MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

September 7, 2006

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on September 7, 2006, at 5:00 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida.  Present were:  Chair Helen Voltz, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Ron Pritchard, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Peggy Busacca, Assistant County Manager Ed Washburn, and Assistant County Attorney Morris Richardson.

 

The Invocation was given by Pastor Wanda Medina, Iglesia El Faro, Melbourne.

 

Commissioner Scarborough led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Chair Voltz, to authorize County Manager or designee to authorize bids and awards for all materials, services, and equipment necessary for expedited completion of Harry T. and Harriette V. Moore Justice Center build out.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Chair Voltz, to adopt Resolution supporting Brevard County Shore Protection Project, requesting State Cost-Share Funding as a match for Dedicated Land Funds.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Assistant County Manager Ed Washburn requested permission for Natural Resources Director Ernest Brown and Chair Voltz to attend the FCT Grants Program in Tallahassee.

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission for Chair Voltz and Natural Resources Management Director Ernest Brown, to attend the Florida Communities Trust Grants Program meeting in Tallahassee on September 14 and 15, 2006.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Assistant County Manager Ed Washburn advised there is an Option Agreement for Sale and Purchase between Brookhollow Community Association and The Nature Conservancy that was dated November, 2005, and it was assigned to Brevard County.  He advised they are almost through the process; there was a typo, and the Town of Malabar has to go back, change the Agreement, and approve it; and they would like an additional 60-day extension, as the Agreement runs out on September 8, 2006.  

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize extension of Option Agreement for Sale and Purchase between Brookhollow Community Association and The Nature Conservancy to extend the closing deadline an additional 60 days, providing time to cure a title defect.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.   

 

 

 

Commissioner Pritchard commented Florida Today reported that Winn-Dixie is pushing for a $1.4 million property tax rollback; and although it is happening in Mississippi, Florida has had Winn-Dixie problems and could have the same situation.  He noted the article mentions nothing about what may or may not happen in Florida, but it is something the Board should keep an eye on; and if Winn-Dixie is going to ask for $1 million or so back, then the Board needs to budget accordingly.

 

 

 

Commissioner Pritchard noted Monday, September 11, 2006, is Patriot Day, designated by President Bush in 2001.  He advised on Patriot Day, flags should be flown at half-staff from sunrise to sunset; in reality, the flag has always been there for all of them, and it has never abandoned them; what the flag truly represents is not war, government, an attitude or policy, or political stance; and the Star Spangled Banner represents the rights and freedoms they all cherish as American citizens.  He stated no matter what one’s point of view, Old Glory flies for them all, and everyone should fly the flag and remember the individuals who lost their lives on 9/11.

 

 

 

Commissioner Pritchard read aloud an item from Fred Galey, Supervisor of Elections, “With great urgency, I write to you again concerning a new location for the Viera Elections Office in the coming year for the Presidential Preference Primary, and General Elections in 2008.  Prolonging our needs for additional space will only be a recipe for extreme trouble in the future.”  Commissioner Pritchard suggested during the Board’s budget workshops, it can talk about the issue and see what it can do for Mr. Galey.

 

 

Commissioner Carlson stated Bank of America, Employ Florida, Florida Chamber Foundation, Publix Supermarkets, and Florida Realtors, are sponsoring a Florida Summit on Affordable Living: Attainable Housing; and it will be held at the Tampa Convention Center, Tampa, Florida, on September 15, 2006.  She commented the event will address the State’s competitive reputation and some attainable housing solutions; Kristin Bakke, with Lead Brevard will be at the Summit representing the project they are doing for the Board, which is the Ordinance on affordable housing; and Ms. Bakke will present to the Summit the methodology, which the Board has used in partnership with Workforce.  She stated she wanted to bring it to the Board’s attention in case anyone would like to attend the summit.

 

 

 

Chair Voltz stated she would like the Historical Ordinance to be placed on the agenda for discussion at a later date.

 

 

 

Chair Voltz noted the resolution is from District 5; Commissioner Colon is not present, and no one is present to accept the resolution. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Chair Voltz to adopt Resolution proclaiming Eat Dinner with Your Family Day.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

 

 

 

Commissioner Pritchard read aloud a resolution proclaiming September 13, 2006 as Commodore John Barry Day.

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution recognizing September 13, 2006 as Commodore John Barry Day, with a celebration scheduled for September 9, 2006 at his memorial monument at Jetty Park at 11:00 a.m., which is sponsored by the Ancient Order of Hibernians.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

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

John Buckley stated the purpose of Honor America is to promote patriotism and inculcate respect for the flag.  He noted they are one of the few museums in the United States to have a replica of the Liberty Bell, less the crack, manufactured in the same foundry where the original was made.  He noted they also have a Brevard School Board-sanctioned visitation program for elementary and middle school children; and they have added a Military Memorial Park that honors all of the United States’ branches of service, as well as a Civil War memorial.  He added they have a monument to 63 pilots and two enlisted men who died during training exercises at the Banana River Naval Air Station, which is now the Melbourne International Airport.  He commented there is a visual display of the raid on Pearl Harbor, built by a Boy Scout as part of his Eagle Scout program; and one of the navigators of the atomic bomb team during World War II is providing details of his mission to the Liberty Bell museum.  He commented they have a handwritten diary of Chaplain Captain Charles Tagert, detailing the events of D-Day, and the events that followed at the end of the European portion of World War II.  He added they have military band concerts for the citizens of Brevard County; they sponsor contests for young children; and they provide speakers to groups in any area.  He stated they co-sponsor parades with the City of Melbourne and hold services for the Fourth of July, Veterans Day, Memorial Day, and Flag Day; this year, they are co-sponsoring, with radio station WMMB, a reenactment of the plane crashes into the World Trade Center on September 11^th.  He summarized they are providing community service without charge to let people know the Country’s history and the leaders who have made the country great, and thanked the Board.

 

Chair Voltz inquired what is the cost of membership to Honor America; with Mr. Buckley responding memberships start at $15 and go up to $25.  Chair Voltz inquired how one would join the group; with Mr. Buckley responding he has applications with him, and people can fill them out and give them to him.

 

 

 

Commissioner Colon read aloud the Resolution, previously adopted.

 

 

 

Commissioner Colon stated she would like to invite the community to join South Brevard on September 11^th, at Veterans Park, located on Port Malabar Boulevard, Palm Bay, at 7:30 p.m.  She noted it is very important for everyone to remember what was done to their country; and it is also important to remember the firefighters, policemen, National Guard and others.  She commented it is very personal for her, as she lost a lot of close friends on September 11^th; she previously worked on the 102^nd floor of the World Trade Center; and she happened to be there that weekend and flew back the day before September 11^th.  She noted people should not take life for granted, and she learned that from September 11^th; being an American is a great honor; and they have an opportunity to come out as a community and a nation, show their respect for what is going on, and never forget what was done to them. 

 

 

 

Mike Cunningham stated on August 22, 2006, he addressed the Commission regarding several issues concerning his community, one of which related to the fact that the area code is not in line with the remainder of Brevard County.  He stated to further illustrate the delay or inequity in the matter, he would like to quote from a transcript from March 16, 1999 of testimony before the Florida Public Service Commission by Alan Benson, who identified himself as the manager of infrastructure planning for the North Florida area.  He stated when asked the purpose of his testimony, Mr. Benson’s answer was, “The purpose of my testimony is to describe BellSouth’s proposal for a resolution of customer concerns within the area code boundary in southern Brevard County.”  He continued to read from the testimony, “BellSouth proposes to establish a new exchange that will encompass all of the customers in the 561, 663, and 664 exchanges.  BellSouth will change these customers from the 561 area code to the 321.  The calling scope and the local exchange rate for the new exchange will remain the same as it is at the time of this filing.  The area code change will only require customers to change their area code and should not require any change of telephone numbers.  BellSouth shall work to ensure that there be no impact to the 911 and local directory assistance services provided to the customers for the new exchange.”  He stated the residents only have one question; and that is hasn’t the foolishness gone on too long in the past seven years.  He thanked the Board for its time.

 

Chair Voltz inquired if the Board had decided at the last meeting to find out what was going on; with County Manager Peggy Busacca responding affirmatively.  Ms. Busacca stated she contacted staff and received a copy of the final decision that was made a number of years ago; the Community has the right to request that a change be made; but what she does not yet understand is whether the final decision that was made several years ago can be appealed, as there appears to be a timeframe.  She noted she has also asked staff to look for any other alternatives outside of that process; and she commented she is working on it, but does not have a report for the Board yet.

 

Chair Voltz stated the Board will get back to Mr. Cunningham, and it will do everything it can to make sure the area code is changed. 

Item VI.A.1.  (Z0511307) Irving & Bette Betrock’s request for change from SR with an existing Binding Development Plan (Z-10898) to EU with an amendment to the existing Binding Development Plan limiting the density to one unit per acre on 4 acres, located on the west side of Hwy. A1A, north of Sea Dunes Dr., which was recommended for denial by the Planning and Zoning Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to table Item VI.A.1. to the November 2, 2006 meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Item VI.A.3.  (Z0605402) Sun Harbor Investment Group, LLC’s request for Small Scale Plan Amendment (06S.14) to change the Future Land Use Designation from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial and change from GU to BU-2 on 2 acres, located on the south side of Freeman Lane, east of Waelti Dr.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to table Item VI.A.3. to November 2, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Chair Voltz commented a large part of the Agenda includes items in District 1.  Commissioner Scarborough stated staff has worked on the items; he requested Utility Services Director Dick Martens to be present to address the Board concerning septic and sewer and County Manager Peggy Busacca to answer any questions from the Board as well as David Laney, who is doing the Mims Incorporation Study.  He requested the Board put those larger issues together for discussion later in the meeting.

 

 

 

 

VI.B.1. (Z0608201) Thomas Arnn Williams’ request for change from AU and EU to ALL EU on .54 acre, located on the east side of terminus of Tanglewood La., north of Tropical Trail, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Chair Voltz noted there was a question of whether or not to do SR zoning, rather than EU zoning; and requested Mr. Enos to explain the difference of the two zonings to the applicant.

 

Zoning Manager Rick Enos stated the difference is that the EU classification requires a lot size of one-third of an acre, and the SR requires a half-acre lot; since the applicant has a half-acre, he would qualify for SR zoning; and there is some SR to the north and RR-1 to the south, so SR may be more compatible than EU.  He noted the applicant will still need a variance to lot width.

