MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

August 30, 2005

 

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special session on August 30, 2005, at 5:30 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Ron Pritchard, D.P.A., Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Helen Voltz, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

 

 

The Invocation was given by Chairman Pritchard.

 

 

Commissioner Voltz led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if there is an ordinance that addresses storage pods; with County Manager Peggy Busacca responding no. Ms. Busacca advised the Board has directed staff to work on the issue; and it will be coming to the Board in October, and is going to the LPA in September. Commissioner Voltz stated it has been a while; with Ms. Busacca advising of staff shortages in Planning and Zoning and the priority of the Small Area Plans.

 

 

 

Chairman Pritchard wished Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten and Space Coast Government Television’s Anda Skambraks a happy birthday.

 

 

 

Chairman Pritchard stated he was presented a plaque by the North Merritt Island 11-year Old All-Stars, District 22, Section 3 Champions, Florida State Final Four; they ended up losing to Maitland, which went to the Little League World Series; and he is very proud of them for doing an outstanding job.

 

Chairman Pritchard advised his grandson is a member of the Warner Robbins Little League, which won the Minor League West All-Stars District 5 Championship.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maureen Rupe stated Commissioner Pritchard informed the public on August 23, 2005, that he had posted a rebuttal to Florida TODAY on the District 2 website; and requested a policy be implemented for the entire website. She stated she does not want taxpayer dollars to be used by a Commissioner to insult fellow Commissioners, verbally abuse the citizens, or attack County staff; and commented on right to be heard with civility. She advised nothing can be politically right that is morally wrong.

 

Chairman Pritchard inquired if Ms. Rupe is saying everyone has a right to be heard by him.

 

 

 

Amy Tidd advised it was reported in the Orlando Sentinel that Polk County raised its transportation impact fees by 175%, effective in October 2005, from $2,700 to $7,447 for a single-family home, by unanimous vote. She stated it was noted that this could change if property tax to fund roads was increased in September; other Commissions are handling the road issues; and commented on Indian River County. She advised Brevard County is $350 million in the hole; last week the Board voted $40 million to bond out Local Option Gas Taxes, which is a start; and requested the Board put the issue of impact fees on the Agenda so there can be public discussion on it. She commented on getting money from growth instead of taking it from citizens who are not causing the impact, how other counties are handling the issue, and growth paying its fair share. She requested attacks on websites not be funded by taxpayer dollars; and commented on inappropriate attacks on employers, businesses in the area, fellow Commissioners, and citizens. She stated Commissioner Pritchard said her view was the minority when it came to the EEL referendum, but 70% agreed with her. She stated there are always different viewpoints, and they all need to be listened to.

 

Chairman Pritchard stated that is not what he said.

 

 

 

Marlene Adams submitted paperwork; and stated she is present to address the use of the public website to talk badly about citizens, the newspaper, and whomever does not agree with Commissioner Pritchard. She stated she has submitted a copy of the original email to Commissioner Pritchard and his response; and she has included her comments. She stated Commissioner Pritchard’s comment was, "I do represent all of the people generally . . . people that oppose me and my common sense approach to managing issues have a biased interest." She stated Commissioner Pritchard represents those who do not oppose him; and if people oppose him, he views them as wrong. She inquired where is it written that members of the public must be held accountable by their elected representatives; and advised that is backwards. She stated Commissioner Pritchard said, "if your input is emotional, biased, and generally fabricated, I consider it to be erroneous." She commented on her right to come before the Board to voice concerns, the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees, accountability, and serving the public as a whole. She stated Commissioner Pritchard said, "As

 

for Florida TODAY, if you support them, that speaks volumes"; and inquired if that gives Commissioner Pritchard the right to discredit people who agree with the newspaper.

 

Chairman Pritchard stated he finds the submittal to be interesting, but some was taken out of context; and there is no sense in addressing it now. He stated he stands behind what he writes, what he does, and behind the research he conducts; and he stands behind his position to represent all the people by taking input from all the people, not small vocal minorities that clamor for things over and over again regardless of what the general population wants. He commented on parking and the incorporation of Port St. John.

 

Commissioner Carlson requested Mr. Knox describe what actions can be taken for any individual having a concern over the content of anyone’s website in terms of ethics or anything like that.

 

Chairman Pritchard stated he had numerous phone calls and emails in support.

 

County Attorney Scott Knox stated if someone has a complaint they can file it with the Ethics Commission, which is the only body having any jurisdiction over individual County Commissioners; and one can always file a written complaint to the Ethics Commission. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Board has any policies over content of websites; with Mr. Knox responding he is not aware of any restriction on what is put on websites. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Commissioner Carlson would like to limit the website content to the truth; with Commissioner Carlson responding the definition of truth has to be based on fact. Chairman Pritchard advised he always speaks the truth.

 

 

 

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance regulating parking, locating, and storage of vehicles and equipment.

 

*County Attorney Scott Knox’s absence and Assistant County Attorney Terri Jones’ presence were noted at this time.

 

Chairman Pritchard commented on conduct at the meeting; and advised there are deputies who will warn the first time and remove people the second time as there cannot be a free-for-all at the meeting. He suggested keeping comments to a minimum; advised he put together parking suggestions and they have been distributed; and if anyone agrees with the suggestions, they can let the Board know. He requested individuals address specific suggestions.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she likes the suggestions that were put together by the County Attorney; and all the issues that could be potentially discussed are included. Chairman Pritchard stated there should be a mesh between the suggestions and the worksheet.

