost to apply for rezoning was $5,300; and it is expensive to speak to the Board to ask that he be allowed to use his own land.

Commissioner Cook stated the application is to change the use of the land, and inquired what is the current zoning on the property; with Mr. Nelson responding AU.

Dave Dulaigh stated he lives 500 feet from the billboard which would be in his front window; he does not like it; and he does not want the change because it may lead to other things such as a radio tower.

Clifford Reich stated he owns two lots on Showdow Street; they broke ground on his new home on Monday; and he does not want the sign or lights at night. He stated the land should stay agricultural or residential; and if Mr. Nelson wants to give the property to the Boy Scouts, he may do so, but without the sign.

Joe Stadnik stated the land would make a perfect mini-park to keep people off the streets; it is a connection to the canal and to Lake Wilson; and he approves of the requested action. He inquired if Disney should be allowed to put all the signs and get all the credit and tourists. He stated Brevard County needs tourists; and the signs will help them to stop. He stated when the new train is put in between the Port and Orlando, it will be the Disney train.

Mr. Nelson stated there is a binding agreement to limit the use to the headquarters of the Boy Scouts of America, Pack 497 and a billboard on the north part of the property. He noted the property is 300 feet long; Mr. Dulaigh is on the other side of Temple Street, which is at least 700 or 800 feet from the property; and he is not trying to build something offensive. He advised there are no other billboards within four miles; and this is an opportunity to use the property for the community.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to deny Small Scale Plan Amendment 98S.6, as recommended by the LPA. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners O?Brien and Voltz voted nay.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the P&Z Board recommended denial of the zoning. Mr. Nelson stated that is not correct; the CRG recommended approval; the LPA recommended approval; and the P&Z Board recommended denial because there was not a settlement on what it would be used for. He stated there have been mistakes from staff; and far too many things are coming out with incorrect information which makes it difficult for the Board to make an intelligent decision. Commissioner Scarborough inquired about the recommendations; with Zoning Official Rick Enos responding the CRG approved the Small Scale Plan amendment, but the LPA denied it.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to deny Item Z9805106 as recommended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Z9805107. Port St. John Junior Chamber of Commerce, Inc., B. B. Nelson, and Jack Moore?s request for change of land use designation from Residential to Mixed Use District and zoning from GU and AU to BU-1 with a CUP for Towers and Antennas (200-foot monopole on Block 1, Lot 2 only)

on 7.97 acres located west of I-95 across the canal from the southern terminus of Homestead Avenue, which was approved by the Citizens Resource Group, denied by the Local Planning Agency, and denied by the Planning and Zoning Board for BU-1 and approved for CUP for 150-foot lattice tower as amended by the applicant.

B. B. Nelson stated this is an application by the Port St. John Jaycees, Jack Moore and him to use some property that is adjacent to the new Port St. John interchange; and the Jaycees want to build a park and clubhouse.

Tracey Higginbotham, President of the Port St. John Junior Chamber of Commerce, stated the property is at the end of Homestead Avenue; and the Jaycees own approximately four acres of the land. He distributed maps, and pointed out various areas of the property including the 200-foot easement, the I-95 interchange, the 100-foot ditch, the property owned by the Jaycees, property leased from Mr. Nelson by the Jaycees, antenna location, and Mr. Moore?s property. He stated the property is bound by I-95 and the 100-foot ditch; it is not desirable for anything residential; and the Jaycees? intention is to construct a chapter meeting hall. He stated the Jaycees have been in Port St. John since 1983; and advised of their current meeting arrangements and need for storage areas. He outlined the Jaycees? various community activities; and stated it is the request of the members to have a meeting place. He stated they understand the road access is rustic and that eventually there will be road access to their facility; previously he presented the five-year building plan; and stated the plan is to have road access within five years and to have the building constructed by 2002. He stated the rezoning from AU to BU-1 will facilitate their ability to put a chapter meeting hall on the property; submitted a petition with 53 signatures; and stated the signatures are from people around the area who support their request for the rezoning. He stated the Jaycees fill a void in the community; no other organization provides the community with the love of family and community which the Jaycees have provided for the past 14 years; and some people do not want the change, but the reason they are here is because they moved to a community which he and the Jaycees helped build. He stated people who voice objections to the request for the change should make efforts to provide what the Jaycees provide to the community. He requested approval of the rezoning.

Commissioner Cook inquired where will access be. Mr. Nelson responded Homestead Avenue is platted and recorded through the property; it needs a culvert; and the other access will be from the I-95 interchange. He stated FDOT obtained additional right-of-way north of the off ramp to the property; there is access to the end of the limited access fence by DOT outside the right-of-way that is going to be used by I-95; but right now the platted access is from Homestead Avenue. He stated he is leasing part of the property to the Jaycees, but wants to use another part for an antenna. He stated the Board was discussing proper location of antennas; and he has an approval on SR 405, well north and away from the airport. He stated south of Port St. John and north of Canaveral Groves he would like to put an antenna in, well away from the airport runways. He advised of consultation with Mr. Hutto; and stated this site and another in Canaveral Groves will serve the entire area. He stated the cellular phone providers need more towers; there are vacant spots along Grissom Parkway; and he is proposing a 150-foot tower which will not be offensive to anyone. He displayed before and after photographs of the area. He stated the contract for the interchange is PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION OF

supposed to be awarded this year and has a 385-day completion time. Mr. Nelson stated the P&Z Board was told there was no money to do planning, there was no right-of-way obtained, and was shown a misleading map. He stated all the right-of-way has been obtained for the interchange and the access to Grissom Parkway; there was a feasibility study done on the access to the west in 1993; but nothing has happened with it. He stated the antenna is away from the houses, hidden in the trees, and will not bother anybody. He requested the Board?s approval for use of the land by the Junior Chamber of Commerce and one antenna.

C. B. Till stated his son-in-law and daughter own Lots 1 and 2, adjacent to the subject property; when they bought the land it was zoned for residential purposes; and they bought it for that reason. He stated when the Jaycees and the antenna go in, their property value will go down; and he is against the request.

Robert Rupe stated the Port St. John Homeowners Association submitted a letter of opposition; and the biggest problem is putting an access road across a dead-end residential road. He stated if it is a clubhouse, it will create a lot of traffic; and at the end of a quiet, residential street is not the best place to put a clubhouse. He stated the tower would be 400 feet from the houses in Port St. John; there are residents all along the canal; they finally got the I-95 interchange; and people who own property in that area will be building their dream homes. He stated he does not want the tower or clubhouse.

Nancy Chalson advised of the location of her property; and described the area. She stated the clubhouse would be just across the ditch from vacant property; and the tower would be just behind Kevin Foster?s house. She stated she got a copy of the Future Land Use Map relating to availability of public facilities and services; it says if access is developed by way of Homestead Avenue, it could affect Fay Boulevard; the current traffic volume on Fay Boulevard is 13,416 trips per day; the proposed land use change would add a maximum of 3,336 trips per day to the existing traffic volume; and the additional trips generated would not result in a degradation in the level of service for Fay Boulevard, currently at level of service C. She stated she was told at the P&Z meeting that this was not right; but she was just quoting what was in the library. She stated she has a beautiful home; and pointed out her property on the map. She stated Mr. Nelson is saying this will not affect her property; but they have enough problems dealing with people going into the area with automatic weapons, etc.; and she is against the rezoning.

James Nadle stated he is against the rezoning; and inquired where will they get the money to build the culvert and put the roads in. Chairman Voltz stated that will be the owner?s responsibility.

Jack Kisner stated he lives in Canaveral Groves; Mr. Higginbotham has made a pretty picture for moving into Canaveral Groves; and inquired about the interchange from I-95 and the west connector road. He stated if a tower is built in this area, when the interchange comes in, it will cut off the old Pine Street; the last time they talked about the Pine Street extension, Road and Bridge advised that would take a bridge because of the width of the canal; and the proposed west connection will have a bridge so there will be access to that area. He inquired until that is done, how will the electronics and lighting for the tower be maintained. He stated a solution might be to table this until after the PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION OF

interchange and west connector road are completed; and at that time, there may be a feasible route to make this happen.

Jeanne Nadle read aloud a letter from the Canaveral Groves Homeowners advising the membership opposes erection of a communications tower in Section 28 due to the proximity of the residential area. She stated she was present at the P&Z meeting, and was upset with Mr. Nelson?s lack of courtesy to the P&Z Board as he indicated the County was going to have towers whether the people liked it or not.