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson to approve Item VI.B.1. as SR.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

VI.B.2. (Z0608202) Brevard County Board of County Commissioners, on its own motion and pursuant to Brevard County Ordinance 2004-29, dated August 15, 2004, authorized administrative rezoning of property owned by Georgianna United Methodist Church, Inc., from EU to IN(L), on 1.4 acres, located on the south side of S. Tropical Trail, west of Crooked Mile Rd., which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

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

 

 

Item VI.B.4. (Z0608401) EAST COAST ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF FLORIDA, INC’s.  request for Conditional Use Permit for Alcoholic Beverages for On-Premises Consumption of ber and Wine in an AU (Agricultural Residential) zone on 36.07 acres, located on the west side of southern extension of Murrell Rd., south of Wickham Rd, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Keith Winston stated as the Board may know, the zoo has served beer and wine after 5:00 p.m. since its inception; and they have done it after many different family events such as Boo at the Zoo, Holiday Nights, and Summer Saturday Nights.  He noted what is happening in the industry is that everyone else is offering the opportunity during the day, and the Zoo wants the option to do that as well.  He noted it has become synonymous with anyone who serves family groups; including the Kennedy Space Center, Universal Studios, and Chuck E. Cheese’s.  Mr. Winston commented the Brevard Zoo has a 12-year track record of success and they have not had any issues he is aware of; and he knows from talking to personnel from other zoos and aquariums across the Country and in Florida, that because of the nature of the zoo and their prices, people do not abuse alcohol in their areas.  He requested the Board allow the Zoo to serve beer and wine; noted it is important for tourism, and it is something they have to offer if they are going to have visitors from other countries.  He stated about 30% of business at the zoo is tourism, and that is important because it brings money to the County.  He stated it is also important to the remodeling the Zoo is doing to the Africa Lodge, which will become an air conditioned facility that will hold concerts and art exhibits, and will also be a great function space, which is something the whole community needs.  He stated if they cannot serve beer and wine before 5:00, it limits their ability to use the facility, which the State has put a half-million dollars into and the County has put in $100,000, in terms of a bed tax.  He noted the zoo is asking for the same flexibility to do this as all the businesses on their door step, such as 7-Eleven and Pizzeria Uno’s; and the zoo has a long, substantiated track record.

 

Commissioner Pritchard inquired who the East Coast Zoological Society is; with Mr. Winston responding it is the Zoo’s official incorporation, doing business as Brevard Zoo.

 

John Moale stated he has experience in working with young people.  He commented at the Planning and Zoning meeting, someone stated that people would get drunk, shoot the animals, and then jump over the fence into peoples’ back yards.  He stated there were a number of people from his community who called the Florida Today and informed it of what was being proposed.  He stated most of the people on his block do not want alcohol at the Zoo; a lot of people work at the Zoo as volunteers; and they feel it should be a small, family zoo, and should not serve alcohol.  He noted he and his neighbors do not have a problem with the serving of alcohol at night, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.  He noted people can get a little obnoxious and let their kids go sometimes; and he hopes the Board considers the request carefully and understands that it cannot compare Brevard Zoo to Busch Gardens or other parks.

 

Commissioner Carlson stated the request is a Conditional Use Permit for alcohol; she thinks the Board understands the issue with credibility to the Zoo; and they have a good track record, but they also know that a CUP is a Conditional Use Permit, and can be taken away as easily as it is given.  She stated she knows the Zoo will be on top of it, and if there are any complaints, the Board can reassess it at that point. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard to approve Item VI.B.4 as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

 

Chair Voltz commented she has reservations about the request; she is not sure if she can support it at this point because if the Zoo serves beer and wine, there are a lot of people in the community who do not support it; and her office has been getting phone calls regarding the request.  She inquired if the zoo would consider confining the beer to the area where it is served.  

 

Mr. Winston stated at this point, the request is to have the flexibility of being able to carry the alcohol around; the intent is to keep the heart and core of the Zoo experience, and they are going to manage it so that it works; if that means they have to limit people, then they will, and they have the right to do so.  He assured the Board people would not be walking around with beer bottles; he advised the request is for the whole area, but they might limit it.  He commented he can tell the Board, from experience, it is not a heavy use, so they might choose to limit it to the café or the pavilion. 

 

Chair Voltz called for a vote on the motion.  Motion did not carry; Commissioners Scarborough, Voltz, and Colon voted nay. 

 

 Chair Voltz advised the Board will hear Items VI.A.2, VI.A.4, VI.A.5, and VI.A.6. together at one time.

 

Item VI.A.2.  (Z0604105) Warm Wind Homes, LLC’s. request for change from AU to SR on 15 acres, located on the west side of Hammock Rd., north of Wiley Ave., which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. 

 

Item VI.A.4. (Z0606102) Paul J. Marion and Dale K. Marion, Trustees, and Robert Clay and Ethylmay Kirk’s request for change from AU to RU-1-11 with a Binding Development Plan on portion designated as Residential 2, limiting development to two units per acre, on 74.39 acres, located on the south side of Brockett Road, east of US 1, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning and Board.

 

 

Item VI.A.5. (Z0606103) Eugene and Lois Kent Brown’s request for change from AU to RU-1-11 with a Binding Development Plan, on that portion designated as Residential 2, to two units per-acre, with a total acreage of 74.52 acres, located on the south side of Main St., approx. 0.55 mile east of U.S. 1; also having frontage on the north side of Cuyler St., east of U.S. 1, which was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

 

Item VI.A.6. (Z0604104) Hilltop Holdings, LLC and Mohan and Shereen Ramkissoon’s request for change from AU to RU-1-11 on 19.5 acres, located on the north side of Main St. east of US 1.

Commissioner Scarborough asked Zoning Manager Rick Enos to show the map to the audience and explain what they are all looking at.  He commented when these items first came to the Board, he did not know all of the issues that were raised, and staff has worked hard on it. 

 

Mr. Enos stated the Mims Future Land Use Map describes the different Future Land Use designations that are currently in play in the area of Mims, north of Titusville and south of Scottsmoor.  He commented of the four applications that are being considered, two are in the area south of Brockett Road, and two more flank Main Street; and one is to the north and one to the south.  He noted the green color on the map is the Residential 4 designation, and the Board can see that three of the four applications have at least part of the property in the Residential 4 designation.  He noted the yellow color on the map is the Residential 2 designation, which is two units per acre; and part of two applications and all of one application are in the Residential 2 designation.  He stated the Board can see that between the green and yellow colors there is a green core surrounded by yellow; as they go further north on the east and west sides there are lower densities; and they tend to be one unit per acre, or one unit per two and a half acres.  He pointed to an area on the map that is designated at Residential 15 units per acre; stated that is quite high; and along U.S.1 is a commercial corridor with a mixture of Neighborhood Commercial and Community Commercial.   Commissioner Scarborough stated there have been three Comprehensive Plan changes; and he requested Mr. Enos point them out.  Mr. Enos stated the cross-pattern that the Board sees on the map indicates the property is now at three units per acre on the Comprehensive Plan.  Commissioner Scarborough noted there is a PUD that will be coming to the Board in October.  Mr. Enos commented there is a parcel to the north that recently had a Comprehensive Plan Amendment; and there were a couple of other smaller ones which are commercial in nature.  Commissioner Scarborough commented the other Comprehensive Plan change that came before the Board is next to the one that Rodney Honeycutt is bringing in next month.

 

Mr. Enos stated the other map is the Mims zoning map; it describes all of the zonings of the property; and colored in light green are all of the parcels that have had a recent rezoning, which are any parcels whose zoning occurred after January 1, 2002.  He noted in the light pink color indicates four applications that are being considered today, and the darker pink color indicates the applications the Board will be considering in the coming months, including the PUD.  He noted the yellow lines on the map are the areas that are currently serviced by the County’s water system; and the darker green color indicates publicly owned parcels, either by the St. Johns River Water Management District, or the F.I.N.D. sites.  He commented he did an analysis of all of the rezonings that have occurred; and distributed it to the Board.  He noted it describes the zonings that have occurred, and they would be associated with the light green color throughout the map.  He stated there are a total of 65 of those that have been rezoned since 2004, and there are a handful that go back prior to that, that had BDP’s.  He noted if the Board looks at the column marked “increase”, it will see it is a PUD that increased the total of 746 units, and that is the Walkabout project.  Mr. Enos noted if they add up all of the 65 residential rezonings, they will see that the total increase of lots or units was 1,363 units; prior to rezoning there were 1,867 units, and after rezoning there were 3,230, for an increase of 1,363 units.  He noted the large majority of the 1,363 units were the four biggest projects. 

 

Utility Services Director Richard Martens stated after the last meeting there was some concern about the impact of the rezonings on the water and sewer infrastructure in the area; and he was asked to make a presentation on the status of the rezonings.  He noted right now, in the Mims area, there is a water and sewer system; the service area for the water system is a little bit bigger than the sewer system; but generally, the area he looked at is bounded by Parrish Road on the South, and Lionel Road on the north, and that is the northern extent of the existing water lines for the system, although the service area goes further north to Aurantia; and as he got further into the analysis it seemed that the number looked like they needed  to focus on the area that had the existing pipes.  He noted Parrish Road to Lionel Road, and then the Indian River Lagoon, west on S.R. 46 to Six Mile Creek are the boundaries of the existing service area.  He noted there is an existing water plant in the area that is rated at 2.4 million gallons a day; water plants are rated based on their maximum day usage; and based on history of how much water per unit the water system uses under current conditions, they are estimating the water plant will serve approximately 5,900 units.  He stated there are 3,300 units on board right now; if the 3,300 are added to the 3,200, there are about 6,500 units total current and planned; and that equals the capacity of the water plant; but if everyone came in today to get subdivision permits for all of those connections, they could not get a DEP permit.  He stated they have included an expansion of the water plant in the five-year CIP, and the plant itself was built 12 years ago with the intention that it would be expanded.  He stated the question became how much water are they going to need for build-out in Mims; he looked at the vacant land that is ready for subdivision development and broke it into two categories; and one is the big parcels with single ownership, currently agricultural.  He noted there were 1,700 acres in that category; as Utility Planners, they would look at property like that as property that can be turned very quickly into  a