 

Assistant County Attorney Terri Jones stated anyone who lives within city or town limits is not affected by the proposed ordinance, which is only for the unincorporated area. She advised she is the prosecutor for Code Enforcement cases; what was happening is that the old Code was so confusing it was necessary to have a zoning expert at every hearing to explain to the Special Magistrate what the Code said; and inquired if it was necessary to do that, how is the average citizens supposed to understand the Code. She commented on amending the Code, losing focus, bringing the issue to the Board’s attention 18 months ago, and holding seven public hearings on the issue. She stated under the old Code, commercial property owners could not park their trucks in their own commercial lots, so a flower shop owner could not park his delivery truck in his commercial lot; and another issue concerned Ford F150’s and F250’s. She stated if someone had a Ford F250 for his personal use, it would be illegal while a neighbor could have a Ford F150, which Ford classified as a personal vehicle, with signage, racks, and commercial paraphernalia, and it would be legal, which did not make sense. She stated the other issue was driveway expansion; displayed a photo; and commented on what is illegal today in terms of parking on driveway expansions. She stated they are balancing the rights of a property owner to use his property as he or she sees fit versus the rights of neighbors to maintain their property values; and the job of the Board today is to balance both sides in a fair and equitable manner.

 

Commissioner Colon requested the picture be shown that started the discussion; with Attorney Jones advising it is the boat on jacks. Commissioner Colon stated they are trying to figure how to stop that. Attorney Jones commented on property values of neighboring properties. Commissioner Colon stated the Board needs feedback on what people agree with regarding parking. Attorney Jones displayed a picture of a boat on a driveway parked legally now and advised it meets the setback of five feet from the property line, so it is legal as the Code is currently written.

 

Code Enforcement Director Bobby Bowen stated there are two areas of confusion; and the first is the front setback from the front property line, which was discussed at the last meeting. He stated there was discussion about why they could not park right up to the property line; and explained about the sight triangle, dangers to pedestrians when vehicles are backing out, and maintenance of the five-foot setback for purposes of health and safety.

 

Discussion ensued on front setbacks, Mr. Bowen’s recommendation, maintenance of sight triangle, and enforcement.

 

Mr. Bowen stated the second issue involved parking of boats in the seven and one-half foot side setback of a property; the setback is a zoning issue; if a permanent structure is being put there, it requires a seven and one-half foot setback; but putting a boat there would not count because it could be moved.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if it is all right to put a movable object in the seven and one-half foot setback, why is it not all right to put it in the five-foot setback. Chairman Pritchard inquired if someone could park a car with the rear bumper at the sidewalk; with Mr. Bowen responding yes. Chairman Pritchard inquired what is the difference; with Mr. Bowen responding the idea is
to maintain a sight triangle. Chairman Pritchard inquired about a van parked with the rear bumper at the sidewalk. Mr. Bowen commented on vehicles being moved, motor homes and boats being parked for long periods of time, and health and safety issue of maintaining a sight triangle.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired why the sight triangle is needed when the boat is parked; and stated there could be a tree or a bush that is not movable blocking the field of vision as well. Mr. Bowen stated that could be, but a reasonable person would want the sight triangle there; it is for health and safety of pedestrian and vehicle traffic; it is there today; and staff recommends keeping it.

 

Commissioner Colon inquired about protocol for the meeting; and suggested getting feedback from the citizens and then answering all questions at one time. She stated she hopes they make a decision today so the citizens do not have to come back. Commissioner Voltz stated if something comes up, she wants to be free to ask a question. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Commissioner Colon is proposing they write down the questions and at the end of public speaking respond to the questions; with Commissioner Colon responding they have done it before and it seems to run more smoothly. She reiterated she hopes they are able to take action so the citizens do not have to come back again. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Commissioner Colon is suggesting they respond to questions at the end of public comment; with Commissioner Colon responding yes. Chairman Pritchard stated that is what they will do.

 

Chairman Pritchard displayed pictures taken in Villa de Palmas. He explained the procedure and time constraints for addressing the Board; and recommended avoiding repetition.

 

Jay Adamson commented on the five-foot easement, relocating, and Chairman Pritchard’s behavior at the August 23, 2005 meeting. He requested a motion to allow Vice Chair Voltz to conduct the remainder of the meeting and any following meetings that pertain to parking of vehicles in residential communities, or as an alternative, to allow the Vice Chair to take over the remainder of the current Chairman’s term.

 

John Watkins commented on the suggested changes; suggested those wanting restrictions move to a gated community; and requested the Board allow property owners to use their properties in a reasonable way.

 

Robert Scorah advised of use of his motor home for health purposes, hardship of parking it anywhere other than at home, regulation of parking being discriminatory; and stated he agrees with regulations, but if it is parked on someone’s property, it should be their business.

 

Harvey Baker commented on the parking suggestions; and expressed support for parking on the side of one’s property. He suggested there should be parking of one watercraft or RV, but not both at a residence; all parking should be on a concrete driveway; watercraft or RV must not block a sidewalk, street, or vision of traffic; parking in driveway should not force other vehicles to be parked in street or grass; all should have current stickers and be in operating condition;
15-foot height restriction; no restrictions if parked in enclosed garage; and no living in RV or watercraft while parked in driveway. He commented on lot sizes and Chairman Pritchard’s representation of citizens.