Nelson Palmer stated he lives on Homestead Avenue; Mr. Nelson says there is no one opposed to this; but he is opposed as he will be within 400 to 500 feet of the tower and the clubhouse. He stated the Jaycees are a wonderful organization; he does not know Mr. Nelson well enough to say that about him; and he does not want to dampen their project. He stated Homestead Avenue is a very narrow street; and inquired if the Board is willing to put speed bumps to control the traffic. He stated there will be an additional 3,000 cars if the road is built across the canal; and inquired if Homestead Avenue can handle 3,000 cars. He advised of the dangers of Homestead Avenue; and stated he is against the request.

Gaver Powers, representing the Port St. John Jaycees, stated five years ago the chapter decided to get some property and seek some permanency; he is not sure what will happen to property values in that area; but he is pleased to find out that I-95 will abut his property. He stated the trend in that area will be to commercialize that property, and there may be businesses going in to benefit the community. He advised of the advantages of having a Jaycees clubhouse; stated they intentionally selected property they thought no one else would want in an area that was distant from everyone else; and now, five years later, they are soliciting approval to build. He stated a lot of individuals are opposed to the Jaycees going into that area; the Jaycees provide a lot of services to the community; and sometimes the needs of the few outweigh the many.

Kevin Foster stated the tower is right behind his house, and he does not want it. He stated the Jaycees are great; but inquired why they need to be outside Port St. John when their activities take place in East Port St. John. He stated they should buy property in that portion of Port St. John so they will not have to truck their equipment through the neighborhood; there are small roads and a lot of children in the area; and they do not need all that traffic. He stated he does not want to look out of his back door at a tower.

Steve Velligan, representing the Port St. John Jaycees, advised of the community activities of the Jaycees; stated there will not be 3,000 trips added to the roadway unless Homestead Avenue is fully extended all the way to Canaveral Groves; and the senior center which is currently going up at Corto Road would generate a lot more traffic. He stated there are two issues; one is the tower, and the other is the rezoning; and the Jaycees are for the land rezoning.

Joe Stadnik stated the people want the help of the Jaycees, but not their presence; people want communications, but not the antenna which provides it; and people want children, but do not want family life. He stated he supports the Jaycees; the plan is in the Small Area Plan of Canaveral PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION OF

Groves; and speed bumps are ridiculous. Mr. Stadnik stated Port St. John is saying it does not want that; and the Canaveral Groves Homeowners Association. which represents less than 100 out of 1,000 families, does not want it either. He stated the bridge is going to cross the canal either to Homestead Avenue or to Pine Street where it should go; and there needs to be an access from Port St. John and Canaveral Groves in both directions. He stated a lot of people want Pine Street going north and would petition for it; and he supports the request.

Mary Tees, representing the Port St. John Homeowners Association, stated the organization sent a letter objecting to the zoning change. She inquired about the coverage for the antenna; and how many antennas will be put in the County. She stated she counted 11 antennas between SR 520 and SR 192 on I-95; Brevard County is becoming a county of antennas and not trees; and advised of the effect on eco-tourism. She inquired about the quality of life for nearby residents, what will happen when the towers are no longer needed, and who will be responsible for taking them down. She stated they support Canaveral Groves in their opposition of the request; and to put a clubhouse on the property, a zoning change is not needed. She stated there has been a lot of talk about the I-95 interchange; it is going in and the bid is out; however, nothing has been decided about the west connector. She stated Homestead Avenue and Pine Street die at the new interchange because it goes through the middle of them; any cross traffic is going to be by Satellite Boulevard, Gulfview, or Baltimore; and the new interchange will be a rural interchange. She inquired if the Board wants a tower at a new interchange; stated there are a lot of people who live near I-95 and are comfortable there; Homestead Avenue and Addie Avenue are narrow streets; there are a lot of children; and now it is going to be opened up. She urged the Board to deny the antenna; and stated the Jaycees have done good works, but this is not one of them.

Mr. Higginbotham outlined the five-year plan; stated they want the zoning change so they know they have some place to go in the future; and without the change they do not know that for sure. He stated at the back of their lot there is a 200-foot easement and a 100-foot ditch; the house on the other side is at least 50 feet from the property line; so when the clubhouse is built, it would be at least 400 feet from the nearest house. He stated Canaveral Groves has one-acre lots; there is plenty of room; the clubhouse will be on three acres; and they are not going to build at the very back of the lot. He stated they will do a feasibility study; and there is still a lot to do to establish development plans. He commented on the road access and the participation of Canaveral Groves and Port St. John in Jaycee activities; and stated for a long time the Jaycees took on the responsibility of cleaning U.S. 1 from Parrish Medical Center to past Canaveral Groves Boulevard. He displayed a map, and pointed out the location of their property, roads, interchange, antenna and the adjacent area. He requested approval of the item.

Mr. Nelson stated the antenna would not be any closer than 400 feet from any house; regarding the access from I-95, the right-of-way has been acquired by DOT to serve the area that is blocked; there is a water line crossing the canal going to Homestead Avenue; and the property for the Homestead extension has already been donated. He stated a lot of the plans lead to commercial land; the property is the logical place for an antenna; it is well away from the airport; and one low-powered antenna can serve all of the Port St. John, Canaveral Groves and I-95 area. He stated he studied

this in detail before he bought the land; and he bought it for this purpose. Mr. Nelson stated this PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION OF

background is electronics; and this is the logical place for an antenna. He commented on sagging telephone cables. He stated there was a lot of incorrect information given; and he has shown the details of the interchange, how it will serve the community, and how there is already a plan to give access to the property. He requested approval of his request.

Commissioner Cook stated the access is not currently there; and inquired if the antenna or clubhouse would not be a reality. Mr. Nelson stated the access from Homestead Avenue is there except for a culvert. Commissioner Cook inquired who is going to put in a culvert and extend the street; with Mr. Nelson responding that has not been decided, but some of the landowners will have to do it. Mr. Higginbotham advised the Jaycees have entertained those expenses; but without the zoning change, they do not want to put out the funds for a culvert. Commissioner Cook stated it is impossible to get a permit without access; and he was wondering how the access will come about. Mr. Nelson stated the access is provided by DOT which already acquired the right-of-way to provide service to the roads they are cutting off. Chairman Voltz stated it would not be necessary to go all the way across the canal. Mr. Nelson stated they do not come from the canal; and DOT has committed to putting in a graded condition road, not paved.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Nelson has a contract with a cellular phone carrier for presence on the tower; with Mr. Nelson responding he does not, but he has several others and is part owner of Communication Towers, Inc. which owns towers throughout the County. Commissioner Higgs stated it is necessary to show a need for the tower; and Mr. Nelson does not have a current contract. Mr. Nelson stated there is a void on Grissom Road; showed areas where there is no service; and stated there is a big need in the area.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Kirschenbaum was indicating something different; and he is confused about the need. He stated in the past the Board has gotten more technical data with multicolored maps. Chairman Voltz inquired how close is this to the last antenna; with Zoning Official Rick Enos responding over two miles to the north. Commissioner Scarborough stated there may be a need for the antenna and this may be the best place; but from the information he has received so far it is hard to make a determination. He stated he thought that was supposed to be part of the application process. Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley stated if the applicant is asking for a waiver, they must prove technical necessity for that particular site. Mr. Enos advised waivers are being requested on the setback and distance to residential property. Commissioner Scarborough stated one issue is waiver of 800 feet from residential lots; with Ms. Bentley advising the applicant must prove technical necessity for the waiver. Commissioner Scarborough stated he will be glad to table the item to allow Mr. Nelson to do additional research; as Mr. Nelson has not met the technical requirements this evening.

Mr. Nelson disagreed; stated he made an attempt to talk to Commissioner Scarborough about all of the applications, but was denied; and he has not spoken to any Commissioner about the zoning matters. He stated he has studied the antenna location and where the needs are; he is putting up towers to lease for antennas; and this is close to I-95, adjacent to Port St. John, not near enough to houses to bother anyone, and in the pine trees. He stated he met all the requirements, but he is willing to pursue whatever he has to do to get it installed.

Commissioner Scarborough stated it will require a waiver of 800 feet from residential property. Mr. Enos clarified the original request was for a 200-foot tower which would have required an 800-foot waiver; but Mr. Nelson has reduced the height of the tower to 150 feet, which reduces the required waiver to 550 feet. Commissioner Scarborough stated the tower and the Jaycees are separate issues.