subdivision; and many of the properties the Board is discussing fall within those areas.  He noted he met with Mr. Enos and came up with something called Probable Zoning, which is significantly below Comprehensive Plan density units; and in that first group of property, about 1,700 acres, they thought there would be 2,500 or 2,600 units that would come in.  He stated there is another group of properties in the area that he thinks sometime in the future could come to the Board with a request for water service; that is another 1,400 acres; smaller lots would take more to turn them into subdivisions, but it is possible, with about 2,200 units; and adding all of those up it comes to 11,000 units, which is clearly more than the capacity of the water plant itself.  He advised for the water plant, the limiting capacity is really the water supply; the well field is about half built-out; the capacity is 3.78 million gallons maximum per day; and it would support about 9,300 units.  He stated since the well field is not completely built out, the projections of the 3.78 million gallons a day, and the 9,300 units is strictly based on computer modeling of the aquifer recharge and draw-downs.  He commented the question is what could the well field support; their calculations, based on the existing well field, are in the four million gallon-a-day range; and they may be able to add more wells.  He noted there is not a huge amount of undeveloped water supply in the Mims area; in looking at what might happen to Mims in the long term, as it builds out, they could see a water demand of five million gallons of water a day; and the existing well field would not support that.  Mr. Martens noted that does not mean they are running out of water in Brevard County, but they are running out of cheap water; and as they go into an alternative water supply, whether it be going to the deep aquifer, getting brackish water, or ocean desalination, the cost of producing water goes up significantly.   He commented there is a wastewater system in Mims; it is a smaller, million gallon-a-day facility that will support approximately 5,000 units; and 5,000 per million gallons per day are the planning numbers that he used.  He noted in the brand new subdivisions, such as Viera, they are approximately 10% under that number, so they could get a little more out of it with low-flow fixtures and modern construction techniques.  He noted of the 11 projects, seven have indicated they want to join the sewer system; but when they look at the tracts, it is unclear whether all of the projects will come in on water and sewer.  He commented what they are seeing, Countywide, is that projects asking for sewer service, for the most part, have individual lots at a quarter-acre or less; few of them are half-acre; and there are very few of them that are high-end subdivisions that are marketing to a very select group of people with lots approximately one acre in size that have sewer services as well.  He noted generally, developments with large lots do not install sewer systems because sewer systems are very expensive to install.  He stated everything that is on the radar right now are existing units being served on the sewer plant; the 11 projects would bring them to about three-quarters of the plant capacity; if the additional 5,500 lots come on the sewer system, it would take it to about 1.6 million gallons a day, which is one million-gallon capacity; and the sewage treatment plan would be easy to expand.  He commented the Walkabout community is going to be using reclaimed water; there is an excellent site for ground water recharge at the wastewater plant; and he does not see a site limitation on the sewer plant.  He advised the number they could end up with is in the 1.5 million gallon range, and he would be surprised if the demand for wastewater service in that area would ever go above two million gallons a day.   He stated there have been questions about alternatives for water and wastewater service; there has been a lot of discussion about the local groundwater; and the groundwater and the residential water  supply in the area is highly variable.  He stated there is a vein of very good water that runs along the Atlantic coast ridge; the further east or west one goes from that area, or the deeper below it, the quality of the water degrades; and the primary problem is salt and minerals.  He noted to the west there is iron and sulfide in the water, and they hear a lot of complaints about groundwater quality from people who live east and west of the ridge.   He commented there are virtually no restrictions on the drilling of individual water wells for single-family houses; and the Water Management District permits the well, but does not issue a permit.  He noted the Health Department requires a bacteria analysis to make sure the water is not contaminated; a drinking water well cannot be built closer than 75 feet to a septic tank, and other than that there is no minimum lot size for drinking water wells.  He noted there are restrictions on alternatives for sewer service, commonly called septic tanks; and in the last few years there have been variations that have gotten sophisticated that do not change the lot sizes, but impact many other aspects of an on-site disposal system on a lot, relative to the size of a house.  He stated in rural environments, the standard is individual wells and septic tanks, and the rules allow individual wells and septic tanks down to one acre, with virtually no limitations. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough commented Mr. Marten’s written report states, “For subdivisions platted after 1972, the minimum lot size for residents with drinking water well and septic tank is one-half an acre, excluding any water bodies contained within the lot.  In general, the minimum size lots served by central water system and a septic tank, so therefore we get the public water, but the private septic tank is one-quarter acre.”  He stated engineering-wise, it becomes easier to engineer a more dense place, but system-wise, there are some dynamics in the development of a site.  He noted Mr. Martens used the example of a 100-acre site, four units per-acre, but 35% of the site might be required for roads and drainage, and then they would end up with 400 units divided by 65.  He commented there is a relationship between what the Board does in capacity, because if some of the property remained AU, they would not have any problems at all, because they would have septic tanks.  He noted Mr. Martens mentioned there is a sewer line problem because the sewer line would have to be re-run from the Mims Elementary school to the sewer plant, because they are almost at capacity with the line that would be serving this portion east of U.S. 1.

 

Mr. Martens stated that is correct; and it is for both the water and sewer.  He noted particularly for the sewer, the only thing east of the wetland that separates I-95 from U.S.1 is Mims Elementary; and the School Board built a pipeline from the school back to the wastewater plant, and it has a finite capacity.  He commented there is a link to the sewer system that will need to be made from the school back to Pine Avenue.

 

Commissioner Scarborough noted the school is on the west side of U.S. 1, and all of the projects coming in for rezoning are on the east side of U.S. 1. 

 

Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Martens’ report discussed the water side: and inquired to meet the projected need, a water plant expansion has been added to the five-year CIP; based on Senate Bill 360 and all of the issues regarding water and concurrency, if Mr. Martens sees any issue with providing that with his budget over the next five years.  She noted part of the issue is that it has to be in the CIP and in the budget so that at then end of five years there is a plant and development based on that CIP.

 

Mr. Martens stated last month they talked about funding a water plant expansion project in Barefoot Bay, and he provided an analysis of the funding requirements for that; and the Mims water plant was included in that overall analysis.  He noted this winter his office will come back with a formal plan for Board approval that will meet the requirements of having the formalized funding in place.

 

Commissioner Scarborough commented he would like Dave Laney to address the Board regarding the incorporation.

 

David Laney stated Brevard County Board of County Commissioners contracted with the Institute of Government, at the University of Central Florida to conduct an incorporation and feasibility study for Mims; associated with that incorporation and feasibility study there were boundaries provided, a set of criteria, and statutory requirements, which he has to address in the conduct of the feasibility study; and he would like to go on record as stating he is not for or against incorporation.  Mr. Laney stated he is doing the study and there are some questions he has as he is progressing with the study; and the Board may recall that he is on task to deliver the study to it by November 6, 2006.  He commented the study is progressing, the date of collection is progressing; and projections are progressing.  He stated what is not progressing is if there are changes to the current zoning, current proposed development and his ability to project the impact of future development on municipal service delivery, because they have to be able to discuss in the feasibility study what the current methodology is for municipal service delivery, how that municipal service delivery will continue in an unabated or un-impacted manner for the next five years; and that does not take into account Parks and Recreation, police protection, and law enforcement; but it does take into account the current methodology for delivery of water sources, the current methodology for wastewater treatment, and over a projected next five year period, what will be the loading on the existing systems and whether or not the existing systems are adequate to address projected possible loading over the next five years.  He commented he does not know if he is able to do that; but he has the numbers as they currently exist and is familiar with the loading in the Mims area, thanks to the good efforts and the information that has provided by County staff.  He noted this may be the first time he has seen the aggregated numbers of approved development in the Mims area, even though that is something that has been discussed with the County Commission for approximately two years; now he has numbers of what is currently approved; and he can at least address what might be approved.  He stated in conducting the feasibility study and reflecting that to a proposed City Charter, if Mims becomes a City, the residents are the ones who are going to have to live with decisions that are made here; and the zoning is grandfathered in at the time of incorporation.  He commented in the event the proposed developments are approved, there are a considerable number of adjacent AU properties to these subject properties.  He stated he has some issues that he is here to watch and get some answers for, and he may need to take a drastic change in direction on the conduct of the study. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough commented it might be helpful if the Board has the applicants speak after the public addresses its concerns; what concerns him is consistency, and the Board cannot be granting one thing to one individual and then another thing to another individual, unless there are distinguishing factors.  He noted there was a meeting with all of the property owners and a good exchange of information, but in his experience he has never seen so many complex issues pushed upon a Commission so rapidly; and it is because the Board is taking a Community and redefining it with actions very rapidly.

 

Mr. Laney stated he agrees it is a very difficult set of evaluations and decisions to make, because it is not a single decision that can be made that does not have other impacting variables associated with it; and it is not an easy set of questions the Board is about to ponder.

 

Commissioner Carlson stated what the Board has done in the past when hit by multiple zoning requests in an area is to do a small area plan; it seems like that would be a feasible route to take in this particular perspective, given all that has been said; and inquired how a feasibility study can be done when the ground is moving.  She inquired if there is anything that hinders the Board legally if they go the route of a Small Area Plan.  She noted the Board has gone this route before and it has worked to the benefit of both the Community and the Commission, because everybody gets to speak on the issue and a good plan comes out of it.   Assistant County Attorney Morris Richardson responded if the Board makes a finding that a Small Area Plan is in order for Mims and decides to let staff conduct a Small Area Plan, the Board may also make findings and impose a moratorium; some moratoriums have been upheld for as long as nine months, in order to conduct the Small Area Plan and to preserve the status quo in the meantime, and then the Board would have to adopt an ordinance to adopt a moratorium.  He commented what is problematic is when there are applications that are already in the pipeline; it is difficult to impose a  moratorium that would apply to requests that have already been applied for and are currently in the pipeline; but if the Board made all of the relevant findings and decided that was the way to go, it could impose a moratorium through an Ordinance, which would put property owners in the relevant area on notice.  He stated whether that moratorium could be retroactively applied to property owners who have already applied for rezoning is a lot more problematic.

 

Commissioner Carlson commented she is not interested in a moratorium; she is more for the Small Area Plan scenario; and inquired if Mr. Richardson could see any issue in this particular light, versus any other time the Board has put in for a Small Area Plan.  Mr. Richardson responded there would be all the same considerations in determining whether or not a Small Area Plan would apply; and the only additional consideration would be if incorporation was likely, the Board might be wasting its time and staff’s time and money doing a Small Area Plan to amend a Comprehensive Plan Amendment.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated sometimes a Small Area Plan evolves into a Comprehensive Land Use Plan change; and inquired if that means someone cannot go through the exercises of knowing what the zoning implications are.  He requested Ms. Busacca to address the subject.