 

John Durkee commented on government; and stated the proposed regulations do not enhance public safety and will create intrusive selectively enforced laws. He commented on allowing pickup trucks and passenger vans to be parked at residences be added, parking of recreational vehicles, enjoyment of recreational vehicles, majority of properties being less than half-acre, size of garages; access to backyards, legislating lifestyle, cost of storage, height and length of RV’s and boats, and choice to live in deed restricted communities. He requested the Board not vote tonight but redo the plan.

 

Jeff Theroux advised of having a dirt driveway, parking of commercial vehicles with same rules as RV’s, and effect of rules on his neighbors.

 

Ted Holm stated he agrees with the way the Board is going; recommended getting away from qualifying and quantifying and allowing one or the other with no restrictions on height and length as long as parking is within the setbacks. He advised of inability to access his side or back yards.

 

John Turla commented on living in unincorporated Brevard County, parking suggestions, discrimination against businesses, size of lots, charter boat captains, and two-vehicle option with no size limitation. He stated if the Board passes the ordinance as proposed no one will want to live here.

 

Randall Branch advised of his choice to live in unincorporated Brevard County, size of property, sight triangle, length restrictions, parking behind fence lines, parking of commercial vehicles, and living in unincorporated area to be free of homeowners associations and deed restrictions.

 

Dennis Solis stated the proposal discriminates against the working people of the County; and advised of lack of support for proposal, control by neighborhood associations and deed restrictions, enjoyment of outdoor lifestyle, lack of garage, and sufficient existing regulations. He advised of his intent to vote with his time and wallet during the next elections.

 

Chairman Pritchard stated prior to the last two meetings the vast majority of people were supporting more regulation.

 

Paul Pettit stated he agrees with what Mr. Solis said.

 

Samantha Branch commented on ability to choose where and how one lives, parking of commercial vehicles, vehicles blocking the roads, and not wanting to be regulated to the point where she feels she has a homeowners association.

 

Robert Davis expressed agreement with previous comments, and support for no size or height limits, parking anywhere side or back on any surface, and no barriers.

 

Edward Arvonio inquired what can be built in the seven and one-half foot setback area; and voiced displeasure with the residential parking ordinance being proposed. He commented on existing ordinances, clutter, distance between homes, benefit to storage unit owners, and limited number of complaints. He stated any ordinance that is so restrictive should be put to a vote of all County residents.

 

Attorney Jones stated several speakers requested the Board not pass the ordinance; but if the ordinance is defeated without any changes, there will be no commercial vehicles allowed on residential property because that is how it is written today, so if someone wants to allow commercial vehicles, they will want an amendment to the Ordinance. She stated the driveway expansion is also a liberalization of the Ordinance; and what she is hearing is a desire for amendment to the Ordinance. She stated a stopgap was passed in May to continue the commercial vehicle discussion; and this is for the unincorporated area only. She stated there was also abatement of the commercial vehicles so that is why there are no current Code Enforcement cases; but if the ordinance is defeated, the abatement will end and no commercial vehicles will be allowed on residential properties. Commissioner Colon advised it does not affect the 15 municipalities.

 

Andy Selvaraj commented on noise impacts versus visual impacts. He stated he has no problem with a neighbor having a boat; but there is nothing he can do about noise.

Harold McDonald commented on amendment to allow commercial vehicles on residential property, eyesores, boat repairs, and condominiums.

 

Richard Lee commented on loosening the Code, length and height restrictions, opaque fences, and small yards. He stated if something can fit in the yard and meet the setbacks, and is not blocking the view of those coming down the street, it is fine. He advised of the length of motor homes; and suggested eliminating length requirements. He stated he has no problem with commercial vehicles as long as it is not a dump truck or garbage truck.

 

Alyssa Marcoux advised she is ten years old and concerned about how much freedom she will have by the time she is twenty years old. She commented on parking in her neighborhood, choice to live in non-deed restricted neighborhood, provisions of the Constitution, and infringement of rights. She suggested if the ordinance is adopted tonight, the Commissioners should read the Federalist Papers and Constitution. She read a statement from a neighbor, Robert Peterson, concerning his commercial vehicle.

 

Darlene Marcoux commented on the types of businesses affected, reasons to park a commercial vehicle at a home, businesses operated from homes, use of her cargo vans for personal and business, clutter, pitting blue collar employment against white collar employment, selective enforcement of current Ordinance, anonymous Code Enforcement complaints, protection of individual and property rights, and legislating opinion. She advised of the prediction of Thomas Jefferson that the natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and liberty to yield and the opinion of James Madison in 1788 regarding abridgement of
freedom by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power; and commented about recent Supreme Court decisions taking away property rights and the Patriot Act, which takes away more freedoms than people realize. Ms. Marcoux stated the old Code was wrong; she appreciates the Board’s attempt to amend it; but amending it will not make it right; and suggested abolishing it. She commented on the duties of elected officials.

 

Peri Campbell stated she agrees the current Ordinance needs to be tweaked; and reminded the Board it is not a homeowners’ association.

 

John Lynn advised he lives in a gated community with deed restrictions; but people who choose to live outside of gated restricted communities should not be restricted by County government.

 

J. D. Galloway advised he agrees with most of what he has heard tonight; and commented on working out of his home, inability to afford a larger place, moving to Brevard County from Broward County, need to address issues, and no need to be told what to do on his property.

 

Chris Milner commented on the suggestion list, service from commercial vehicles, and parking of law enforcement vehicles on lawns. He advised he is against what has been going on; and it needs to be gotten rid of.

 

Floyd Rippetoe commented on unincorporated areas not wanting to become deed restricted communities, property values, choosing Brevard County as a residence, postcard Florida, and boats parked in the yard indicating freedom and flexibility. He stated the Board has opened a can of worms; and recommended rescinding the amendment.