Commissioner Cook inquired if Mr. Nelson does not want an opportunity to submit additional information to show the necessity for the tower; with Mr. Nelson responding he does not mind that, but a lot of the additional information came from yesterday?s Economic Development Council?s meeting. Mr. Nelson stated Nokia and Harris Corporation participated in the meeting; and inquired if the County will be attracting industry or will it be running them off. He stated the Board seriously needs to look at this; Sprint has advised the County?s Ordinance is the worst in the United States; it is not easy to comply with; but he has changed things to comply. He stated this is the most logical place for an antenna to serve all of Port St. John, Canaveral Groves and I-95. Commissioner Cook stated that is not in the application; and Mr. Nelson needs to list all the things he has said to show some sort of technical necessity. Mr. Nelson requested approval of the commercial zoning and delay of consideration of the tower.

Commissioner Scarborough explained the intent of the Ordinance; and stated this evening he is incapable of making the decision without additional information. Mr. Nelson inquired how could he locate north of Port St. John and stay away from the airport. Commissioner Scarborough stated the issue is the proximity to the home, in this case, not the proximity to the airport; and that is where the waiver comes into play.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to table consideration of the CUP for Towers and Antennas to July 30, 1998. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he talked to John Denninghoff yesterday; he was confused about how the road running along the interchange would work and where it would cut south; and requested Mr. Denninghoff address the issue.

John Denninghoff, Registered Professional Engineer with the Public Works Department, stated the right-of-way on the northwest quadrant of the interchange, as well as similar rights-of-way on all quadrants, was acquired by DOT to provide access to properties which had access cut off by the purchase of the property for the interchange; and a distinction needs to be made between the limited access portion of the interchange and the additional rights-of-way. He stated the purchase of the additional rights-of-way was not to provide access to the interchange; breeching the limited access fence is prohibited except at designated locations on the western extreme of the interchange; and the right-of-way that was acquired did not extend that far.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired how the two roads merge; with Mr. Denninghoff responding it would be necessary to acquire more right-of-way to make the geometry work properly as well as any intersections which would be necessary in order to prevent a hazardous situation from arising. PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION OF

Commissioner Scarborough inquired whether this is a minor or major arterial intersection; with Mr. Denninghoff responding the additional right-of-way is 75 feet wide, which does not comply with the County?s arterial or collector road standards. Mr. Denninghoff advised the minimum radius allowable is 400 feet, and it would be impossible to get around the corner to get to the interchange access point without acquiring additional rights-of-way.

Commissioner Cook inquired if the access to the property is Homestead Avenue. Mr. Denninghoff stated it is not accessible to the DOT right-of-way; and right now the most logical access is through the Homestead Avenue right-of-way. Commissioner Cook inquired if that is the way Mr. Nelson sees the DOT right-of-way; with Mr. Nelson responding the additional right-of-way that DOT has acquired is for the specific purpose of providing access to this land; part of it is 75 feet wide and another part is 110 feet wide; and that exceeds any other rights-of-way. Mr. Nelson stated DOT advised it will make improvements to the road to provide that access; it will be graded and leveled so it can be used; and it will go beyond the limited access point to whatever road the Board decides it should hook up to. He advised of the 1993 feasibility study; and stated the County has not taken the steps to buy additional right-of-way or make a decision where it will put the road. He stated the right-of-way that DOT acquired is much wider than anything else the County has at 75 feet to 110 feet; the present access is from Homestead Avenue; the water line is there; and there needs to be some activity to provide access to the western side of the interchange.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the BU-1 portion of the request does not appear to be consistent with the location criteria for community commercial, according to Policy 4.4.a; and there has been testimony from a professional engineer that the request does not meet the criteria.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to deny Item Z9805107 as recommended by the P&Z Board.

Chairman Voltz stated the Jaycees can apply for AU zoning for the property. Mr. Enos stated the Jaycees is a private club; there is a conditional use permit available in AU zoning for a private club; and BU-1 is not required.

Chairman Voltz called for a vote on the motion to deny. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to deny the Small Scale Plan Amendment for Item Z9805107. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 8:14 p.m. and reconvened at 8:28 p.m.

Z9805108. B. B. Nelson?s request for change of land use from Residential to Mixed Use District and zoning from AU to BU-1 with a CUP for Towers and Antennas (200 feet) on 8 acres located on the

east side of I-95, approximately 1.21 miles north of the Service Area, which was approved by the Citizens Resource Group, Local Planning Agency, and Planning and Zoning Board.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Item Z9805108 was unanimously approved by the P&Z Board; and it is in an isolated area.

Commissioner Higgs stated according to Page 34 of the Staff Report, the National Wetlands Inventory for the Maytown quad reflects the presence of wetlands, primarily on the northeast portion and southern one-third of the site; the Plan provides that commercial and industrial land uses shall be prohibited in wetlands unless there is an overriding public need; and this does not meet her criteria for that.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt an Ordinance amending Article III, Chapter 62, of the Brevard County Code entitled "The 1988 Comprehensive Plan," setting forth the Seventh Small Scale Plan Amendment of 1998, 98S.7, to the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan; amending Section 62-501 entitled Contents of the Plan; specifically amending Section 62-501, Part XVIII(G), entitled the Future Land Use Map Appendices; and provisions which require amendment to maintain internal consistency with these amendments; providing legal status; providing a severability clause; and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay. (See page                            for Ordinance No. 98-32.)

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve BU-1 zoning for Item Z9805108 as recommended. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the Conditional Use Permit for Towers and Antennas for Item Z9805108 as recommended.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if any waivers are required; with Zoning Official Rick Enos responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the applicant can demonstrate the technical necessity of the tower in this location. Commissioner Scarborough agreed that needs to be done; and suggested tabling the CUP to allow Mr. Nelson to come back with the technical data at the July meeting.

Mr. Nelson inquired what is the waiver; with Mr. Enos responding Mr. Nelson is requesting a waiver to the 1,000-foot setback to residential zoning. Mr. Enos advised the AU zoning is residential even though it is undeveloped. Commissioner Scarborough stated that is pushing the point; in one place there are homes, but here AU is only a possible residential. Commissioner Higgs suggested changing the law.

Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley advised if the Board can get evidence into the record regarding the technical necessity for the location on this site, there would be grounds for a waiver. PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION OF

Commissioner Scarborough stated his problem is there is no technical evidence in the record; with Ms. Bentley advising she does not see evidence in the record at this point, but she has not read the minutes of the P&Z meeting, and Mr. Nelson may have presented something at the that level.

Commissioner Cook inquired if AU is a stretch or did the Board intend that in the Ordinance; with Commissioner Higgs responding it was intended.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would be more comfortable tabling the CUP to July so evidence can be presented; and addressed various levels of evidence. He stated something needs to be included in the record to proceed with the waiver.

Commissioner Higgs stated when the Board crafted the Ordinance, one of the concerns was speculative towers, lack of need, and getting CUP?s on the book that would not be used for a long period of time.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to table CUP for Towers and Antennas for Item Z9805108 to July 30, 1998. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Z9805201. Kathy C. Yancey?s request for change from SR to RR-1 on 2.24 acres located on the south side of Fenner Road, approximately 0.08 mile east of Cox Road, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Motion by Commissioner O?Brien, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z9805201 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Z9805301. Paul E. (Jr.) and Elisabeth C. Phillips? request for change from GU to SR with Binding Development Plan limiting density to one unit per 2.5 acres on 6.03 acres located on the west side of Fleming Grant Road, approximately 0.61 mile north of Mockingbird Lane, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z9805301 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Z9805302. River Grove Mobile Home Village I & II, LTD?s request for change from TR-3 with Special Use Permit for Trailer Sales to BU-1 on 1.2 acres located on the west side of U.S. 1 approximately 350 feet south of Garretts Road, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Chairman Voltz stated the only speakers are the applicant and one person who is in favor of the rezoning. Commissioner Higgs recommended proceeding with the speakers as there have been written objections; and stated she has some concerns, and would like to discuss the issue.