 

Ms. Busacca stated in the past when Small Area Plans have been done, the Board and staff have looked at a variety of different topics including some information on water and sewer and other resources; and it has been looked at in the big picture, and usually led to the amendments in the Comprehensive Plan on the Future Land Use Map.  Commissioner Scarborough stated years ago the Board did a Comprehensive Plan Amendment in the South Beaches, and the density became less on the South Beaches for evacuations purposes; and with the Mims environment, he wonders if the Board is doing damage to a community by not having the data available to know the implications.  He noted the area could or could not incorporate; he does not think the Board needs to do the full-blown Comprehensive Plan Amendment, because David Laney should be able to finish his work first; but that same data would help the community define itself in understanding if it wants to vote for or against incorporation, because it would help the people understand the limitations of their infrastructure.  He stated he thinks it would evolve into a more informed vote, a more informed Commission, and whichever way it goes, the City would be better prepared to understand its destiny, or the Board could move forward with additional work on a Comprehensive Land Use Plan.  He commented in the South Beaches, the Board looked at a specific limiting factor of transportation; each part of the Mims Community may have a limiting factor, and he does not think those limiting factors will change regardless if it is incorporated or unincorporated. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Laney has data together; and he inquired how long staff would need for a quasi-small area plan.  Ms. Busacca responded she and Comprehensive Planner Randy Hunt have discussed that they could probably do it within 60 to 90 days, but then it would take some time for public input, which is typically the process of a small area plan.  She stated she believes staff would be ready by the February 2007 zoning meeting, to have that information to provide to the Board.   Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Ms. Busacca was stating staff could have the data in two months; with Peggy Busacca responding she believes so.

 

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Commissioner Scarborough is interested in pursuing a small area plan; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he is interested in hearing the people who have come with applications, and the people from the community.  He stated the Board asked for a product, and County staff has done an excellent job of bringing it to the Board; but there are some elements the Board has not gotten complete information on.  He commented the Board needs to know if there is a material violation of relevant policies in any elements of the Comprehensive Plans.  He stated he cannot, at this moment, vote in favor, but he also cannot vote against it, because there is not a basis to deny all of the applications.  He noted he would like to see if the Board can get information in a timely manner and bring it back. 

 

Commissioner Carlson stated the feasibility study may or may not resolve itself into being a positive vote for incorporation, but if they start with a small area plan, they offer an educational opportunity to the community.  She noted there should be parallel paths; right now there is a path of incorporation and another path where they still need community input; and otherwise, the Board cannot say aye or nay to any of the requests.  Commissioner Scarborough stated his concern is if the Board approves these requests, it cannot deny others that will come in before the community votes on the incorporation; so it has defined that community before it became a community.  He commented there is something not correct; he thinks there is going to be a movement from the AU’s to greater density and to development; but inquired is the Board making the right decision by looking at them as individual zonings.

 

Commissioner Carlson noted she supports going forward with a small area plan to make sure the community has input; they are going down a road where everybody has some input, and they are not piecemealing it; the Board has done that in other areas of the County when it has been up against the same sort of thing; and she inquired why this is any different than the other small area plans.  Commissioner Scarborough commented he does not think the Board has to go the full measure of going to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan because it deferred going to that higher level of product.

 

Commissioner Pritchard inquired of the timeline for the result of Mr. Laney’s study and the possibility of this going to a vote; with Mr. Laney responding he is obligated by Contract to the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners, and his product has to be to the Board before the end of the first week in November.  He noted the project then proceeds to a formal presentation to the Board; and whether it is found to be feasible or unfeasible, it will be presented to the Legislative Delegation from Brevard County; then it has to go to the Legislative Committee where it is then constructed into a Bill.  He advised that has to be with the Florida Legislature 90 days prior to convening for the 2007 session; it is then considered in session and in the event the feasibility study determines that it is feasible to incorporate with the conditions and parameters that are incorporated into the study, and if it is adopted by the Legislature, it then comes back to the registered voter in the defined boundaries of the study area, and they go to referendum to decide if they want to incorporate.  He noted at that point, the opinion on how they structure their proposed City Charter depends on when the Citizens Group proposes to hold its meeting to incorporate or not incorporate; and they are not required or bound by law to wait until the normal November election cycle. 

 

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what Mr. Laney thinks about running a parallel course for the small area plan, and if it would be a problem for him; with Mr. Laney responding it would not impact him at all.  Chair Voltz noted Mr. Laney stated he would have his study done in November, and she wonders if the Board can get the small area study done before November; and inquired if Mr. Laney would need that information to finish his study; with Mr. Laney responding he does not.  Mr. Laney advised in the event a small area plan process is undertaken and the information that is produced from it is to inform the process of the feasibility study, the feasibility study can be amended prior to its being introduced and voted on by the Florida State Legislature.

 

Commissioner Carlson stated there is potential that once the Board gets the information in regards to feasibility, and it turns out that it is not feasible, then it could address the small area plan, instead of doing both of them on a parallel track.  Commissioner Pritchard stated he was concerned about doing a small area plan parallel to what Mr. Laney is doing, and whether it would have any effect, negative or positive, and if would enhance what Mr. Laney is doing.  He stated what Mr. Laney is doing is separate and distinct; he likes the idea of providing more information; and whatever is going to happen with Mims is going to happen with Mims.  Mr. Laney stated the information and the effort that has already been put forth by County staff in providing the data request that he submitted to them has allowed him to be as far along in the progression of the study as he is.  Chair Voltz stated when Grant-Valkaria incorporated, the Board made sure any zoning items that were before it were going to be compatible with what they wanted in their community; and she wanted to make sure that any items that did come back to the Board were okayed by the people who were going to incorporate, so nothing would be messed up in the town limits.

 

Commissioner Colon stated she recalled the sensitivity of making sure somebody did not get in the pipeline during the incorporation study; and the Board is looking at as much as it can to make sure that does not happen again.  She commented this evening is important because the Board is trying to create a community and protect the integrity of, and that is critical because they are only going to get one shot at it.  She inquired if the Board is going to try to get feedback from everybody again; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the people have come to the Board and have put their cards in; he thinks it is their opportunity to come up and make their comments on both sides; and the Board should hear what they have to say and then take action after it listens to them.  Chair Voltz inquired if the Board wants to hear all four items at the same time, with the public.  Commissioner Scarborough suggested the Board hear the applicants after it hears the public; stated the public is going to be directed at all four items; that would allow the applicants to hear everything that is being said, and if there is something that distinguishes their application, then they can go to that issue.  He noted the Board has a general idea of what the applications are, and if the applicants consent, the Board can reverse the order, and they will have an opportunity to comment afterwards. 

 

Chair Voltz stated several people have cards for different items, and if they would like to speak for all items when they approach the Board, that will save everybody some time.  She stated she will call names, and if they would like to speak to more than one item, they can let her know at that time. 

 

Laurilee Thompson stated she has lived in Mims for 30 years; since she has been on the Planning and Zoning Board, she is shocked at the amount of rezoning requests that have been applied for in the Mims area; she is concerned because she has not seen anything comparable taking place anywhere else in the County; and these rezonings are redefining the entire community.  She commented two years ago the Mims Community Group asked the Board to define how the new development will affect the services in Mims, and what the total aggregate impact will be on water treatment and delivery services, sanitary sewer services, surface roads and the impact to schools; they have come full circle; and the citizens of Mims stand before the Board again tonight still hoping to hear the answer to the question of how all of this proposed new development will affect the services in Mims.  She stated there is more to the situation than what is depicted on the zoning map; the map just shows the recent rezoning requests; she has 29 Binding Development Plans that date back to 1992, and they have individual components that are not reflected on the zoning map that everybody is looking at; and they need to get data together in order to fully understand all of the implications of the total proposed new developments.  She stated a lot of information has already been compiled by County staff; and several months ago the Board approved the expenditure of money for the Mims community to conduct a feasibility study in preparation for the possibility of incorporation.  She noted the people of Mims have stated repeatedly that they want to preserve the rural lifestyle that they cherish so dearly; and they believe that incorporation represents their only hope of doing so.  Ms. Thompson commented for the feasibility study, Mr. Laney is collecting additional data that can be added to the information that staff has gathered to put together a small area plan; delaying the Board’s decision on future higher density rezonings in Mims until the small area plan is completed will offer a much better scenario for the Mims community, as well as the developers; and if they continue on the path they are on, by rezoning properties individually, and failing to look at the big picture, they will create a total mess.  She stated the whole character of Mims can change before the citizens have the opportunity to determine what they want their community to be; and there is a very real potential that the water supply in Mims will be exhausted.  She stated the citizens of Mims are not against development, and they know that smart growth can be good; but what is happening in Mims today goes against all of the thought processes that are being brought forth by both Brevard Tomorrow and the myregion strategic planning initiatives; and it is totally unfair to the citizens of Mims to dump these higher densities on them without fully understanding how the zoning changes will affect their community.  She inquired how the Board could approve any of the projects if it does not have the answer to this question; and inquired what will be the total impact of all of the proposed new development on the services, their lifestyle, and the community environment of Mims.     

 

Bill Hall stated in Mims, most of the people are currently on wells; if someone digs down beyond 40 feet there is bad water that is orange, stinks, and stains everything; good water can be had at 50 or 60-feet, but below that right now is saltwater; and if all the people from the development move in and dig wells, they are going to get bad water.  He stated they have been trying to get one home per acre; and that does not mean that ten houses can be put on ten acres, because there has to be free land and roads.  He stated there has to be room for a septic tank; the County has one sewer line, which he believes is a six-inch line; and the County will have to put in a new line.  He requested the Board use its best judgment on the situation. 

 

Steve Jack, President of the Mims Community Group, stated he had a meeting with Commissioner Scarborough to try to get a small area plan.  He read a statement to the Board, “The north end of Brevard County is in flux because we have never completed a small study area plan.  A small area plan along East Hammock Road, toward the Indian River Lagoon was completed, proposed, and is being worked; much is complete and review of development plans now exist.”  He stated something that has not been mentioned is that some things that are being put in their Charter Amendments might affect the project of T&L Management; and they are putting on height limits and are in the middle of presenting them to the community and having them approved.  He commented Mims Community Group has asked several times to start at Parrish Road and continue through North Brevard, and they are still waiting for that to happen; other areas of Brevard County have benefited greatly where small area plans were implemented; and North Brevard areas are deserving of the same consideration of the studies. 

