[2:49] >>> board of county commissioners acts
[2:50] as a quasi-judicial body when it hears requests
[2:53] for rezoning and conditional
[2:55] use permits. Applicants must provide competent,
[2:56] substantial
[2:58] evidence establishing facts, or expert witness
[2:59] opinion testimony showing that the
[3:02] request meets the zoning
[3:04] code and comprehensive plan criteria. Opponents
[3:07] must also testify as to facts. The
[3:08] board must
[3:11] then decide whether the evidence demonstrates
[3:12] consistency and compatibility with
[3:14] the comprehensive plan and the existing
[3:16] rules in the zoning ordinance, property
[3:17] adjacent to the
[3:19] property to be rezoned, and the actual
[3:23] development of the surrounding area. The
[3:24] board
[3:25] cannot consider speculation, non-expert
[3:26] opinion testimony, or poll the
[3:28] audience by asking those in favor
[3:29] or opposed to stand
[3:32] up or raise their hands. If a commissioner
[3:34] has had communications regarding a rezoning
[3:35] or conditional use permit
[3:37] request before the board, the commissioner must
[3:41] disclose the subject of the communication and
[3:42] the
[3:43] identity of the person, group, or
[3:44] entity with
[3:49] whom the communication took place
[3:51] before the board takes action on the request. Like
[3:53] wise if the commissioner has made
[3:55] a site visit, inspection, or investigation, the
[3:57] commissioner must disclose that fact
[3:57] before
[3:59] the board takes action on the request. Each
[4:00] applicant is
[4:02] allowed a total of 15 minutes to present their
[4:03] request unless
[4:06] time is extended by the majority
[4:07] vote of the board. The applicant may
[4:09] reserve any portion of
[4:10] 15 minutes for rebus tat. Speakers
[4:12] may not pass their time to someone
[4:13] else
[4:14] in order to give that person more time to speak.
[4:18] >> good evening
[4:21] and welcome to the zoning meeting
[4:24] on july 11, 2024. I'd like to call
[4:25] the
[4:27] meeting to order. I'd like to
[4:30] start with a moment of
[4:33] silence. If we could, I'm not sure
[4:36] if all of you know, but former commissioner
[4:38] nancy higgs has passed away. I'd like
[4:39] you
[4:42] to keep that in mind for her family. Let's
[4:43] have
[4:45] a moment of silence.
[4:57] okay, thank you so much. Let's stand for the pledge.
[5:00] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america
[5:04] and to the republic for which it stands
[5:06] one nation
[5:08] under god indivisible with liberty and justice for
[5:12] all.
[5:21] okay, thank
[5:23] you so very much. I'm not sure, we've
[5:24] got a couple of different announcements
[5:27] we need to make on some of the agenda items. But
[5:30] before we get started, we had to cut
[5:33] our meeting short the other night,
[5:34] tuesday night,
[5:35] and I had something that I needed
[5:36] to get
[5:39] done as a request from the board,
[5:42] and that was I'm traveling to washington,
[5:45] d.c. With a group of 10 to 12 people on
[5:46] the
[5:47] brightline station, and I need the
[5:48] permission
[5:50] of the board to travel. Would somebody
[5:51] --
[5:52] >>
[5:54] so moved.
[5:55] >> a motion by
[5:57] commissioner pritchett. Second by
[5:58] commissioner
[5:59] tobia. Any discussion? All in favor
[6:00] signify by saying aye?
[6:01] >>
[6:01] aye.
[6:03] >> all opposed nay? Thank you very much.
[6:07] let's go right into the
[6:08] public comments, and we will go to
[6:13] h1, and
[6:16] jeff, go ahead,
[6:19] man.