Michael Douglas stated he is one of the owners of the property in question; it has been a sales lot since 1969; and there have been complaints about the parking area. He stated the parking lot has been there; and displayed a map showing the parking lot in the early 1980's. He stated the zoning has been the same since 1969, and says they are only supposed to use it for sales in the adjoining mobile home park, but it has been a sales lot to various areas since 1969. He stated they have been selling modular homes from a sales office since 1990; and displayed the permit papers from 1990. He stated in 1990 there were three mobile home models; they were rotated each year, with the number of models varying; they have owned the property since 1979; it was a sales lot since 1969; and the uses are not consistent with the current zoning. He noted he does not know if the zoning rules have changed, but the property has been used for commercial purposes that exist under BU-1 zoning for all those years.

Chairman Voltz inquired about plans to change the current use of the property; with Mr. Douglas responding they are going to use it for sales of mobile homes, real estate sales, and sales for construction, which has been the use since 1969.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Douglas needs a zoning to allow real estate sales and construction sales. Mr. Douglas stated the property needs to be rezoned to do what they have always done there; and outlined the activities on the property. Commissioner Higgs inquired what zoning would be needed; with Zoning Official Rick Enos responding he would need a commercial zoning classification, and the request is for BU-1. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it can be done under RP; with Mr. Enos responding not the mobile home sales lot. Commissioner Higgs inquired about BU-1-A; with Mr. Enos responding not the mobile home sales lot. Commissioner Higgs stated the only alternative is BU-1; and one of the issues of the homeowners in River Grove Mobile Home Village is the prospectus has been broken. Mr. Douglas noted he did not get copies of any of the letters. Commissioner Higgs read aloud from the letter and prospectus; and inquired if the park residents were notified. Mr. Douglas stated the property in question is not part of the mobile home park; it is and always has been the sales lot; and the prospectus governs lots within the mobile home park. He stated the sales lot is not part of the 73 rental lots; the sales lot was sectioned off in 1969; and all of the homes in the park now were sold out of the sales lot. Commissioner Higgs stated it is a TR-3 with SUP for Trailer Sales; that gives the impression that it is one parcel with a Special Use Permit. Mr. Enos responded that is the way the zoning was set up, but he does not know how the park documents were set up; but the zoning shows it all as one parcel. Mr. Douglas stated zoning shows 73 units in the park; and the prospectus governs those 73 units. Commissioner Higgs stated there is a Special Use Permit for the Sale of Mobile Homes; and they are being sold only on the front parcel. Mr. Douglas stated the lots in the park were all filled in 1982 or 1983; from that point, they sold mobile homes into a park they built off Micco Road; and his predecessors also sold units for Barefoot Bay. He stated this is not a change from what has always been done.

Commissioner Cook inquired if the parcel with the SUP is separate; with Mr. Douglas responding it is all part of the tax bill, but it is not part of the 73 units. Commissioner Cook inquired if the SUP covers a specific portion of the parcel; with Mr. Enos responding affirmatively. Mr. Enos pointed out the area covered under the SUP and the area requested for BU-1.

Mr. Douglas stated Commissioner Higgs is taking one page out of the prospectus; the rest of the prospectus goes farther to explain what the park is; and he has never been required to get the permission of the residents of the park to run the sales lot or bring homes in or out.

Commissioner Cook inquired if Mr. Douglas is saying there has been no change, and no additional structures are proposed. Mr. Douglas advised of a dispute with the park residents over rental increases; and stated as a result they called Code Enforcement about his parking lot. He stated after 28 years of being a sales lot, people who received a rental increase called Code Enforcement which advised him this is not right.

Chairman Voltz stated she visited the park, and did not see a problem. Mr. Douglas stated the parking lot has been in existence at least since 1979; and there has never been an accident there.

Commissioner Cook inquired why Mr. Douglas needs a zoning change; with Mr. Enos responding Mr. Douglas has more uses on the parcel than the original Special Use Permit permitted; the SUP was just for trailer sales for that park; and outlined the businesses being operated on the property. Mr. Douglas stated this did not just happen; and reiterated it has always been a sales lot for outside sales; it only recently came up that the zoning was not correct; and this should be grandfathered in. He stated in the Comprehensive Plan, it is already BU-1; and he is only asking the Board to uphold its previous decision. Mr. Enos advised the property is designated Mixed Use District in the Comprehensive Plan; and BU-1 is permissible on the parcel, but it is not zoned commercial.

E. M. Cunningham stated the Micco Homeowners Association supports approval of the rezoning.

Commissioner Higgs stated there are a number of objections on file from property owners; this is a change in their prospectus; and they deserve the right to full notification. She stated BU-1 is not appropriate for this parcel; and inquired if buffering is required between BU-1 and TR-3. Mr. Enos responded the Code does not require new site planning unless additional construction is done; however, perhaps it can be a condition of the zoning in this case because of the peculiar circumstances. Ms. Bentley advised there is nothing in the case law that addresses that, but because of the peculiar circumstances with the old SUP and the change in the situation, it would be a reasonable requirement to have Mr. Douglas provide a site plan. Mr. Enos stated the uses were developed prior to any site plan requirements which started in the mid to late 1970's. Commissioner Cook stated it is hard to site plan a structure that is already in place. Commissioner Higgs stated if the Board changes the zoning, what had been a part of the function of the park in terms of the mobile home sales will become a different use; and it could become a totally different use if the property was sold. She stated it could go from being a real estate office and mobile home sales to being a 7-Eleven or something of that nature. Chairman Voltz advised it would have to come to the Board for that; with Commissioner Higgs disagreeing. Chairman Voltz stated it would have to come back for site planning; with Commissioner Higgs advising the Board would not necessarily see that. Commissioner Higgs stated there needs to be additional work, and it should be tabled until July to work out some of the issues; and she wants to see what can be done to separate the uses.

Commissioner Cook inquired if the Board can approve the zoning with conditions such as a Binding Development Plan that it would be used only for the purposes it is currently being used for; with Ms. Bentley responding if the applicant agreed to it.

Mr. Douglas stated he brought a copy of the Binding Development Plan with him because he thought something like that might be suggested. He advised there is a 300-foot recreation area from the property to the park; and the homes are not backed up to the sales lot. He stated he has no problem doing a Binding Development Plan, because he is just trying to keep what he had for 20 years.

Commissioner Scarborough stated BU-1 is not a problem; but requested Mr. Douglas meet with Commissioner Higgs and staff to discuss the uses.

Chairman Voltz inquired if there is a Code Enforcement lien; with Mr. Douglas responding yes, he is being told he has to shut down the real estate office. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board can abate enforcement. Mr. Douglas inquired when is the next meeting; with Chairman Voltz responding July 30, 1998. Mr. Douglas reiterated the property has been used in this manner for 20 years; and it is not a new use. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is a new zoning use; if Mr. Douglas dies, the BU-1 would go with the property; and someone could come in and put a 7-Eleven there. Mr. Douglas inquired if it can be done through a Binding Development Plan so there cannot be a 7-Eleven, a bar or whatever. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be nice to sit down and work that out; and the Code Enforcement action can be abated. Commissioner Higgs stated the residents are asking that their park not be impacted; and through a Binding Development Plan it will be possible to work through some of those issues, and assure that everyone maintains the status quo. Mr. Douglas stated that sounds like a good idea; but he does not know what the residents? thoughts are or how much more aggravation he will go through when others are brought into this. Commissioner Cook inquired were courtesy notices sent out to adjacent property owners; with Mr. Enos responding yes. Commissioner Cook stated everyone within 500 feet was notified; with Chairman Voltz advising they could have been here. Commissioner Higgs stated this is a senior citizen park; and it is a long way to travel. Mr. Douglas clarified the park is for residents 55 years old and older.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to table consideration of Item Z9805302 to July 30, 1998.

Mr. Douglas stated he has no other options for this property; this is what it is used for; the present zoning allows him to only sell in the park, which has been full since 1980; and if he does not get the zoning, the County is taking away all his uses for the property. Chairman Voltz stated staff will work with Mr. Douglas on a Binding Development Plan to allow him to continue doing what he is doing.

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

Chairman Voltz passed the gavel to Vice Chairman Truman Scarborough.

Z9805501. Brevard County Board of County Commissioners on its own motion authorized administrative rezoning on property on which a development order had been submitted initiating a consideration of a change in zoning classification from AU to AGR in accordance with the provisions of Future Land Use Element XIII, Policy 10.2, Brevard County Comprehensive Plan as adopted on September 8, 1988, on 305? acres located on the south side of U.S. 192, approximately 3 miles northwest of Simon Road which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Commissioner Voltz stated this is an administrative rezoning, and it will be a partial rezoning to change part of the AU to AGR, leaving the rest until later. Zoning Official Rick Enos stated the western part of the property is designated Agriculture; that is where the tower goes; and the administrative rezoning is only on that portion of the property.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z980550 for a portion of the property. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner O?Brien inquired who owns the property; with Chairman Voltz responding it is owned by Billy Kempfer. Mr. Enos stated the item is associated with Item Z9805502. Commissioner O?Brien inquired why is the County rezoning someone?s property; with Mr. Enos explaining the administrative rezoning process.