 

He commented the rezoning requests for new units have overwhelmed their water supply, police protection, fire protection, and County staff, which is having problems keeping up with the applications; and this leaves no continuity for the Mims residents for small area plans when staff is so burdened and the persons they were working with are no longer employed.  He stated the small area plan should consist of a master plan, with all elements of the Comprehensive Plan including police, fire, water, roads, and schools; they do not pay taxes to support more portables, which is a gross loss of taxpayers’ money in the long haul; and no plans at this time are in consideration for the Mims area.  Mr. Jack stated there is one developer who came from another area and bought the 140 acres across from the KOA Campground; he has never done any development in Brevard, but he won the citizens by saying he has helped other communities by putting in schools and libraries; and no other developer has ever offered anything, as all they want to do is take from the citizens.  He commented developers have left the citizens with empty promises, and they have seen nothing from them that will benefit the community; and this is a give-and-take, and the citizens have given rezonings, and the developers have been taking much more than what was initially promised in the County review process.  He noted the Community thought there was a near number of solid units accepted by the County, but they see 70 more units on one project than they were told and 114 on another; and after looking at the map, nearly all of them increased by more than what they were told they were going to be.  He stated no one came back to the community to say the plan had been revised, and no one was able to see the binding development plans.  He stated it all must stop as it is out of control; and as Mr. Martens stated one million gallons a day are going to be over the capacity.  He stated the Mims Community Group would like to ask the Board to use its wisdom and highly scrutinize anything that takes more water for these development projects; therefore, the Board has an obligation, according to the Comprehensive Plan, to hold the rezoning approvals until such time that a new water source can be found, and in Florida this is becoming highly impossible.  He noted they have asked for the aggregate effect, but no one has answered what all of this will do to the community.  He stated there is so much to be completed before their rural area becomes extinct; they must do small area plans, with a Master Plan to show what their vision is to be; and they want rural flavor and country charm. He stated the rezonings have all come back to Mims Community Group to be completed before they have a chance to be incorporated.  He stated the Mims Community Group is asking for the Board to help preserve their rural quality of life; they have always had great cooperation and assistance from all County staff; and they want to thank the Board and staff for their great commitment to Brevard County.

 

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Jack has looked at the seven-year school facility plan; with Mr. Jack responding he has not seen the seven-year plan.  Commissioner Carlson stated she would be interested in finding out whether or not there is a plan that still goes to Senate Bill 360, which staff is looking at; the Board has to be on board concurrency-wise with transportation, water, and schools; those are the three big ones, and if those are not going to be in place or part of the process and the budget, the Board is supposedly mandated that it cannot allow permits and zoning.  She stated the Board needs to make sure it is following the law, and she does not know where it is right now.

 

Mr. Jack stated he looked at the percentages of what the schools are; Astronaut was 116%; now it is way down; and he could not figure out why it was now so low.  He stated he went to the school and saw that the Driver’s Ed range is now all portables; they are taking into account that square footage; and it is not giving a true picture of what the real square footage of the main structure should be.  Mr. Jack stated the Mims library has buckets inside it; it is a portable, and he would like to see the portables disappear. 

 

Benny Davies stated he is favor of the requests; Mims needs more development; he went to one of the Mims Committee meetings; and he is not in favor of the incorporation of Mims.  He noted he bought his land for development years ago, such as what is being proposed now; Mims may not become a city, and then the applicants’ would have wasted their time and money; his land sits in the middle of the subject properties, and in time he will be in front of the Board as well.  He stated he is for the rezonings and they should remember that they may not become the City of Mims; and there is not enough density in Mims to become a city without legislation ruling on it. 

 

Phil Hulsizer inquired what would happen if Mims does not become a City would it affect the Board’s decisions tonight, and if there was no talk of incorporation, would the Board still put off the study.  He stated Mims is a growing community and needs more business; it is not going to get the businesses without the people; the buildings and homes are not going to be built overnight; when it starts growing, the community is going to get more tax dollars in and will see the need for the schools and water; and it is not all going to hit at one time, but is going to be a process over the next ten to 15 years.  He stated he wants to see Mims grow; he has 15 acres right next to where someone wants to build; in a couple years he may want to sell five of his acres and get ahead in life; and this prevents that.  He commented he thinks it is a big put-off, and Mims is really hoping to become incorporated; he is terrified to think that if the wrong people get into office, Mims is always going to be a one stop light town, with one store, no business, and no people; there have to be people to pay taxes to get the schools, water, and sewer; and there cannot be one without the other.  He stated a friend of his received an email from a group that said the water and sewer could not handle it; she was for incorporation, but that letter swayed her into thinking that a city could not handle it; he read Mr. Martens’ report today and realized that a city could handle it; and his friend was fed false information.  He stated it makes him wonder how many people in the community are getting emails that are giving false or incorrect information, and swaying them against something that could benefit the community.  He stated he does not want to see anything hurt the community; he wants to live someplace he can be proud of; if they look at the land around him, it is broken down orange groves, nothing is being mowed, and it is ridiculous; he wants to live in a rural community, but rural means nice homes and pastures, and not old dirt roads with broken down cars and places for people to dump their refrigerators or roof shingles; that is all Brockett Road is right now; and it is ridiculous.  He stated if subdivisions are built, these places are going to get cleaned up, and will get more and more people, and all of those people are going to be part of the community.  He stated he has a lot of property, but he has no problems with a nice community coming in next to him to raise the taxes and get more growth; he does not like driving all the way to Route 50 if he wants to go to a nice restaurant, he would like to see someone come in and build a Sonic or Whataburger, but no one is going to do that because there is nobody in Mims to visit those places; and if they get more people in the north end, then maybe some more businesses would want to come in.  He stated he wants the facts; and he does not want anything to hurt the community, but growth can be a good thing.

 

Robert Clay Kirk, applicant for Item VI.A.4, stated the area needs development; when his item was in front of the Planning and Zoning Board, it was approved, and then it started flip-flopping.  He stated it makes it tough when he is trying to get engineering done and figure out what the zoning is going to be on the property; now, tonight, they are talking about further delays and putting it off; and he is one of the land owners and has some rights also.  He stated he has been to all of the meetings, including the meeting when the Collier Group spoke about building condominiums at I-95 that sell for $1.2 million; (and building $200,000 to $300,000 is hard to do at $100 per square-foot;) and basically it is like Mims Community Group is in favor of what he wants to do if he wants to give away everything he can make out of the project.  He stated the Collier Group had support of the Community Group for its project because the Group wants Red Lobster, and other restaurants; it is okay for that area, but it is not okay for the area on Brocket Road; and something needs to be done in the area.  He stated good, common sense decisions need to be made about it; and there needs to be a decision, let the chips fall where they may, and Mims move on.  He stated there is a divided community in Mims; right now the East Community Group is not sure it wants to be part of the incorporation; the people in Sherwood are 900 “no” votes, and when the study is done, the proof will be there; but it is not fair for everyone who has been coming to the Board for the past year and a half, trying to get something done; and it is time to make a yes or no vote.

 

Paula Lay stated some of the things that are being said are getting misconstrued; one gentleman said he was at a Mims Community Group meeting where there were not a lot of people; but the meeting when she saw the gentleman was not a Mims Community Group meeting, as it was a meeting for the developers.  She stated everybody in Mims is not on the same page yet because they still do not have all of the information; she thinks that is what Commissioners Scarborough, Carlson, and Pritchard were speaking about, for them to all get the same information and make an informed decision; and that is what Steve Jack is asking for.  She stated they want to see what they are going to be stuck living with because they want to stay living there and want to enjoy the rural community and rural quality of life; and she has been involved with the Mims Community Group for two years, and has not seen a lot of the people who have spoken to the Board tonight.  She stated their meetings are published and held on the third Tuesday of every month, in the same place; the Town Hall meetings are the ones where 300 people show up, so there are people coming and finding out information; but they would like to get all of the information for everyone, and not just the Mims Community Group, as this is going to help everybody living in Mims. 

 

Cedric Jackson, applicant for VI.B.5., stated he is not a developer; he is an airline pilot by trade; and he has come into this as a result of a family relationship, his education, background, and the time to be able to put into this.  He commented he would like everyone to keep in mind that his project has passed the previous Zoning Boards and no one has made any specific objections; even the Mims Community Group let the project go through, or at least reserved comment on it.  Mr. Jackson stated his project goals are to achieve a zoning of RU-1-11 with two to four units per acre; and in the future there is a good chance that as a result of the complication that this project is going to involve, he will probably be before Zoning again for a more complicated request.  He noted his project will reduce the industrial footprint on the area, and he will be closing a borrow pit in association with the project, which has been used with an industrial permit that has been cleared on agricultural land.  He commented he has had talks with the East Mims Community Group leaders, and has had meetings with them and County staff about the type of project they would like to have, and he has taken that under advisement; and he has a meeting tomorrow with Housing and Human Services.  He stated there is a golf community next to his subject property; his project is 75 acres, and the surrounding area is rural renters on large tracts, new rural homeowners, and the traditional rural home community, which is representative of the East Mims Community, the minority community that is not represented tonight, but does support the project.  He stated his project is representative of the integrity of the community and he wants to bring in a mixed investment value to the community, which represents a range of investments and a range of income levels; he has had meetings with County staff and wants to bring something that is a positive for everyone in the community and the Brown family.  He stated the Browns’ family homes are on this property and they live there; he is a third generation of the area; his great uncle owned much of the land at one time; and he sees no reason why his request should be turned down.

 

Loys Ward, applicant for VI.A.6, stated he represents Hilltop Holdings and their request is for 19.5 acres on the north side of Main Street, immediately east and contiguous to the East Mims Community, directly across the street from the Brown property that Mr. Jackson is representing.  He stated he has met with Mr. Ziegler of the East Mims Group, who has no objections; and his proposal is next to higher density than what he is proposing.  He stated his clients are from South Florida and they are working-class people; one is a bathroom remodeler, and the other one does granite counter tops; they bought this property as an investment; and they anticipate development three or four years from now.  He stated he has not completed any engineering or environmental work yet, because he does not know the feasibility without getting the zoning in place; it is AU now, and totally inappropriate for one-acre lots or larger; and the RU-1-11 would net about 40 to 50 home sites, depending on the environmental constraints and the stormwater.  He stated his project is small and he does not see that it will impact the future of Mims except positively.