[6:20] >>
[6:22] thank you, suzanne
[6:28] cook, request for
[6:31] a permit. Tax account number
[6:32] 2431745 located in district two. Mr. Chair,
[6:34] I wanted to point out during
[6:37] the planning and zoning board
[6:38] meeting, june 10, I mistakenly quoted
[6:40] the code
[6:43] of saying that the cup runs
[6:46] with the ownership,
[6:47] however, that's incorrect. It runs
[6:49] with the land. There is
[6:50] criteria for a guesthouse and one
[6:52] of that criteria
[6:55] is that
[6:58] the guesthouse cannot
[7:01] be rented out or used for short-term rental.
[7:02] >>
[7:04] okay,
[7:07] is
[7:13] ms cook here? Suzanne, please.
[7:16] >> I'm suzanne
[7:18] cook. The main problem was that we had just
[7:19] a
[7:22] few square feet short of an
[7:25] acre that was necessary. I do understand
[7:28] that I can't rent it out, and
[7:30] I have mentioned that casually to
[7:33] the fact that the economy is bad, and
[7:34] they asked
[7:36] me had I changed my mind, and I said
[7:37] certainly. I said
[7:40] I'll just sell the property if
[7:43] I
[7:45] can't pay the bills. That doesn't
[7:46] bother me.
[7:47] so the bottom line, that's it.
[7:48] >>
[7:49] okay, thank you
[7:52] so much. Commissioner goodson,
[7:54] do you have any comments?
[7:54] >> the only
[7:55] comment I
[7:56] would have. As long as she understands
[7:58] all the conditions, I
[8:00] have no problems with it. And you
[8:01] do
[8:02] understand all the conditions?
[8:03] >> yes, yes, sir.
[8:04] >> would
[8:06] you give us a motion, commissioner?
[8:07] >>
[8:07] yes, I
[8:10] would like for the approval
[8:13] and acceptance of this motion
[8:16] or this h1, yeah, h1, please.
[8:19] >> is there
[8:22] a second?
[8:23] >> second. >> any
[8:24] discussion? All in favor?
[8:24] >> aye. >>
[8:25] all opposed,
[8:26] nay? The motion carries. Thank you
[8:28] so very much.
[8:29] >> thank you.
[8:34] >> now jeff --
[8:36] >> mr. Chair, I think
[8:37] maybe commissioner goodson, do
[8:40] you want to say something on h2 before
[8:41] we start?
[8:42] >> on h2, I'd like to make a motion
[8:43] to continue
[8:45] the public hearing on this until november 7,
[8:46] giving the
[8:49] developer a chance to go back to the
[8:52] residence and see if he could
[8:55] come to a resolution of some sort
[8:56] that you're
[8:57] accepting with. I understand you're
[8:58] saying no, but
[9:01] let's give
[9:02] them 120 days. That's the motion.
[9:03] >>
[9:04] is
[9:06] there a second to that?
[9:07] >> jeff, do
[9:07] you want
[9:10] to say something first?
[9:11] >> okay. >> hold
[9:13] on, please. Just hold on.
[9:19] was there a second? Hearing no
[9:21] second to the motion, it fails. Let's
[9:22] go
[9:25] in had to jeff, please.
[9:26] >>
[9:27] thank you, mr. Chair. Item h2 is frank
[9:28] mastroianni, requests
[9:31] a change of
[9:34] zoning classification from
[9:37] bu-1
[9:39] and ru-2-10 to pud. Application numbers
[9:43] 23pud00001, tax account number
[9:46] is 2600118. Located
[9:48] in district two.
[9:48] >> yes, ma'am, go
[9:49] ahead.
[9:50] >> we already
[9:51] turned in all of our public records
[9:52] that I
[9:55] heard, except I did get
[9:58] a phone call today from miss debbie mayfield, mentioning
[10:01] the time limit that she had
[10:02] a concern being 120 days. I have to
[10:04] go ahead
[10:07] and let everyone know I heard
[10:10] from ms
[10:13] mayfield.
[10:14] >> mr. Chair,
[10:16] also regarding application
[10:17] 23pud00001 on july 11, the zoning
[10:21] --I spoke with mr. Michael via phone
[10:22] today, did not have time
[10:25] to put it in the call. It lasted approximately
[10:27] five minutes, during which we discussed
[10:30] his opposition to the item. Again,
[10:31] I did not have time to submit
[10:33] that since it happened today.