Z9805502. William C. Kempfer & George Reed Kempfer?s request for CUP for Towers and Antennas (195-foot communications tower) in an AU zone on 305? acres located on the south side of U.S. 192, approximately 3 miles northwest of Simon Road, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if anyone is present in opposition to Item Z9805502; with no response heard.

Commissioner Voltz stated there are waivers involved; and requested the applicant address the technical necessity.

Jack Kirschenbaum, representing the applicant, stated the OUC property was rezoned in anticipation of the Conditional Use Permit for the property by the airport; and they go hand in hand.

Brian Borgiet, representing Sprint PCS, stated there are all co-locations in the area; and based on that, they shrank the search area, and determined the spot in question will provide coverage along U.S. 192, west of I-95. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated the waiver being requested is from the five times the tower height, the distance to the residential property to the north; and inquired why cannot it be located further south; with Mr. Borgiet responding it is wetlands and marsh. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired if it is possible to build a tower further south; with Mr. Borgiet responding no.

Commissioner Higgs requested Mr. Borgiet further define the search area for the tower. Mr. Borgiet stated the co-locations are to the east and west, north and south; and the need is for a tower along U.S. 192, west of I-95. Commissioner Higgs inquired how wide was the search area; with Mr. Borgiet responding under one-quarter mile. Commissioner Higgs inquired how wide is the search area north and south of U.S. 192; with Mr. Borgiet responding that was the limiting factor because there were wetlands on both sides of U.S. 192, residents to the north, and wetlands to the south. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it was a narrow search area that got approximately one-quarter mile wide just in this location; with Mr. Borgiet responding affirmatively. Commissioner Higgs inquired if this tower had to go within the quarter-mile north and south of U.S. 192; with Mr. Borgiet responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired what would happen if the owner said no; with Mr. Borgiet responding Sprint would be in a lot of trouble and would have to explore other options. Commissioner Higgs inquired what would Sprint do if the owner refused to have the tower there; with Mr. Borgiet responding there would be a gap in coverage. Commissioner Higgs inquired if other towers would be moved around. Mr. Kirschenbaum advised the technical necessity is not such that the tower has to be at a certain place in the universe; it could be moved over a certain number of feet to the west or to the east; so the technical necessity is not a pinpoint on a map. He stated they have not run into the circumstance where they have been unable to find one location within the search ring that brings them to the technical requirement; however, if that happens, there will be a gap in coverage, and it may or may not violate the FCC license. He stated there is a Telecommunications Act that requires local governments, with appropriate regulation, to allow the towers to be sited. Commissioner Higgs stated she understands, but Sprint cannot make someone sell their lot for the tower; with Mr. Kirschenbaum responding that is correct, but they have not the occasion yet that they could not find property within the search ring. He stated Mr. Borgiet has the expertise to address the technical requirement; it is the policy of Sprint to first co-locate as many towers as possible; and that narrows the technical zones for the new tower. He stated if the tower could be on the property or on the neighbor?s property, someone has to exercise discretion to locate it on the one that is preferable to the locating company; but in this case that was not an option due to the wetlands. He stated the technical necessity is a result of the equipment used, the license they have which draws the search ring, and the wetlands that are to the north and south of U.S. 192; and it is possible to put the tower anywhere in the search ring if conditions on the ground merit it. Mr. Borgiet described the exhibits.

Commissioner Cook inquired how close will the tower be to the nearest residence; with Mr. Kirschenbaum responding miles. Commissioner Cook inquired if red lights will be used on the tower; with Mr. Kirschenbaum responding there is no necessity for it to be red or white; but the tower will be designed for a light on top.

Discussion ensued on lighting the tower, the height of the tower, and AU-zoned property.

Vice Chairman Scarborough stated this is getting to be a problem; the Board was trying to protect residential property; but the Board may need to readdress the agricultural areas. Commissioner Higgs stated there is so much AU in Mims, Scottsmoor, Grant, Valkaria which has developed as residential. Vice Chairman Scarborough suggested it may be possible to get consents from adjoining AU property owners, if no homes are there.

Mr. Kirschenbaum stated a tower is necessary between the tower that is north of the mall on Hibiscus Road and the one at the County line on U.S. 192.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Item Z9805502 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Vice Chairman Scarborough passed the gavel to Chairman Voltz.

Z9804103. Rosemary Graham?s request for change from AU to ARR on 1.02 acres located on the east side of the southern terminus of Weatherly Place, which was denied by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the applicant is present; with no response heard.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to deny Item Z9804103 as recommended by the P&Z Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages for Zoning Resolutions.)

Chairman Voltz called for the public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Port St. John Independent Special District Board made at its May 6, 1998 meeting as follows:

PSJ80501. Hivis Development Group, Inc.?s request for change from BU-1-A to RU-1-11 on 8 acres located on the south side of Corsica Boulevard, approximately 480 feet west of Homestead Avenue which was approved by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve item PSJ80501 as recommended by the District Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 9:24 p.m. and reconvened at 9:34 p.m.

PSJ80502. Joel C. and Kathryn M. Pitts, Ricky E. Curry, and B. B. Nelson?s request for change from RU-1-9 to BU-1 and Small Scale Plan Amendment to change Future Land Use Map designation from Residential to Mixed Use District on 1.37 acres located on the northwest corner of Fay and Tulsa Boulevards, which was approved by the LPA and denied by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board.

B. B. Nelson stated the item was approved by the P&Z Board, but not by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board; and he finds it interesting that the minutes of the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board pertaining to this item covered 9 pages while the court reporter had 99 pages. He stated some of the members of the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board would come in and talk, but not vote; others said they were against it to start with; that does not meet the Board?s quasi-judicial requirements; and that is why he spoke against the continuation of the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board. He recommended the Board monitor the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board. He stated the population of Port St. John is in excess of 20,000; and displayed a map showing existing convenience stores in the area and a picture of the new 7-Eleven that just opened on Merritt Island. He stated there are no 7-Elevens in Port St. John; this is an opportunity to create some competition between convenience stores; it meets all the requirements of the County; it is at the intersection of two major roads; and what changed the intersection is the addition of Grissom Parkway to the north and south. He stated it is now a major north-south thoroughfare; the total traffic is almost as high as U.S. 1; it is no longer a residential lot; and if he came before the Board to request it be zoned residential, the Board would turn him down. He requested the Board look at the police reports to see how bad the intersection is; and stated it is a commercial corner. He stated the corner across the street is BU-1-A with a nursery; there are several other commercial locations on Fay Boulevard to the east, but none to the west until you get west of I-95; and there is enough population to justify an additional commercial market in the area. He displayed maps and aerials; requested the Board see how many houses there are in and around the location; and stated at half-time during the Super Bowl, there will be a lot of traffic crossing the intersection to get to the next convenience store. He stated the law says such a store "should" be located a quarter-mile away, but does not say "shall." He stated the Presidents of the Port St. John Homeowners Association and Canaveral Groves Homeowners Association work for the newspaper, Happenings; that newspaper is published by a real estate broker; and it is totally against the rezoning. He noted the real estate broker attended the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board meeting, but did not vote; it is not right; and recommended the Board not stifle competition. He requested the Board approve the BU-1 zoning to allow a new 7-Eleven to be constructed.

Robert Rupe, Planning Committee Chairman for the Port St. John Homeowners Association, stated the Association voted unanimously to oppose the rezoning. He stated the property is one mile north of the closest Mixed Use District; at the new intersection there are at least 12 acres of BU-1; and described where the west connector road will go.

Chairman Voltz inquired if Mr. Nelson owns the 12 acres; with Mr. Rupe responding no.

Mr. Rupe stated there is BU-1-A zoning to the west; and the Association opposed that, but it was approved with a Binding Site Plan to limit what can be put on the property. He stated Fay Boulevard is four-laned up to the intersection in question; it was never meant to have a heavy traffic use; and the rezoning would pull more traffic from the three busy arterials onto the quieter road. He stated he does not understand why it would face Fay Boulevard rather than Grissom Parkway. He commented about the impact on children going to school.