 

Kevin Barfield stated the other speakers have covered everything; and he has faith that the Board will make the right decision.

 

Capt. Bob Barfield, President of the Canaveral Charter Captains Association, advised he agrees with most of the things that have been said; and commented on Brevard County being a blue collar community. He noted he is a charter boat captain; just about all charter boat captains who operate out of Port Canaveral drive their marked trucks home; and commented on operating a business out of his home, boat in his driveway meeting current setbacks, sign on his truck, and allowing parking as long as homes are maintained in a reasonable manner.

 

Bill Taylor advised of his choice of a home without restrictions; stated he has no problem with commercial vehicles or recreational vehicles; and he does not want restrictions on height or length.

 

David Pasley, Director for Citizens for Florida Waterways, commented on access to waterways, restrictions being too narrowly defined, problems in other counties, and restrictions in other counties. He suggested looking at what other counties have done.

 

Art Pearce recommended abolishing the current and proposed ordinances; and stated if any parking suggestion is used, it should be that the vehicle needs to be tagged, and if it fits on the property, it can be done. He commented on property lines and setbacks.

 

Charles Williams advised of the size of his motor home, complaints from neighbors, and parking suggestions. He expressed preference for parking the unit next to the home rather than in the driveway.

 

Russ Rivers, member of the Canaveral Charter Captains’ Association, commented on incorporated and unincorporated Brevard County, signage on trucks, boat parking, and common sense.

 

Lois Lacoste commented on visibility, size of property, meeting setbacks, height restrictions at least six feet above six-foot barrier, commercial vehicles parked in side or back yards behind opaque fence, commercial vehicle parked in garage, lot size restriction at half-acre or more, fairness, and signage. She advised the unincorporated areas should be less restrictive; and requested the Board stop government control in unincorporated Brevard County. She commented on small business owners bringing their vehicles home to better serve the community’s needs, blue collar workers, and waiting lists for storage units.

 

Bob Harper requested the Ordinance be rescinded; and commented on fixing the rules and unincorporated areas.

 

Clifford Golm expressed opposition to limiting personal recreational vehicles and recreational equipment, and limits on size of boats. He commented on stabilizing property boats are sitting on, driveway on side of building, blue collar workers with commercial vehicles, and quick response.

 

Jeff Sink, member of the Florida Sportsman Fishing Forum, expressed support for axing the new regulations; and advised of a list of proposed regulations. He commented on illegal parking of commercial vehicles, driveway expansion, and need to address those issues. He suggested removing all length, width, and height restrictions; clearly establish the setbacks; add to the definition of recreational equipment such that multiple pieces of equipment stored on one trailer will be considered one piece of equipment; allow recreational vehicle equipment to be located in unenclosed carport, rear or side yard, or other stabilized area that meets all setback requirements; all boats must be stored on trailers and trailer and vessel registration must be current; and allow any combination of two commercial, recreational vehicles, or equipment to be visible from the front yard.

 

Peter Murphy commented on his RV, which is parked on the side of his house and is visible; and recommended the issue of commercial vehicles be straightened out.

 

Paul Armstrong advised he appreciates the Board’s courage to address the previous Board’s negative bias against small business; and commented on problems of small business owners.

 

Chairman Pritchard advised currently it is not legal to park anything behind the fence that is visible; and there have been numerous citations.

 

Victor Raynor stated the audience is failing to recognize that what the Board is trying to do is loosen the present Ordinance; and advised of receiving a citation for a rental property where someone parked a boat trailer in the front yard. He commented on eliminating previous Code, attempts of the Board to help, and freedom to have and enjoy vehicles. He inquired about height restrictions and opaque barrier heights.

 

Scott Fifield stated he has a cargo trailer that he tows a race car in; he does not want to park it in a public area; he would like to park it in his yard; and advised he is going before the Special Magistrate again on Thursday.

 

Chairman Pritchard stated currently the Board allows anonymous complaints; he does not think there should be anonymous complaints; and requested everyone think about that issue during the break.

 

The meeting recessed at 7:43 p.m. and reconvened at 8:00 p.m.

 

Carl Holland advised of need for prompt response by repairmen; and stated commercial vehicles need to be parked where the people can get to them. He advised he has a motor home and a boat and a driveway that is big enough for both; and commented on not needing a barrier fence and renters not being able to put up a fence.

 

John Bibby commented on parking of motor homes and boats, extension of driveways, backing RV in parking slot, visitors staying in motor home, and need to park commercial vehicles at residences. He advised of the need for positive change.

 

Steven Webster, Vice President of Citizens for Florida Waterways, commented on losing slips in the County, Manatee Protection Plan, trailering boats, insufficient parking at boat ramps, not allowing boats to be parked in front of houses, the Mike Erdman Scion van, eyesores, rescinding the ban against parking commercial vehicles at residences, and enforcing setbacks to insure there are no vehicles hanging in the right-of-way as a safety issue. He noted postcards from Florida feature the beach, bikinis, and boats in a marina; and inquired why a boat in a marina is beautiful but in someone’s front yard it is ugly. He requested the Board define this simply in terms of setbacks for safety and rescind the rest of it.

 

Douglas Carney commented on the Board trying to deal with a can of worms, being a boat owner, discrimination against commercial vehicles with signage, signage on government vehicles, visual triangle, fencing, boats on trailers, canoes and kayaks, and clarification of stabilized areas. He stated this will be a law for unincorporated Brevard; but often municipalities adopt County and State laws; and people in municipalities need to be concerned. He recommended the Board amend the law and fix it.