 

Chair Voltz inquired how long Mr. Ward’s project has been in the pipeline; with Mr. Ward responding his client bought it in the middle of the rezoning process and he was not notified of the request; he resubmitted in January or February of this year; and there was a prior request on a portion of the property that was denied because the owner did not come to the meeting.  Chair Voltz inquired how long Mr. Jackson’s project has been in the process; with Mr. Jackson responding approximately five months.

 

Commissioner Colon stated the Board needs to be fair; the brakes need to be hit before it gets to zoning; and she is uncomfortable that these requests started at least six months ago because

some of the projects have gotten blessings from some of the groups.  Commissioner Colon stated she is torn because there needs to be a great deal of discussion of how the Mims Community sees itself and that is critical; it definitely gives the Board an opportunity to put something together that it can be proud of after they leave office; and she is very supportive of the small area study; but she is uncomfortable that the items have gone through the entire process, and now the Board is going to penalize people while the discussion has gone back and forth.  She stated she remembers Mr. Jackson from a previous meeting and she specifically pushed affordable housing to him because he discussed it with staff; and the requests have been approved unanimously by the Planning and Zoning Board.  She stated she has a problem when an innocent bystander gets hit in the crossfire, and the Board has seen that before; she does not have a problem if the Board, as of today, says it needs to hit the brakes on the requests that are coming in, because it is starting to get out of control; and that kind of discussion needs to happen, but the Planning and Zoning Board through should not go through that if the Commission is going to hit the brakes on those also.  She asked Steve Jack to address the Board, and state what it is in particular that is of concern to the Mims Community Group.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the problem is that the Board has to be consistent; Rodney Honeycutt has a project coming before the Board next month that is one of the best projects he has ever seen; each application has merits in its own particular way; and the problem is that if it is given to one, what is the rationale in going here and there.  He stated the Board can go through  and examine all of the BDP’s to see what restrictions it put on the other ones, or it can see if it should have two or four units per-acre; even without the massive movement, which is occurring because of Mr. Jack, all of the people came in with applications; the Board needs to be prepared to distinguish all of the subsequent requests and understand what the final product is; and he does not think Mr. Jack is capable of answering Commissioner Colon’s question.

                                                                 

Commissioner Colon stated it is not fair to change the rules in the middle of the game, and she likes to try to listen to both sides; if someone is planning on developing in Mims, the Board of County Commissioners has hit the brakes because right now it would like to study the area, as it is uncomfortable with the kind of growth that is happening; and whether it is incorporated or not is irrelevant, because she will not be supporting something that would hurt the integrity of Mims.  She stated she is uncomfortable that the applicants in front of the Board have already been in the pipeline; she wants to hear from Mr. Jack, because if he does not have a problem with certain projects, then the Board has to be fair, and if he is not comfortable with a certain project, she would like to know why; and then the Board can deny it today or let it go forward.  She stated that message needs to be strong, and unless she hears something otherwise, she will be supporting all of the projects this evening. 

 

Assistant County Attorney Morris Richardson stated Commissioner Colon brings up a good point; the Board can consider the items tonight, but decisions tonight are not going to tie the Board’s hands for the future; he knows there is concern that once the Board approves something, it establishes a precedent, and that is simply not the case in a situation like this.  He stated if they conduct a small area plan, and then later there is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that is consistent with the plan, and the plan shows that what the Board did today maybe was not the best thing to do, the small area plan is what will control rather than what was approved by the Board tonight.  Mr. Richardson advised to the extent there are pending applications, the Board certainly should consider those based on consistency and compatibility.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has a responsibility to follow certain instructions on how the Board analyzes rezoning requests; and he inquired if it is not supposed to look at the capacity to meet the Comprehensive Plan requirements; with Mr. Richardson responding the Board is supposed to look at all of the competent substantial evidence presented to the Board regarding consistency, and compatibility; and there are certain capacity issues.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it is in its prerogative to do that with each individual application; with Mr. Richardson responding the Board should consider everything that Mr. Enos and Mr. Martens presented tonight as competent substantial evidence regarding capacity and things of that nature, as to each individual application.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Richardson is familiar with the language that talks about trends dealing with the manner in which the Board analyzes requests, and whether the proposed usage is consistent with the merging or existing, or surrounding development in determining the analysis of historical land use patterns; the problem is if the Board takes each one in the posture of the bigger picture, there is probably not a good reason to deny any of them singularly.  Mr. Richardson responded if the Board approves these requests, it does not mean it is bound to approve every one that comes down the pike in the future; and if a small area plan shows that maybe the Board should not approve others, he does not want the Board to be concerned that it might set a bad precedent tonight.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired without a small area plan, does he not have an obligation to know what he is voting on; and when questions are raised should he not try to get answers to them before he makes a decision, or should he draw straws as to which ones he should approve.  Mr. Richardson responded he should consider the competent substantial evidence presented.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if he does not have the evidence, should he not get it; with Mr. Richardson responding absolutely.

 

Steve Jack showed the Board the email that was sent out; stated everything in the email came from Mr. Martens’ letter; there is nothing false about that, and he takes exception to someone saying he is lying.  He commented originally, the Brown property was to have a binding development plan stating there will be two units per acre, which is why his group did not object to that portion; and if anyone else said they would build at two units per acre, they would probably not be here tonight.  He advised Warm Wind Homes proposes 22 units; on the Marion property, right now there are 24 available units, and they are proposing 218; available on the Brown’s property right now are 29 units, and they are proposing 246; and on Hilltop Holdings, the current available units are 6, and they are proposing 73 units.  He inquired why they are going for so much density when they knew what the property was zoned when they bought it, and they knew what they could get out of it; Mims Community Group is willing to go half-way with them, but they do not want to give them the total maximum going to 218 units; Mims is a rural area, and it is being taken into urban sprawl.  He stated they stopped that two years ago at Parrish Road; they started picking up one house per acre; when they got to this area, they started looking at it and thinking maybe that is not appropriate here, but they would have gone for two per acre; however no one ever came back and asked if they could go half way, in lieu of the request being denied.  Mr. Jack stated he thinks the Mims Community Group has been more than fair with anyone it has ever worked with; and the very thing that happened two years ago with Jen-Development, when they went from Agriculture to two and a half per-acre is why Mr. Kirk said they were asking for it; so he does not want to hear that it does not set a precedent, as it is presently happening.

 

Commissioner Colon stated when Mr. Jackson spoke at the last meeting, Mr. Jack stated he did not have a problem with that particular project, and she was wondering if he still felt that way with that particular property.  She noted her comfort level at that time was because the residents of the area were comfortable, and the residents felt that it was something that was positive for the Community and it would improve the Community; and inquired if Mr. Jack still felt that way and if he has heard from the neighbors in that area.  Mr. Jack responded that was a Block Grant area and they had different controls it read that it would require a BDP on that portion designated two units per acre; and that was what was stuck in his mind.  Commissioner Colon inquired if that was a request his group were comfortable with because the community and the area was comfortable with that request; stated she wants to do that to each of the four items; she feels what the Board has done tonight is lump everybody together; but each one is unique, and she would like to be fair to each one.  She stated if there is one that stands out that needs to be denied, or needs to be tabled for whatever reason, then that is the way to go; and she inquired if Mr. Jack still feels comfortable with what he has heard, or has the applicant changed the game plan since the last time the Board has spoken.  Mr. Jack responded when he made those comments at the last meeting, he read the request as having two units per acre; he talked to Dwight Ziegler about it, and he told him it would be two units per acre; since then, he talked to Mr. Jackson and found out that some of it is Residential two and some of it is Residential four; and because they are in a Block Grant area he told them at that time that the Mims Community Group would yield to the residents’ wishes were.  Commissioner Colon stated in other words they let the people in that area decide what they want; and inquired if anything stood out to Mr. Jack concerning Item Six that he really felt strongly about.   Mr. Jack stated he feels that Hilltop Holdings is going to be flipped.  Commissioner Colon inquired if he feels that particular request needs more massaging, or if he feels comfortable with the kind of vote that took place, and was passed 10 to one by the Planning and Zoning Board.  Mr. Jack stated Mr. Ward has spoken to the East Mims Group, and he is not in that group, so he does not know what took place and if they worked anything out.  Commissioner Colon inquired if East Mims has its own homeowners association; with Mr. Jack responding they have the East Mims Civic Group.  Commissioner Colon noted that group is not present, but they are aware of the issues; with Mr. Jack stating he has talked to Dwight Ziegler about the issues and at that time Mr. Ward had not talked to him.  Commissioner Colon requested the owner of Hilltop Holding to address the Board. 

 

 

Mohan Ramkissoon stated he did speak to Mr. Ziegler and he is in favor of what he is trying to do; and the last time he was in front of the Board, it asked him to meet with the local group, but Mr. Ziegler’s group is a one individual group, and he seems to be the head of everything.  He stated he spoke to Mr. Ziegler and explained what he wanted to do, and he spoke to him this afternoon and they explained to each other what they wanted for the neighborhood; Mr. Ziegler stated he was fine with that and said he would speak to Commissioner Scarborough about the situation; and he wishes Mr. Ziegler was present tonight to represent them as a group.  He advised he has been trying to get the property rezoned for almost nine months; he is from Miami; and each time, he has to spend the entire day when he comes up here. 

 

Commissioner Colon inquired if Mr. Jack felt that the Hilltop item still needs some massaging or tweaking.  Mr. Jack responded he has had many people in the East Mims Group who say that Mr. Ziegler does not speak for them; and apparently what is happening is a lot of the information is not getting taken back to the Community.  Commissioner Colon stated item VI.A.4 was also recommended for approval unanimously by the Planning and Zoning Board; there is a binding development plan; and she would like feedback from Mr. Jack.  Mr. Jack stated he thinks the density is too high; what has happened is that Gen-Development, on Hamlin Groves, did get the two and a half units per acre, and Mr. Kirk thought he should get the same thing; but somewhere it has to stop, and because that happened two years ago is why they are going through this now. Commissioner Colon inquired if the Mims Group sat down with the property owners to try to work things out; with Mr. Jack responding at every meeting they have talked about it being too much density, and they have never once said they would give less density.  Chair Voltz stated they are requesting two units per acre, and she is at a loss.