Mary Tees stated she lives within 500 feet of the property; and she does not work for the newspaper, Happenings, but submits articles on behalf of the Port St. John Homeowners Association for the information of the people in Port St. John. She advised in 1991 she and her husband built their home in Port St. John at Fay Boulevard and Banks Street, approximately two lots west of the property in question; she specifically asked her builder and the County whether there was any commercial development because she did not want to live next to a convenience store, and was assured the four blocks were zoned RU-1; and described the area at the time her house was built. She stated she wants to live in a residential atmosphere without the hassle of gas stations; and enumerated stations already existing or being built in Port St. John. She stated one of the neighbors alluded to the fact that it is impossible to sell a house on Fay Boulevard; advised in today?s newspaper it shows where a house two lots west of the railroad tracks sold in 37 days; and submitted the article. She stated there is no reason for the proposed gas station at this corner as everything around it is homes; and the people do not need it.

Lorraine Nieuwkoop advised she does work for the newspaper; she is a homeowner with three children around the corner from the property; and requested the Board vote against the rezoning. She advised she moved into Port St. John in 1983; the area was residential; and that was why they built there. She stated the corner is busy; children cross the street to go to ball games and school; there are three bus stops in front of the proposed store; and the applicants only want to line their pockets, and do not care about the residents. She noted Mr. Nelson does not live in Port St. John; and the residents do not want the rezoning. She stated at the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board meeting she submitted a petition signed by 56 residents; and submitted an additional petition with 65 signatures. She stated the Commissioners are elected to do what the people want; and the people of Port St. John do not want the 7-Eleven.

Darlene Bristol stated when things go into the community, they should be for the betterment of everyone; and advised of Mr. Nelson?s sale of a house for the day care which resulted in only cars with children going into a dangerous access. She stated the new 7-Eleven on Merritt Island looks great; but inquired how will it look in one, two or three years. She advised of existing or planned shopping and gas stations in Port St. John; and inquired if the Commissioners would want a gas station one block from their homes. She stated this is a residential section; it is in the middle of Port St. John; and commented on competition between stores. She noted there was no traffic jam at Fay and Tulsa during the Super Bowl; and Mr. Nelson did not put any gas stations or convenience stores in his Windover development. She stated at the May 6, 1998 meeting two residents complained it is hard to get out of their driveways on busy roads; she was raised on a busy thoroughfare; but it is

not busy all the time, and there have not been accidents. She stated she has no trouble getting out of Banks; and requested the Board deny the rezoning.

Bernie Cooper stated he is within 500 feet of the proposed station; he moved into Port St. John in 1983; they selected a residential area; and now someone wants to put a septic system at his front door. He advised of Mr. Nelson?s plan to put in a wall, lights, etc.; his daughter will have to walk past both access points to catch her school bus; and his other daughter will catch the bus behind the gas station. He advised of concerns about traffic in the area, existing gas stations and convenience stores, and the impact on those living immediately adjacent to the proposed store. He commented PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PORT ST. JOHN INDEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICT BOARD

on the impact to the Sheriff?s budget; and provided statistics concerning accidents at the intersection. He advised of the convenience of existing facilities. He advised of a problem with building staff four years ago which Commissioner Scarborough straightened out for him. He recommended the Board listen to the residents of Port St. John.

Gail Glotz-France stated she moved to Port St. John in 1985 because it was a quiet community; and submitted petitions against the gas station. She stated there are enough problems at that corner with accidents; and requested the Board vote against the gas station.

Shelly Myers stated the proposed gas station and convenience store will be in his back yard; Mr. Nelson came to his house to explain what he was trying to do; and submitted a proposal of what the project will look like. He stated between his back yard and the proposed business, there is a 50-foot drainage ditch that is County right-of-way; Mr. Nelson has said he will work with the people on where he will put the six-foot wall; but it is shown as being two feet from his chainlink fence. He stated Mr. Nelson has proposed filling in the drainage ditch; outlined the number of trees that will be lost if the ditch is filled; and advised of the impact of the store on his back yard. He submitted a letter from Mr. Stillwell in opposition to the rezoning. He advised of existing gas stations, use of the intersection, and accidents at the intersection. He stated no more traffic is needed on that street with all the children who use it. He inquired how can he enjoy his retirement with the lights on all night in his back yard and cars going in and out.

Stephanie Miller stated there are plenty of convenience stores; the location is dangerous; and those residents who live on adjacent streets fear that the traffic backups that will be caused by the store will force people to use their streets as main thoroughfares. She stated stores attract loiterers and sometimes trouble; it is a good neighborhood right now; and the residents want to keep it that way. She stated she chose her property because it was surrounded by residential; and if they wanted to build in commercial, they would have built on U.S. 1. She stated it is unfair to the homeowners of the area to change the zoning of the subject property for something so unnecessary. She stated she is for positive, not negative change; and this would be a very negative move.

Doug Moran stated he lives behind one of the lots that is to be zoned commercial; when he moved there in 1989, he assumed that would be a residential area; and he does not want to live behind a wall with the lights on all night. He stated his street which connects Fay Boulevard and Grissom Parkway will be a natural holding pattern for people who cannot get through the intersection or cannot get into the 7-Eleven from the intersection. He stated it is a bad idea to put a 7-Eleven in this location; and everyone knows the kind of atmosphere that grows around a convenience store.

Joseph Stadnik stated all the complaints seem like a replay of Canaveral Groves; and advised of the success of the store there. He stated Fay Boulevard is commercial all the way to Grissom Parkway, and Grissom Parkway is commercial; and Grissom Parkway is to be four-laned all the way to Titusville. He advised of human needs; and stated a convenience store in this location is a necessity to some, a convenience to others, and others do not want it. He stated he has looked at the drawings; it is a beautiful store which will enhance the neighborhood; and travelers from Titusville come down Grissom Parkway to work, and that will be the only gas station until they get to

Canaveral Groves. He stated that is a good location for this venture; there is a lot of traffic; and no one wants businesses on side streets. He recommended the Board approve the rezoning.

Stan Kupisz stated his property is within 500 feet of the corner of Fay Boulevard and Tulsa; and voiced objection to the noise pollution, light pollution, traffic, and the wall. He stated when the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board held an open meeting, Mr. Nelson spoke twice; and quoted the Florida TODAY article which says the applicant was not allowed to speak. He advised of Mr. Nelson?s comments at the meeting concerning a city that does not exist, need for the convenience store, and the new store in Merritt Island. He stated there are a number of businesses two blocks away on Fay Boulevard in a district zoned commercial; the County rule is one-half mile separation; and the nearby gas station and convenience store is in the process of expanding. He stated the proposed store will have homes sharing a property line; and there is plenty of land on Grissom Parkway south of Port St. John. He stated Mr. Nelson advised the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board that everything he was going to build was allowable within an area zoned for business, and therefore it could not keep him from getting the property rezoned; but everything that exists at the corner now is allowed as the area is zoned residential.

Shirley Myers stated her property is behind the lot in question; she and her husband are retired; and they purchased their home in 1992. She stated they have 11 children with seven still at home; and advised of various physical problems of the children. She stated in the last 14 years, 69 children have gone through their home as foster children; and the corner of Fay Boulevard and Grissom Parkway is busy with small children between the ages of 5 and 15 going to various schools. She stated two of her children have to go around the corner where the proposed business will be located to get on the bus; and she does not want her hyperactive children to have to stand in front of the business to wait to cross the street to board a bus. She stated other children pass the corner to go to play football and softball at Fay Boulevard Park; many of these children have parents who work and cannot transport them; and playing sports may be the only thing keeping some of the children off drugs. She stated she does not want the added noise and traffic of a business in her back yard; the lights of the business would not be conducive to getting a good night?s sleep; and the six-foot fence will only be 49 feet from her bedroom window. She stated she does not want even one child to be hurt or killed because of a business being allowed to go up in a residential area; and inquired what is most important, the safety of the children, having peace and quiet, or a businessman whose only concern is making more money.

Rick Curry, co-applicant, stated the people say they want to keep the neighborhood quiet and peaceful; but on the other hand, they are saying how busy the intersection is already, and that there have been 280 police assists. He stated he lives in the area; he hears the accidents; they are violent accidents; and he has been hit twice pulling into his driveway. He advised of other businesses on Fay Boulevard; and stated he cannot see how the residents consider it a quiet residential area. He advised of traffic patterns at the proposed store; and stated people will know it is a commercial intersection. He stated the child care center does not look commercial; people do not anticipate stops and turns there; and anyone going east on Fay Boulevard who turns there is subject to accident. He stated he has been told it is not about the three houses and families, but about the

surrounding families; but it is not about the people who live within 500 feet either because there are 25,000 people in Port St. John, and they expect them to support the store.