 

Paul Partloz advised Chairman Pritchard’s suggestions allow one vehicle per lot; that is too restrictive; and he would like to see two vehicles allowed per lot. He stated it is time to table the item and rewrite it.

 

Tom Flynn commented on remaining fair to everyone, lot sizes, and not restricting number of vehicles as long as they fit within setbacks.

 

Richard Phillips commented on percentage of houses with boats and trailers, gated communities, expansion pad for boat, commercial vehicles, restrictions on commercial vehicles by number of axles or weight, houses on canals, allowing number of vehicles that will fit within setbacks, and unsightly boats. He recommended loosening the regulations on commercial vehicles and not coming down too hard on boaters.

 

Herrill Herring stated he runs a small business; advised of Code Enforcement action, which resulted in addition of one and one-half hours to his workday and a 30-mile commute to where he parks his vehicle; and requested relief by allowing commercial vehicles to be parked in residential neighborhoods. He commented on the financial impact of not being able to park at his home and people doing what they wish with their properties.

 

Nicholas Kateb stated he agrees with a lot of what has been said already; and commented on gravel driveways, expansion driveways, Code Enforcement complaints, and visual triangle. He requested the Board enforce the current laws.

 

Barbara Benn commented on fairness, responsibility, maintenance of property, street parking, and emergency vehicles; and requested the Board not do away with the old Code or proposed Code as something is needed.

 

Patricia Knittel stated the residents of Villa de Palmas do not want commercial vehicles to be parked in residential neighborhoods.

 

Betsy Keenan, member of the Merritt Island Redevelopment Beautification Committee and Keep Brevard Beautiful, commented on moving from Broward County to an area with fewer restrictions, canal-front living, and ownership of multiple boats.

 

Tom Page, President of Villa de Palmas Homeowners Association, advised of the configuration of Villa de Palmas, emergency vehicles, street parking, dangers to pedestrians, smaller lots, and number of vehicles.

 

John Venice commented on hiring sufficient Code Enforcement officers to enforce the amended Code, enforcement based on complaints, 18-wheelers parked in subdivisions, and eliminating anonymous calls to Code Enforcement.

 

Kenny Boyd read quotes from John Adams on property rights and Thomas Paine on government; and commented parking at businesses and working things out between neighbors.

 

Attorney Jones advised there is a misconception about how the Code is written; before the stopgap measure was enacted in May, it was not legal to park any commercial vehicles on BU-1 property; the Code that passed in May said larger vehicles have to be located in a back loading dock area; but smaller vehicles can park anywhere as long as they meet the site plan. She advised there are two sets of commercial vehicles, one is the big semi-trucks, front loaders, box trucks, and that type of vehicle, and the second includes pickup trucks, cargo vans, and passenger vans; so an air conditioning truck could be parked on BU-1 property anywhere that is available on the site plan.

 

Commissioner Colon stated there is a lot that is confusing people. Attorney Jones stated a lot of people have misconceptions about the two different types of commercial vehicles; what they are talking about today are the pickup trucks, passenger vans, and cargo vans; and the larger vehicles are treated specially because they are big, wear out roads, and have those types of issues. She advised of the action taken in May 2005.

 

Robert Lee requested no size limitation on boats and vehicles be allowed to be stored in side yard areas up to the lot line; and advised storage yards for boats are being rapidly redeveloped for other uses, marinas can charge up to $10 a foot, and keeping a boat in one’s yard allows it to be kept powered up and shipshape.

 

Brad Freed advised of Code Enforcement citation, fencing, storage of boat on grass, and ownership of jet skis and ATV, which are parked out of sight; and stated he agrees with elimination of anonymous complaints. He commented on his specific citation and actions taken to comply, anonymous complaints, height restrictions, and verifying that complaints are from individuals who are affected.

 

Henry Happel commented on adverse effects on small businesses; and recommended not adopting the proposed ordinance and holding a workshop with the public. He recommended a temporary amendment to the present Code to allow commercial vehicles on a limited basis to be parked at homes.

 

Marcelle Kinney commented on having company stay in motor homes, limits on anonymous complaints; and suggested deleting A and B, renumbering C, and deleting the first sentence of D on page 4 of the proposed ordinance. She recommended striking the provisions limiting number and location.

 

Danielle Walbroehl commented on anonymous complaints, dealing with neighbors, living in unincorporated areas to not have restrictions, inability to park in backyard, and financial considerations.

 

Chairman Pritchard inquired if any of the Commissioners live in unincorporated Brevard County; with Commissioners Scarborough, Voltz, Carlson, and Colon responding no. Chairman Pritchard stated he is the only one who lives in unincorporated Brevard County; he believes in smaller less intrusive government; and commented on listening to people for the past eight
months, vast majority being opposed, deed restricted communities, homeowners associations, and anonymous complaints. Chairman Pritchard suggested wiping the slate clean on the ordinance and looking at something more reasonable such as any vehicles must be parked within setbacks. He stated vehicles should not encroach on the sidewalks; but since Code Enforcement is reactive rather than proactive, not all of them get called. He stated any boat, personal watercraft, etc. must be on a trailer and have current registrations. Commissioner Scarborough inquired about canoes; with Chairman Pritchard responding canoes and kayaks would be excepted, and non-motorized vessels under 16 feet are no registered.

 

Attorney Jones commented on registration of vehicles and derelict vessels already covered by Code, measuring trailers and boats, front setbacks, sight lines, municipal government codes, and boats on docks being exempt.