 

Mr. Enos stated both Items VI.A.4. and VI.A.5. are part Residential 4 and part Residential 2; in both cases the applicants submitted a binding development plan limiting the property to two units per acre on the part of the property designated as Residential 2; so the density limitation in the binding development plan is not being applied to the Residential 4 part, but only the Residential 2 part.  Mr. Jack stated on the Residential 4, there are going to be 148 lots; and apparently they are going to go to four on the Residential 4 and two on the Residential 2, which would make a total of 218 lots.  Mr. Enos stated it is going to be four units per acre on the part of the property designated as Residential 4, and two units per acre on the part of the property designated as Residential 2.  Commissioner Colon noted that is a lot of density; with Mr. Jack responding it is urban sprawl.  Mr. Enos advised the average density will be 2.9 units per acre.

 

Commissioner Colon stated she is willing to take the items one at a time; and she is having difficulty with the Marion item, but she is willing to take the other ones separately.  Commissioner Scarborough advised the Marions were represented by an attorney at the last meeting; the attorney asked whether Mr. Jackson’s request had been approved and learning that it had not been approved, sat through Mr. Jackson’s request with a court reporter taking a transcript, he assumes for the purpose of challenging that the Board’s actions were capricious and without reason going from one to another; and he feels strongly that there is linkage with density throughout the area unless a stronger case can be made.  Commissioner Colon stated at any time, anybody is welcome to take the Board to court, and she cannot make a decision worrying if someone is going to take her to court; the Board acts quasi-judicial, and it has to make sure it takes each item; and she made a motion to approve Item VI.A.5., based on the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board.

 

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Item VI.A.5. as recommended.

 

 

Commissioner Pritchard stated he agrees with Commissioner Colon’s earlier comments about changing the rules, and he does not like changing the rules in the middle of the game; he did not hear anything that was said that would not allow this to happen in all the areas that were going to affect capacity; diversity is good in a community, and not everybody wants to have two and a half acres to maintain; and he can look at each item and say that each one is separate and distinct, but he is not sure that they are, and they all have benefits and detriments.  He stated the point is that when they are looking at what has been ongoing for the last six to 12 months, they have been in the pipeline, have gone through the Planning and Zoning Board, and were approved; and he does not know why they have advisory boards if they do not pay attention to them.  Commissioner Pritchard noted he does not have a problem with moving forward on all of them; but he thinks that because Mims is looking to incorporate, they are never going to move off of square one regarding the requests; and he is going to rely on the Planning and Zoning Board which has approved them and was presented with all the information.  He stated there are people in favor of it and people who are against it; everyone is not going to be happy; and that is where he stands on the discussion.  He stated it does not mean if they give it to one, they give it to another, because if they are going to do a small area plan for anything else coming down the pipeline, then it takes that out of consideration.

 

Commissioner Carlson stated she thinks the Board should have listened to Mr. Laney when he stated he might have to take a drastic turn in terms of the feasibility study in assessing the ability to incorporate; if the Board has now put forth $20,000 to do the feasibility study, it needs to take it back and have them stop the study because the Board is in a dangerous situation in that if it continues to allow stuff to happen, it has to look at density issues; density is a factor when it comes to compatibility and most of the requests are not compatible with the surrounding areas; and her concern is that the Board initiates a zoning change that has a domino effect, whereas the Board has every right to say an item is denied because of too much density.  She stated the Board has many options and the thing about a zoning request is that the Board is not required to automatically assume that it is a good request; it should have a valid reason that is appropriate; compatibility is a perfect reason; and the Board has done that many times.  She stated she thinks a small area plan at least gets everybody talking to each other, so they can understand what is going on and what the potential is; the facts are going to be out there because staff will be out there to explain the whole scenario; and good, bad, or otherwise, there is a problem when looking down the pipeline of potential incorporation and the feasibility of that.  She stated she is concerned from a systematic approach that if Mr. Laney has been hired to do something, he cannot do an accurate job if it is a moving target; and if the applicants would like to get out of the game or if they would want a yes or no vote, then the Board should do that; she is not sure that approving all of them is going to be to the benefit of the community as a whole; and in fact, she thinks it would be a detriment because the Board has not heard everybody speak.  She stated she would have liked to have heard from East Mims when Mr. Jackson talked about his issue, so she would have a more balanced appreciation of what the issues are;

and she is not totally convinced the Board has addressed all of the capacity issues.  Commissioner Carlson commented she would like to hear a little bit more from a small area plan perspective and get everybody there; at least with a small area plan they can work with the developers and get more of what they want; and if they get that it is a win-win and might evolve so that it happens before they incorporate.  She stated at least they would have some input into the process; when she did a small area plan in District 4, the basic assumption was that they listen to the Community, and now this is more complex because of the feasibility study.

 

Commissioner Scarborough commented a lot has been said about people’s rights when they file something; they have a right to a fair hearing and a right to have all the information presented, and he thinks the Board is trying to do that.  He noted an affirmative vote bestows upon them certain rights such as vesting and Burt Harris Act, which once given cannot be removed without tremendous costs; and the Board knows from everything that has been said that there is a trend being created; He stated the rules require it to look at compatibility, and compatibility is what is at the adjoining property; and it is going to become a greater and greater burden on the Commission to deny future applications by approval of these items he made a motion to table the items until the November 2, 2006 meeting, so the Board can be better informed and know the full implications of what is occurring.  Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson to table Items VI.A.2, VI.A.4. VI.A.5. and VI.A.6 to the November 2, 2006, Board of County Commissioners meeting.

 

 

Chair Voltz stated she will support the motion; a lot of people in Grant-Valkaria were stuck in the same position, and once the incorporation took place, a lot of people were unable to go forward; if the Board is going to make any decisions with the applications in front of it, it needs to do it before any incorporation takes place, and then people will be in bad shape.  She commented the applicants are going to be upset because they have put so much time and money into the process; at the same time it is not fair to the citizens of Mims to not really know what their community is going to look like; and she supports the motion because she believes both parties will get a fairer shake in the long run if the Board tables it.

 

Commissioner Colon stated if the majority of the Board wants to table the items, then she has no choice but to respect that, but there are two items that are being put in the crossfire, and that is unfair.  She advised she was planning to support Items VI.A.5. and VI.A.6.; she is not going to support Item VI.A.4.; and just because an item is approved by the Planning and Zoning Board does not mean it will be approved by the Commission.  She stated the density on Item VI.A.4. is not acceptable to her because she does not feel it is compatible with the area, and that is why she will not support that item.  She commented to make items VI.A.5. and VI.A.6. wait is unfair; that is why she wants to vote for the items individually; and she inquired if there was anything on the Planning and Zoning Agenda in District One from last month; with Mr. Enos responding there was nothing on the “B” agenda from District One.  Commissioner Scarborough noted the Board will be hearing the request from Rodney Honeycutt next month.  Commissioner Colon stated the Board needs to hit the brakes on what is coming from Mims from now on; but the Board cannot hurt something that is going to be good for a particular community and have them be in the crossfire. 

 

Commissioner Pritchard commented he agrees with Commissioner Colon; he does not like last minute efforts to derail something; there has been plenty of opportunity to talk about the issues; there was the Planning and Zoning Board, and in some cases the items were before the Commission and it tabled them many times; and the issues will come back to the Board, it will hear the same arguments from both sides, and it will not change.  He stated the diversity is good; the Board has heard all the arguments, and some are repetitive; and the Board needs to move on the issues and put in the small area plan for anything new.  He stated Mims may never become a city; the Board cannot be all things to all people; there are times when it just needs to make a decision; and he is not going to support the motion.

 

Mr. Richardson commented if there is interest in putting on the brakes during a small area plan, the Board will need to direct staff to do a small area plan and prepare an ordinance accordingly.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the motion was not for a small area plan; with what is happening with the Mims Incorporation, the Board does not have to put the full effort forward that it would have to do with a small area plan; and a small area plan in Mims is unique because of the incorporation.  He noted it is his intention to fully consider approval of all four items, and if he wanted to deny them, he would have moved to deny them; the compatibility of adjacent property in the Board’s voting history cannot be ignored; he is not here to deny, he is here to be informed; and the motion is to table, not for a small area plan or for a moratorium. 

 

Mr. Richardson stated his comment was directed at the comments made by Commissioners Colon and Carlson; and he wants everyone to understand that if the Board does a small area plan it needs to go through the correct procedures.  Commissioner Colon stated the Board can work on this; it is coming back in November for more information; and the Board needs to make a motion to hit the brakes on what is coming down the pipeline, so it can catch up and look at everything that is going on.  She stated she is comfortable denying something when looking at the big picture and determining that there are too many subdivisions in one particular area; she thinks it would behoove the Board to take direction today; and she does not know what the procedure is to officially stop those applications from coming in.  Commissioner Scarborough noted it would be a moratorium; with Commissioner Colon stating it is critical for the Board to do that, and she is comfortable doing that, which defeats the whole conversation of protecting the integrity of the community; and she would hope that after the tabling, another motion will take place to hit the brakes.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the moratorium would apply to the acceptance of new applications; with Chair Voltz responding affirmatively.  Commissioner Scarborough stated anything currently in the pipeline can be decided on, but there would be no new applications.  Mr. Richardson advised any moratorium would have to be tied to a small area plan that conceivably might result in changes to the Comprehensive Plan; and a moratorium would have to be based on the need to perform a small area study.

 

Chair Voltz called for a vote on the motion to table Items VI.A.2., VI.A.4.,   VI.A.5., and VI.A.6.  Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Pritchard voted nay.   

 

Commissioner Colon stated she would like to make a motion for a moratorium; Commissioner Scarborough advised there is a legal procedure and some things the Board has to do as a prerequisite.  Chair Voltz stated she does not know if the Board needs to do that tonight; Morris Richardson advised what the Board would do is direct staff if it is going to consider a moratorium and small area plan. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct staff to review the possibility of a resolution establishing a moratorium on any projects that are not currently pending in the Mims area and report to the Board.  Mr. Richardson stated it puts property owners on notice; and he inquired if he understands the Board to be directing staff to look into a small area plan and whether a moratorium would be appropriate, and bring the relevant findings back to the Board. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not want a report.  ; Commissioner Carlson requested clarification of the motion.