Jim Swann stated if the testimony heard at this meeting is representative of the 25,000 Port St. John homeowners, he would not vote for the convenience store; but he does not think they are. He stated it is a dangerous intersection of two major highways; there are heavily wooded lots with houses blocking visibility; it is not well lit; and many accidents have occurred. He advised the County has a major drainage ditch there which has not been maintained; and when he went to look at it there was a moccasin right by where children are let off the school bus. He stated the convenience store will be the best; and it is not just to pick up beer for Super Bowl weekend, but cough syrup for a child in the middle of the night and other things that are needed by the community. He suggested a Binding Site Plan to address safety issues and lighting issues; stated they will put the wall where it will be least offensive; and they will pipe the ditch. He stated 7-Eleven will not go to the other locations; it wants a high volume business; and if the community wants a first-class convenience store in Port St. John, this is the location for it. He stated the safety of the intersection will be increased; if the Board wishes to table the item, he will be happy to talk to the School Board Transportation Group about bus pickups; and the store will face Grissom Parkway with a corner entrance. He requested the Board?s support.

Mr. Nelson requested the Board look closely at the ditch; and stated it is a County ditch which is a hazard for children, and it should be piped or at least cleaned out. He submitted photographs of the ditch showing its condition. He stated it is a commercial corner; the traffic is dangerous; and it will qualify under all of the County?s rules and regulations for commercial.

Commissioner Scarborough stated this was part of a Small Area Plan in 1992; and requested Mr. Corwin tell the Board what happened at that time. Planner Todd Corwin stated prior to 1992, 20 acres of property in the vicinity of the intersection was designated Mixed Use District on the Future Land Use Map; a Small Area Study was done for the Port St. John area; and outlined the small area study process. He stated the rationale for removing the 20-acre Mixed Use District in the Small Area Study for Port St. John referenced the established residential character of the intersection area and the possibility of that future commercial uses could be provided in other locations along the Grissom Parkways corridor; and the Plan Amendment generated from the Port St. John Small Area Plan, 92A.2.3 changed the intersection area from Mixed Use District to Residential in 1992, and it is still in effect today. Commissioner Scarborough stated this took place in 1992 with a number of public hearings that extended over a long period of time; it was submitted to DCA; and this is where it is today. He stated it would be improper for the Board to leap in another direction with one parcel.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to deny Small Scale Plan Amendment as recommended by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board.

Commissioner O?Brien stated stores are market driven; Mr. Swann feels it will not fail; and even if there is plenty of land elsewhere, it depends on who owns the land. He stated people should be able to do what they want on their land; but if it has an adverse affect on the land next to it, that is PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PORT ST. JOHN INDEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICT BOARD

different. He advised of the situation when Publix was built across the street from Winn Dixie on Merritt Island, with both surviving well. He stated he has never owned a 7-Eleven and does not know if it is a good or bad business; and if people do not want it on that corner, they should say so. He stated there is a Circle K at Pioneer Road in Merritt Island; and there is never any garbage near the store or on the adjacent streets. He stated homeowners who inquired about zoning have a reasonable expectation of the zoning remaining; if someone wants to buy the house on the corner that faces all the traffic, that is up to them; and to change the zoning to BU-1 would be spot zoning, which he does not like. He stated the applicants have offered a Binding Development Plan to address the lighting problem, etc.; they are bending over to make sure they do not interfere with the homeowners? reasonable expectations; and he has a problem saying no to the request, but there is a reasonable expectation that it should stay residential.

Chairman Voltz stated she will support the motion, but it is only a matter of time before the corner becomes something more than what it is right now; and it is a very busy highway. She stated there is talk about sustainable communities; and that is when businesses are put within the residential areas so people can walk to them.

Chairman Voltz called for a vote on the motion to deny the Small Scale Plan Amendment. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to deny Item PSJ80502 as recommended by the District Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 10:43 p.m. and reconvened at 10:54 p.m.

PSJ80503. Orlando Utilities Commission?s request for Conditional Use Permit for towers and Antennas (165-foot lattice tower) in a GU zone on 5.739 acres located on the north side of Ranch Road, approximately .34 mile west of I-95 which was tabled by the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board for 30 days.

Zoning Official Rick Enos advised an error was made and this item is not in the Port St. John Area; it was taken to the Port St. John Dependent Special District Board which tabled it; but due to the error in the advertisement, it will be re-advertised for the July P&Z Board meeting to come back to the Board on July 30, 1998.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to table discussion of seating in snack bars/restaurants in BU-1-A zoning to July 30, 1998. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Voltz called for the public hearing to consider issuance of mulching facility permit to Thomas M. Fortson, North Cypress Reserve, Inc.

Attorney Clifton McClelland, representing North Cypress Reserve, Inc., reserved his speaking time for rebuttal.

Richard Higgins, member of Barefoot Bay Homeowners Association, stated the mulch factory would be three miles west of Barefoot Bay; and outlined the revised operational concept. He stated on May 12, 1998 he indicated the concerns of the residents including public safety, destruction of roads, and environmental pollution; with the revised operational concept, the environmental pollution may be limited to noise pollution from the grinders; however, there will also be traffic pollution along that portion of Micco Road traversing Barefoot Bay unless arrangements are made to route all trucks into and out of the mulch factory by way of Babcock Street. He stated at that meeting he requested a conditional use requiring all timber trucks to enter and leave by way of Babcock Street, and Mr. Fortson?s attorney agreed. He advised they have reviewed the draft enforcement plan for the facility; the plan proposes periodic inspections of the plant weekly during the first six months of operation, and other inspections later with decreasing frequency; and this is a step in the right direction. He requested citizen involvement in each inspection team; stated it will raise the approval rating of the County?s enforcement process; and it will help prevent bad relationships between the community and Mr. Fortson. He suggested for each inspection, a citizen from the Barefoot Bay Homeowners Association or the Micco Homeowners Association, with rotational selection, accompany the inspection team as observer; and stated the observer will report to the two Homeowners Associations.

Ben Graham, member of the AIR Committee, stated he is pleased with the enforcement schedule for the facility; and requested on the second page, the last sentence be changed to, "the amount of the bond is set based on the cost of removing all materials of any kind proposed for storage at the facility should a permit be revoked or operation ceases for any reason." He stated a representative of the Fire Inspector informed him that the mulching facility is allowed to begin once the onsite inspection has been done; and he understands that will not be done until the permit is granted. Mr. Graham stated the people of Barefoot Bay are concerned about brush fires; and advised the facility is only separated from Barefoot Bay by a small field with brush and fruit trees, and once a wind from the west starts blowing toward Barefoot Bay, fire can reach it quickly. He requested their fire department be allowed to make onsite inspections; and read aloud from of a letter from Assistant County Attorney Katherine Harasz concerning the road and assessments for commercial properties. He stated the people of Barefoot Bay use automobiles; they do not need the road upgraded for their use; but the mulching facility will need to have it upgraded due to the weight and number of trucks. He stated he is pleased that the trucks will be run to and from the mulching facility to Babcock Street; and he hopes that will be included in the conditions.

Robert Smith, Chairman of the AIR Committee, stated his interpretation is that the Cypress Mulch Facility will not be installing an air curtain incinerator, having open burns, or creating emission problems that would be detrimental to Barefoot Bay; the items which cannot be mulched will be taken offsite; and they are happy with Mr. Fortson agreement to have ingress and egress to the west PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ISSUANCE OF MULCHING FACILITY PERMIT TO THOMAS M.

onto Babcock Street. He recommended the Board consider a citizen involvement in the inspection process.

Mr. McClelland stated his client has complied with the requirements of the County in terms of the operating permit; and requested the Board?s approval.