 

Code Enforcement Director Bobby Bowen stated the number of complaints last year regarding commercial vehicle parking at homes was nearly 700; and commented on driveway expansions, permits, and side setbacks. Chairman Pritchard inquired if there is a setback for flatwork; with Mr. Bowen responding no. Ms. Busacca advised if it is in an easement and the County or power company needs to remove it, that removal would be done by the company and replacement would be by the property owner, so there is that risk. Mr. Bowen provided an example.

 

Commissioner Voltz commented on her house being flooded and quick response, not limiting number of vehicles visible from street, not limiting size of property as long as setbacks are met, not limiting size of vehicles, not requiring opaque barrier, not regulating size of signage on vehicles, and parking of commercial vehicles. She stated if they meet the setbacks, there should be no complaints; she lives in a deed restricted community; she does not own a boat; and that is her choice. She stated she is not saying everyone should be living with deed restrictions; and commented on stepping on property rights, unintended consequences, and anonymous calls by people who are afraid of consequences. She stated if they use the setbacks, that will limit the number, size, and all the other things.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired about number of complaints on boats, RV’s, and golf carts. He stated the lot defines what is acceptable; and size is the limiting factor.

 

Discussion ensued on configuration of lots, calls on various range of vehicles, variety of complaints, blocking sidewalks, suggested changes, setbacks, backing vehicles into driveways, parking in right-of-way increasing liability to County, sizes of rights-of-way, setback from property line, combinations of vehicles, signage, and parking on roads.

 

Attorney Jones commented on boats on trailers and catamarans.

 

Discussion ensued on motorized vessels, vessels on jacks, working on boats, visibility from street, and parking of 18-wheelers.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, to accept all six suggestions, (1) Remove all length, width, and height restrictions from the amendment; (2) establish setbacks as follows: streets with sidewalks - one foot on house side of sidewalk, streets without sidewalks - five feet from street edge or curb, side streets with sidewalk - one foot on house side of sidewalk, and side street without sidewalk - five feet from street edge or curb; (3) add to definition of recreational equipment, multiple equipment pieces stored on one trailer will be considered one piece of recreational equipment; (4) allow recreational vehicle/equipment to be located in an unenclosed carport, rear or side yard, on a driveway, driveway expansion, or other stabilized area that meets all setback requirements; (5) allow any combination of two commercial/recreational vehicles/equipment to be visible from the front yard, limiting commercial vehicles to pickup trucks, cargo vans, and passenger vans only; and (6) all boats must be stored on trailers and trailer and vessel registration must be current.

 

 

Commissioner Carlson stated she had an issue with the setbacks; and stated she would support the five feet from the sidewalk because of the safety issues. Ms. Busacca advised it is a setback from the property line because there may not be a sidewalk. Commissioner Carlson stated five feet from the property line, not the front setback; and she can agree with that if Commissioner Voltz wishes to make that clarification in the motion.

 

Discussion ensued on setbacks and property lines.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she is going to leave it as a setback of one foot from the sidewalk. Ms. Busacca stated the sidewalk could be three feet from the property line; and suggested the setback be from the property line.

 

Discussion ensued on how Code Enforcement knows where the property line is, encroachment, liability issues, setback being the property line, removing all restrictions allowing 18-wheelers, multiple pieces of equipment, not parking on grass, eliminating suggestion #5, and limiting number of vehicles.

 

Ms. Busacca suggested changing number 1 to remove all length, width, height, and maximum number restrictions.

 

Discussion ensued on having a boat storage lot on residential lot, not making laws for the exception, recreational vehicles versus equipment, golf carts, stabilized areas, driveway expansion, responding to the public, leaving the regulations alone, visibility, boats on trailers, differences in sizes of vehicles and vessels, requiring boats that are transported on trailers to be stored on trailers, eliminating maximum number restriction, meeting setbacks, homeowners associations, and striking a balance.

 

Commissioner Scarborough suggested the larger the lot, the more lenient the Board can be. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board has been talking about this for eight months; and inquired how many from the other side are present. Commissioner Scarborough stated right now the
Board is responding and liberalizing the rules; as it goes in that direction, Code Enforcement will get fewer complaints; however, if the Board wipes out all the rules, they will hear from the others. He stated they want to respond to what the people are saying; but if the Board just lets anything happen, it may regret it.

 

Commissioner Colon stated she agrees with number 1 with no maximum number; number 2 is good; there is agreement on number 3; and inquired about number 4. Chairman Pritchard stated there was a problem there with stabilized areas; with Commissioner Colon responding they did not want that. Commissioner Colon stated number 5 is not necessary because that is dealt with in number 1; and for number 6, they can use Ms. Busacca’s wording. She stated they have to add a caveat for what Commissioner Scarborough was mentioning about 18-wheelers. She stated the people are saying to leave them alone; the Board is leaving them alone; and inquired how should they deal with 18-wheelers.