 

Chair Voltz stated there is a motion to look a doing a resolution for a moratorium on any projects that are to be coming in, and are not currently in the pipeline. Commissioner Scarborough commented the Board may be informed enough in November to remove the moratorium, and proceed with zoning requests as they come in, but people need to know that it is only approving two or three units per acre; and once it does that, it can treat everybody fairly across the board. 

 

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

 

Commissioner Scarborough commented the other question he has is the area the Board is considering; the more intense certain areas of Mims are created, there will not be water or sewer supply; and there are issues in dealing with what the Board wants Mims to look like and whether it wants to stop at certain roads.  Chair Voltz inquired about the boundaries of the Mims incorporation; Commissioner Scarborough responding he has heard that Sherwood is not happy may ask that Sherwood be dropped from the area; and he does not know exactly what the incorporation boundaries are.  Chair Voltz stated the area needs to be defined for everybody for the moratorium.

 

Cedric Jackson stated his project has been brought up before the Board; the Mims Community Group agreed with his project beforehand; they are on record as not objecting to it, and now his project is being placed in limbo because maybe someone will object to it.  He noted the East Mims Group has had discussions with Mr. Jack, and his project was specifically mentioned as being allowed to go through; the East Mims Group would be here supporting him if there had not already been agreement that Mr. Jack would not object to it.  Chair Voltz stated Mr. Jack objected to the item tonight.  Mr. Jackson noted Mr. Jack objected to his item tonight claiming that it was the fact that there was a change in the density, but there has not been a change in density that he is requesting.  Chair Voltz stated that is an issue for the Board because the two Mims groups are saying two different things, so rather than turn Mr. Jackson’s project down, it tabled it until November.  She stated she knows that everybody who has a project in the pipeline tonight is not happy about the tabling; she cannot tell, without the correct information, how she is going to vote; she would like to hear from the East Mims Group, and if there are people who disagree with them, it needs to be worked out before they come to the Board.

 

Commissioner Colon commented she shares Mr. Jackson’s frustration, but the best thing to do right now is wait until November; and she advised she does not care for what happened tonight.  Mr. Jackson inquired if he should not make any clarifications as far as the mistakes that have been made.  Commissioner Colon stated his item has been tabled and it will come back in November.  Mr. Jackson stated his project is in the Community Development Block Grant, in the heart of a poor minority community that the Mims Group does not represent or live near.  Chair Voltz stated she agrees, but the item has been tabled until November.

 

*Five minute break.  The meeting recessed at 8:15 p.m. and reconvened at 8:25 p.m.

 

 

 

 

Item VI.B.3.  (NMI60801) – Charles & Nancy Mae Waldron’s request for change from AU to EU on 2.87 acres, located on the east side of North Tropical Trail, opposite of the eastern terminus of Oak Lake Place.

 

Robert Adcock stated he represents Charles and Nancy Waldron, who have requested their property be rezoned from AU to EU; the request was denied by the Zoning Board, and the Waldrons are now asking to appeal that decision.  He read a letter from the Waldrons to the Board, asking it to reconsider the denial; advised their argument is that there are several houses in the adjacent area that have been rezoned to EU; they have a Contract for sale on the property contingent on the Board rezoning the property to EU; and the potential buyer would build two additional houses on the property, so there would be two houses on 2.87 acres. 

 

Michael Wheeler stated he is the Zoning Committee Chairperson for the North Merritt Island Homeowners’ Association; he stated he would like to point out a few Administrative Policies the Board agreed to use as criteria with which it judges a rezoning request.  He stated the first issue is the character of the area; and displaced a map of the area.  He noted 89% of the surrounding land is AU, and 3.27 acres are either RR-1 or EU.  He stated there is the potential for stress on the infrastructure, and that is the developmental impact on the water supply; the property is currently 100% recharge soils, which means there is enough permeability in the soils to benefit the Florida aquifer; and putting new developments on the soils diminishes the aquifer resupply capability, and impacts the surrounding properties. He noted he had phone calls from the immediate neighbors in the area and emails and presentations to the North Merritt Island Homeowners’ Association, and also to the North Merritt Island Board; and both boards voted unanimously to deny the request to EU.  He commented the current AU zoning is consistent with the Future Land Use Designation; the most recent rezoning on North Merritt Island by the Board was last month, when 21 acres were rezoned to allow 14 houses, and the Kabboord property, which was rezoned to one unit per 1.3 acre.  Mr. Wheeler noted the community has had overwhelming input and is requesting the zoning request be denied.

 

Chair Voltz inquired of the Future Land Use; with Rick Enos responding Residential 4.

 

Charles Sweeney stated he has lived on Merritt Island for 26 years and he is a builder in area; he has been building in Merritt Island, Cocoa, Titusville, and Rockledge since the mid-eighties; he would like to be consistent in a trend.  He stated recently the Board approved zoning down the street from this property to EU, with one-third acre lots; it is currently being cleared; and stated each house on the subject property will have over a half acre of land to each dwelling.

 

Chair Voltz inquired how many homes Mr. Sweeney wants to build; with Mr. Sweeney responding EU will allow three houses to be built, and he will go down to two if he has to; but the EU would give him more than half an acre per lot, which is almost the same zoning as SR.  Chair Voltz inquired if Mr. Sweeney would be willing to limit to two houses; with Mr. Sweeny responding he would limit it to two additional lots, besides the house that is currently on the property.

 

Joe Doepel showed the Board a map of the area; and requested it look at where the house sits on the property.  He advised to the north there are other lots that are deep and large also, and to the south the lots get smaller.  He noted there is no sewer available, so any houses built in the area would have to be on septic tanks and drain fields; the area also has some wetlands; and the neighbors would support a change on the property if Mr. Sweeney only wanted to put one house on it, but they have a problem with the zoning he is seeking.  Chair Voltz inquired if Mr. Doepel would agree to SR zoning, which is one unit per half-acre; with Mr. Doepel stating he would not agree to SR; he would personally like to see one unit per acre in the area because of what is being built up the street; and the neighbors also do not want to see the property rezoned.  He stated there is another development being built up the road; they are adding more density and traffic to North Tropical Trail; there have been many accidents on the curve, to which Commissioner Pritchard responded by having a stop sign put up at the south end; and as the community gets built more, and as the park gets built, people will choose an alternate route which will be to come down North Tropical Trail.  He stated they will see an impact on the road, which has not reached its level yet, but they will see it increase; the road is in really bad shape; and it will be difficult to limit the next person who requests a rezoning, when Mr. Sweeney was allowed to rezone.   He requested the Board to limit the property to one house per acre, or table it to a future meeting.

 

Chair Voltz noted with the placement of the house that is currently on the property, she is not sure Mr. Sweeney would be able to get two more houses; and she inquired if there is room to get two more houses and each have approximately one acre.  Mr. Enos responded under RR-1 they can only get two houses total, including the one that is already there, because they do not quite have three acres.

 

Bob Wilcox stated he is the President of the Sunset Grove Homeowners Association, and his neighbors have some concern over the increase in density; and requested the Board defer to the Planning and Zoning Board’s recommendation, as it speaks for the community.  He stated the concerns are for increased density, putting pressure on the infrastructure, and the potential for additional flooding.

 

Julian Linderauer stated he is on the Board of Directors of the North Merritt Island Homeowners Association; and he has heard from people in Sunset Lakes who have concerns with the problem of flooding if this type of construction is allowed to proceed.  He stated granting EU to the subject property would open the doors to any developer who wants to further commend to higher intensity housing.  He stated the previous speakers have given the Board good reason to deny the request; and requested the Board deny the request. 

 

Chair Voltz inquired if Mr. Sweeney would be amenable to just one more home; with Mr. Sweeney responding he would not be; all of the houses in the area are one-half to one-third of an acre; Mr. Doepel has 11 houses on the side of him and from his property to the end of the subject property, there are less than five houses; and he does not see how that is fair.  He noted Doug Bryan had previously submitted an application for rezoning, and his neighbors told him if the zoning went forward, then they would not be able to keep the parcel behind it from being rezoned.  He stated he would not do anything to hurt North Merritt Island, the subject property is an eyesore because the grass is mowed only once a month; and there could be three beautiful houses on it. 

 

Chair Voltz stated she is thinking the request will be denied, or else he can have only one other house on it.  Mr. Sweeney stated that does not help him with the price of the property. 

 

Commissioner Pritchard stated he is not going to support the request because he does not think two more houses could fit on the property; RR-1 zoning would work with the one additional house; but he can understand the concern Mr. Sweeney has.  He stated RR-1 used to be the standard on North Merritt Island, and then came the subdivisions; and he finds it interesting that the people who live on four units per-acre complain about density.  He advised Mr. Sweeney the Board is considering RR-1.

 

Mr. Sweeny commented Mr. Adcock is representing the property owner, and he should be the one to agree to RR-1.  Robert Adcock stated he does not know if the owners would accept RR-1.  Commissioner Pritchard stated it may be best to come back in October.

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to table Item VI.B.3. to the October 5, 2006 meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Zoning Manager Rick Enos stated it has come to staff’s attention that there was a motion to approve CUP for alcohol for Item VI.B.4., which failed, but the Board did not follow up with a motion to deny, and it will need to make a motion to deny.

 

Commissioner Colon asked Mr. Enos if this is regarding the zoo.  Mr. Enos responded there was a motion to approve, which failed by a 2:3 vote, so the Board did not take any action, and now it needs to make a motion to deny.

 

Chair Voltz passed the gavel to Vice Chair. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough to deny Item VI.B.4.  Motion did not carry.  Commissioners Voltz, Scarborough, and Colon voted Aye.  Commissioners Prithcard and Carlson voted Nay. Commissioner Carlson noted Commissioner Colon voted to deny the item the first time; and inquired if Commissioner Colon is opposed to denying it now, but was okay with it before.  Commissioner Colon stated she approves the request now.  Chair Voltz inquired if Commissioner Colon was changing her vote, with Commissioner Colon responding she wants to allow the zoo to serve alcohol. 

 

Commissioner Carlson stated the record shows that the denial does not have three votes, so another motion needs to be made. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Item VI.B.4.  Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough and Voltz voted nay.

 

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

 

 

 

 

ATTEST:                                                                     _________________________________

                                                                                    HELEN VOLTZ, CHAIR

                                                                                    BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

                                                                                    BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

___________________

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

 

 

            (S E A L)