Commissioner Higgs requested Mr. Denninghoff explain his findings regarding the condition of Micco Road and Ms. Bentley explain the Board?s options. Construction Management Engineer John Denninghoff advised the analysis is based on limited information and a number of assumptions, particularly with respect to the actual use of the trucks, both in volume and in loads; but the assumptions are as reasonable and fair as he could make them under the circumstances. He advised of an error in his memorandum which should read $100,000 per mile. He stated the analysis was an effort to determine the amount of damage that additional truck traffic would do to Micco Road; the difference in the loading rates on the road was a 25% increase assuming the mulching facility utilizes 26 trucks per day making round trips; and he also did analysis of 50 and 100 trucks per day which equates to a 99% increase in the loadings on the road. He explained the meaning of "loadings"; and stated the increase is based on the additional trucks that would come from the mulching facility. He stated the remainder of the analysis was an attempt to determine what could be done to the road to prevent the damage from occurring; and there are two approaches that can be utilized, to overlay the road or rebuild the road. He stated the overlay is less expensive but is an inferior method of performing the remedial work; the major deficiency is that the road does not have an adequate base for the last four miles of the road approaching I-95 from the east; and the road between I-95 and Babcock Street is substandard, but not as bad as the four miles east of I-95. He advised the remedial work has been listed for the Board with the costs; and stated the better long-term solution is to rebuild the road at approximately $330,000 per mile. Commissioner Higgs inquired about the distance between the mulching facility and I-95; with Mr. Denninghoff responding it is approximately one-half mile. Commissioner Higgs stated there are clear impacts from the trucks on the Micco Road; and inquired about the Board?s options. Assistant County Attorney Eden Bentley advised the Board could consider an impact fee, but there is no ordinance like that in place; so the County cannot assess a fee for the impact through that route. Ms. Bentley stated there is nothing in the Resolution which sets up the criteria for mulching facility that informs the public it will need to post bond for reconstruction or improvement of the road if they do this sort of activity; but the property owner may be willing to provide some funding to cover those costs although he is not specifically required to do so. She stated imposing a special assessment would require a finding that the road improvement specially benefitted abutting property; the County could not do an assessment just for the mulching facility; and it would require an analysis by the Engineering Department and Property Appraiser to determine where the benefit would be flowing. She stated the County can establish tolls under Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, but that would have to be applied equally; and routing truck traffic may be a possibility. She noted there is no quick and easy answer.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is a requirement in the borrow pit Ordinance for bonds; with Ms. Bentley responding yes, there is a provision for bond for closure. Commissioner Higgs stated there is a recommendation that there be provision for the full cost of the closure; with Ms. Bentley advising it says, "the cost of incinerating, mulching or otherwise removing or disposing of PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ISSUANCE OF MULCHING FACILITY PERMIT TO THOMAS M.

land clearing debris stored at the facility and otherwise securing the site in the event the permit is revoked or operation ceases." Commissioner Higgs inquired if it will cover all costs of closure; with Ms. Bentley responding yes.

Commissioner Higgs stated it is frustrating to look at the potential cost that may be incurred on Micco Road, but she is not sure what the Board?s options are; and inquired if the applicant is committed to going west on Micco Road; with Mr. McClelland responding they are committed to asking their customers to go west. Commissioner Higgs requested a haul route be established. Mr. McClelland stated there is no regulatory power; the public has a right to use public highways as they see fit; and they cannot control their customers, but will post signs asking customers to use the western route. Commissioner Higgs inquired if North Cypress Reserve has trucks of its own; with Mr. McClelland responding the facility is going to be open to customers; and in terms of its own trucks, North Cypress Reserve is willing to use the western route. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. McClelland is willing to establish that as the haul route; with Mr. McClelland responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired if there is a way for citizens to be involved in inspections; with Lisa Barr responding the Solid Waste Management Department can coordinate those types of inspections; but there is a legal question about access to the property. Commissioner Cook stated there could be a substantial liability problem; with Ms. Bentley responding it would be on the part of the property owner, and they would have to agree to the inspection. Commissioner Cook stated the County has a professional staff tasked with doing the inspections; and the residents can be confident that staff is doing its job.

Commissioner O?Brien stated he could not vote for that; and indicated it is like a Communist county that has citizen patrol invading people?s private property to look at what they are doing. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board meetings are all held in the sunshine; and having citizen participation in inspections is not such a bizarre idea that anyone would need to imply it is Communist. Chairman Voltz stated she cannot support the action. Commissioner Higgs inquired whether the Micco Fire Station will be involved in fire inspections; with Ms. Barr responding that has no been addressed specifically, but she will be happy to do so with the Fire Department. Chairman Voltz inquired if the facility will be burning anything; with Commissioner Higgs responding fire inspections are part of the normal process. Ms. Barr stated there would be normal fire inspections like any other business.

Commissioner Higgs stated the big question is the impact the trucks will be causing on the road. Mr. McClelland stated if the Board considers turning this down because of the road impact, he wants to attack the study the County Engineer has done which is erroneous. He stated staff has doubled the amount of trips projected which doubles the impact; and the soils information is erroneous. He stated by going to a more reasonable figure, the road has a substantially longer life; and he has an engineer present to address the technical issues. Commissioner Higgs stated she wants to see a study by staff on how to cover those kinds of impacts; there are impacts in excess of what Mr. Denninghoff has said; 6,000 cars equal one of the heavy trucks in terms of loading; and staff needs to do further study to define what the impacts are. Chairman Voltz stated the Board is not talking about that tonight. Commissioner Higgs stated there are impacts, but there is nothing in the Ordinance giving the Board the ability to deal with it; and recommended Solid Waste Management PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ISSUANCE OF MULCHING FACILITY PERMIT TO THOMAS M.

staff study it in terms of enhancing the Board?s ability under permits to deal with impacts, and Land Development staff study it in terms of land alteration and other industrial permits that impact the roads. She recommended the Board look at its commercial/industrial impact fees for transportation; and stated clearly there are impacts, and the Board needs to be realistic.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the bond is built into the Borrow Pit Ordinance; and inquired why it is not in this Ordinance.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if "haul route" needs to be clarified; with Ms. Bentley recommending it be put on the record. Commissioner Higgs stated it needs to be a condition of the permit that the haul route for the facility be to the west onto Babcock Street.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve issuance of a mulching facility permit to Thomas M. Fortson, North Cypress Reserve, Inc. including conditions listed in the draft permit, haul route to be to the west onto Babcock Street, and implementation of the monitoring plan.

Commissioner O?Brien inquired if the road could be restricted from trucks of a certain weight. Commissioner Higgs stated she will make a separate motion for the Public Works Department to report with information about weight and limits that should be put on the road.

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

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct the Public Works Department to assess what appropriate limits will be put on Micco Road given its condition.

Chairman Voltz stated if it comes back that trucks over a certain weight will be restricted, it could restrict North Cypress Reserve, Inc.?s trucks; and the Board cannot do that. She stated she does not see why the Board is always looking to close someone down. Commissioner Higgs noted she voted for the permit, and is not trying to close them down, but trying to protect the road and the people who use it. Commissioner Scarborough suggested the Board look at the options; and stated the Board is going ahead with the permit, but is looking for some way to make the direction work. Chairman Voltz inquired what if the North Cypress Reserve trucks weigh a couple of tons and the County says they can only have one ton. Commissioner Scarborough noted the Board is just going to get a report back.

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

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct that Code Enforcement action against Michael Douglas, River Grove Mobile Home Village I & II be abated until the Board takes action on the rezoning application which was tabled to the July 30, 1998 meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to direct staff to investigate the possibility of allowing towers in Agricultural zoning with the consent of adjoining AU property owners showing they have no objections, to relieve the burden of having to come to the Board.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board knows there are just cows out there, and that is all there ever will be. Commissioner Higgs stated there is a lot of AU that has been divided into two and one-half acre lots; with Commissioner Scarborough advising all of the properties will have to consent. Commissioner Scarborough stated there is no reason to make people go through many different discussions when all that will ever be on the property are cows. Commissioner Higgs stated she understands that if it is Billy Kempfer?s farm, there will be cows.

Commissioner Cook stated the Board sends out a notice to those within 500 feet, but a tower affects people miles away. Commissioner Scarborough suggested moving consent to one mile; and reiterated if there is nothing out there, it is silly for the Board to spend its time on it; and the Board needs to decide what are issues and what are not because it is dealing with things that are not issues.

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

Environmental Services Administrator Stephen Peffer inquired if that is for all adjacent property owners or property owners within a certain distance. Commissioner Scarborough responded Commissioner Cook wants to see a very large AU buffer; and suggested looking at consent forms to address it.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 11:31 p.m.

___________________________________

HELEN VOLTZ, CHAIRMAN

__________________________ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

( C L E R K )