 

Commissioner Carlson stated the only thing they are missing is a number; she understands what Commissioner Scarborough is saying that everyone from the other side will complain there are ten vehicles on a quarter-acre lot; so if someone has a quarter-acre or less, they should be limited to two vehicles as outlined in number 5. Commissioner Colon inquired what if they have an RV and a boat but also have a small business. Commissioner Carlson stated if they are on a quarter-acre lot, it is too small to have all that on it. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is two visible from the front yard; and conceivably on a larger parcel, they may have things in the backyard. He stated if they want to go from two to a larger number, they can do that; but that gives some parameters. Commissioner Voltz stated they could go to four. Commissioner Colon suggested including number 5; and commented on compromise. Chairman Pritchard inquired what about number 5; with Commissioner Colon suggesting the Board take the recommendation. Chairman Pritchard suggested number 5 be changed to a combination of three under a quarter-acre. Commissioner Voltz agreed with three. Commissioner Scarborough inquired as a percentage of property, how much would normally have vehicles on it; and would exceeding 50% be pushing it; with Mr. Bowen responding he thinks so, but the Board could probably limit the number beyond the front building line. Commissioner Scarborough stated if someone paved more than 50% of the front of their property to park vehicles on, they could put three vehicles in an extremely small area; and suggested having some parameters that the entire parking area should not exceed 50% of the front of the building. Ms. Busacca inquired if Commissioner Scarborough means the width of the structure; with Commissioner Scarborough responding no, the width of the lot. Commissioner Carlson stated that does not matter because the Board already said they could park on the grass.

 

Discussion ensued on narrow lots, not meeting setbacks, dimensions of RV’s or boats, worst case scenario, leaving regulations alone, not making restrictions for tiny group, and eliminating numbers.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he will not be supporting any further action on the item; and the Board will be hearing from people later. Commissioner Colon stated she is not happy with it
either; but it is what the community is saying. Commissioner Scarborough advised the community that came out is aggrieved; there has been overly aggressive enforcement of the Ordinance; and if there is some egregious act, the Board will be readdressing it. Commissioner Colon stated at that time the Board should advise it already addressed the issue and they had the opportunity to come before the Board. Commissioner Voltz advised if someone is going to park seven or eight vehicles on their property, they are not going to care about the ordinance. Chairman Pritchard commented on the role of homeowners associations. Commissioner Colon commented on deed restricted areas.

 

Chairman Pritchard stated based on the discussion, numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 are good to go; and the addition to 6 is all boats that are transported on trailers must be on trailers.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to approve items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 with the addition that all boats that are transported on trailers must be stored on trailers. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Scarborough voted nay.

 

 

Commissioner Colon inquired how are they going to deal with 18-wheelers. Chairman Pritchard inquired are they talking about anything to do with lot size. Commissioner Scarborough stated if a person has heavy equipment and a larger lot in a more rural area, there may be farm equipment going down the road; and inquired why should they prevent a tow truck or something like that. He stated it has to be defined by the nature of the lot; and if the lot does not compel the restriction, he does not know why it should be restricted. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Commissioner Scarborough is looking at an acre; with Chairman Pritchard responding he is not looking at size, but the nature of the lot. Commissioner Scarborough stated a gentleman spoke earlier about having a tow truck; by having it at the home, he can be at the scene much sooner; he lives on a large lot; and if the vehicle is not visible from the road, it could be parked at the rear of the larger lot, which should suffice.

 

Attorney Jones stated there are four restrictions for RV’s; the RV cannot be used for commercial purposes; provisions for guest RV; all vehicles must be parked within the property lines; and all boats that can be transported on a trailer must be stored on the trailer. Chairman Pritchard advised they also removed all length, width, height, and number restrictions. Attorney Jones stated there will be four restrictions for recreational vehicles: (1) the recreational vehicle/equipment shall not be used for residential/commercial purposes; (2) a recreational vehicle may be connected to utilities to accommodate guests for no more than 14 consecutive days in any given month; (3) all vehicles must be parked within the property lines; and (4) if the boat must be transported on a trailer, it must be stored on a trailer. Chairman Pritchard stated there were also provisions about registration being current; with Attorney Jones advising that is already in the Code. Ms. Busacca inquired about the statement that no RV could be connected for more than 14 days. Attorney Jones stated a recreational vehicle may be connected to utilities to accommodate guests for no more than 14 consecutive days in any given month. Ms. Busacca inquired if the Board is regulating the length of time it is connected or the length of time that people stay.

 

Discussion ensued on having RV connected to utilities, occupancy, and use of RV by owners.

 

Attorney Jones suggested the recreational vehicle may be used to accommodate guests no more than 14 consecutive days in any given month.

 

Chairman Pritchard stated the Board needs to add the part about the RV’s.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve provisions for RV’s as follows: (1) the recreational vehicle/equipment shall not be used for residential or commercial purposes; (2) a recreational vehicle may be used to accommodate guests for no more than 14 consecutive days in any given month; (3) all vehicles must be parked within the property lines; and (4) if a boat must be transported on a trailer, it must be stored on a trailer.

 

 

Ms. Busacca inquired if there is no lot size; with Attorney Jones responding not, for RV’s.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is confused; he voted against the motion; and inquired if it does not apply to RV’s or boats. Attorney Jones stated those four items deal with recreational vehicles and equipment; and now the Board is going to talk about commercial vehicles. Commissioner Scarborough stated item 5 was eliminated; it stated specifically recreational and commercial vehicles; and the intent was to simultaneously recognize both. He inquired if the assumption is the motion he voted against applied only to recreational vehicles and not commercial; with Attorney Jones responding no, she was trying to clarify what the rules were for recreational equipment and vehicles, and the Board was going to discuss whether to include 18-wheelers and those kinds of vehicles.

 

Chairman Pritchard stated the motion was for recreational and commercial purposes; then the Board talked about 18-wheelers and construction stuff; and what Commissioner Scarborough said was to let the lot determine whether they can be there. He stated no one is going to be allowed to park an 18-wheeler on a street overnight; that is not the purpose of residential neighborhoods; but if someone has a lot of acreage, he or she can park it okay. Attorney Jones inquired if the Board is going to allow a semi-trailer on a quarter-acre lot if it can fit there; with Chairman Pritchard responding no. Attorney Jones inquired if the verbiage is for cargo vans, passenger vans, and pickup trucks. Chairman Pritchard stated a semi will not fit on a quarter-acre lot; with Attorney Jones responding she has three injunctions on trailers that are on smaller lots, and one is a quarter-acre lot. Chairman Pritchard stated that means lot size will not determine what can be parked there. Commissioner Scarborough stated there is apparently a third category that the Board has not addressed. Mr. Bowen stated for enforcement purposes, if his brother comes to live with him but he does not have an extra bedroom and puts him in an RV, do the time limits apply; with Commissioner Voltz responding it would be 14 days, because he would be a guest. Commissioner Scarborough suggested changing guest to occupant. Chairman Pritchard stated the wording can be, "occupancy not to exceed 14 days."

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated a gentleman has a Code Enforcement issue against him; he does not have an RV or a commercial vehicle; he has a trailer; and he wants to know where he falls within the ordinance. Commissioner Scarborough described the unit. Attorney Jones stated trailers are considered under the definition of commercial vehicles; and that is why she wants to nail down what the Board is going to allow. She inquired if it is for pickup trucks, cargo vans, passenger vans, and trailers; and noted before the Board had trailers 24 feet excluding the tongue. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board needs to address commercial vehicles. Commissioner Carlson stated the recommendation dealt with commercial and recreational vehicles. Chairman Pritchard stated as long as it fits on the property, the gentleman is good to go. Commissioner Carlson stated number 5 was allowing a combination of two commercial/recreational vehicles; and she is not sure it is anywhere else in the item, so the Board needs to include something. Commissioner Voltz suggested adding to number 4, "allow recreational/commercial vehicles. . . ." Chairman Pritchard stated that means if it fits on the property, it is good to go. Commissioner Scarborough stated if there is a deep lot, there could be some pretty big commercial vehicles; with Mr. Bowen responding there could be. Mr. Bowen advised he lives on a quarter-acre lot and could get an 18-wheeler on his property. Chairman Pritchard inquired what can the Board do about limiting heavy construction machinery and vehicles on lots of certain size. Attorney Jones suggested for x amount of lot or less, only allow cargo vans, pickup trucks, passenger vans, or trailers under x feet. She advised of two upcoming cases involving larger vehicles.

 

Discussion ensued on abatement, not having final draft, vehicles under ten wheels, no parking of larger trucks in residential areas, heavy equipment, lot sizes, and dump trucks.

 

Attorney Jones read aloud the definition for commercial vehicles. Commissioner Scarborough compared a realtor’s vehicle with a sign and a cement truck; and stated there is a lot of difference between the two. Commissioner Carlson read aloud suggestion number 5. Discussion resumed on commercial vehicles. Attorney Jones stated the compromise is pickup trucks, passenger vans, and cargo vans, which are defined, and some provision for smaller cargo trailers. She stated what she is hearing is the Board does not want big trailers like outside of Wal-Mart, but a cargo trailer 24 feet would be allowed. Commissioner Carlson stated that would be fine as long as it fits within the property lines and the setbacks. Commissioner Scarborough indicated he does not want to include the cement truck.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to allow commercial/recreational vehicles/equipment to be visible from the front yard, and for this rule commercial vehicles will be limited to pickup trucks, cargo vans, passenger vans, and trailers. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Commissioner Colon inquired about property lines. A speaker advised his street has a 50-foot right-of-way; there are no sidewalks; grass goes right up to the road; and his property line is almost exactly 25 feet from the center of the road; there are utility easements on both sides of the road; and that takes away 12 feet of his driveway. He stated the ordinance will allow him to
have a trailer in his driveway but he has to be five feet behind the property line. Commissioner Voltz advised the limit is the property line. The speaker advised he loses 12 feet of his driveway because it is in the public right-of-way. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the speaker parks there; with the speaker responding he parks his private vehicles in his driveway every night. Chairman Pritchard inquired what is the harm; with Attorney Jones advising the harm is the County’s liability for permitting someone to put something in the right-of-way.

 

Discussion ensued on parking next to the road, difference between allowing it under the Code and not making the gentleman move, closing public comments, and bringing back ordinance in draft form.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board removed all height, length, and other restrictions as long as it meets setbacks; it had limits on the number of vehicles, but that has been removed; and to the extent a person can fit vehicles in the front of the property, it would be unlimited except as restricted by the setbacks; and he has continuing problems with it.

 

Commissioner Colon inquired when would it come back. Chairman Pritchard suggested it come back to a zoning meeting. Attorney Jones advised it has to be tabled to a date certain because it is a public hearing. Commissioner Voltz stated it is not being tabled. Commissioner Carlson stated it will be reviewed under Unfinished Business or Consent. Attorney Jones advised to pass the ordinance, it will have to be a public hearing. Commissioner Colon stated people should contact the Commissioners and they will advise when it will be on the agenda. Ms. Busacca advised if the Board does not wish to continue the public hearing, it will have to be readvertised. Discussion ensued on a date to continue the public hearing to. Attorney Jones advised she will post the proposed ordinance to the website.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to continue the public hearing to September 15, 2005 at 5:30 p.m. and abate all current Code Enforcement cases dealing with the Ordinance until September 15, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 10:54 p.m.

 

 

 

_____________________________________

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

 

_____________________

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)