[10:34] >> yes,
[10:34] I've
[10:36] got a question.
[10:37] >> yes, sir? >> if
[10:37] we can't
[10:39] give people an opportunity to go back,
[10:40] they're very aware of
[10:43] the fact that they will probably
[10:45] not get what they requested. But we can't
[10:46] even allow them to have
[10:48] open discussions again to see if they
[10:49] can come to some resolution?
[10:52] >> okay.
[10:58] please do not do this tonight, okay. I
[10:59] know
[11:00] everybody is uptight and concerned,
[11:01] so we're going to get there this
[11:04] and do it in an adult fashion, and
[11:06] no talking from the audience. I would
[11:08] very much appreciate that. Thank you so very much.
[11:10] commissioner,
[11:12] if you'd like to try your motion one
[11:13] more time, try your motion one more time.
[11:16] >> well, yes, I
[11:19] would like to try the motion again. To
[11:20] give
[11:21] them the opportunity to go back and
[11:22] work with these people and
[11:24] come back. They're going to come through the
[11:25] same process. They're going to
[11:27] have to come back to planning and
[11:28] zoning with a new
[11:31] idea if it
[11:34] is acceptable to the people.
[11:35] >> is there
[11:37] a second?
[11:38] >> just a quick question. I don't think that
[11:40] motion, if we table it until that
[11:43] had date, I don't think that motion
[11:44] proceeds going
[11:44] back to planning and zoning. There
[11:46] is no necessity to go back to
[11:48] planning and zoning.
[11:48] >> wouldn't they
[11:49] go back? I'm
[11:51] sorry, mr. Chairman?
[11:51] >> yes, sir. If
[11:52] they come
[11:54] up with a different zoning criteria
[11:55] for a number
[11:58] of units, would they not have to go back
[11:59] for
[12:00] approval to zoning for that? I don't
[12:01] know, you tell me.
[12:04] >> mr. Chair? >> yes, sir, go
[12:05] ahead.
[12:07] >> if I was looking at this,
[12:07] I would
[12:10] make that extremely
[12:13] clear in the motion, and
[12:16] just --I looked at that,
[12:19] august 14 is the zoning meeting before
[12:20] that
[12:22] with a deadline of august 2 of submittal
[12:25] to make that november 7 date
[12:28] just for clarity sake. But you know,
[12:29] it's probably better
[12:31] for staff if that was actually put
[12:32] into the motion. I'm not
[12:34] saying I'm willing
[12:36] to go there. I'm just saying that
[12:37] I certainly wouldn't vote for
[12:39] it to come back here without having
[12:40] to
[12:42] go to planning and zoning again.
[12:42] >>
[12:43] you would not?
[12:44] >> I
[12:46] would not.
[12:47] >> yeah, I agree. I would not either.
[12:49] >> there is a motion on the floor. Is
[12:50] there a second? Commissioner
[12:51] pritchett, will you take the floor,
[12:52] please?
[12:53] >> yes, sir. >>
[12:55] I'm
[12:58] going
[12:59] to second your motion. Discussion. So
[13:01] commissioner pritchett, may I have the floor, please?
[13:05] I intend
[13:07] to hear everybody tonight that's here. So
[13:08] you're not
[13:09] going to come in here. It's not fair
[13:11] for
[13:12] you to come out here in vain. But I'd
[13:14] like
[13:15] to get this motion passed, and then
[13:17] we've got a couple
[13:19] of very quick zoning items that can
[13:20] be done,
[13:22] and we can spend whatever time is necessary, so
[13:23] that you can pour your heart
[13:26] out in regards to your request.
[13:29] I don't know whether this will
[13:32] pass or not.
[13:33] >> can I ask a
[13:33] question just for clarification here? Are
[13:35] the applicants
[13:36] here tonight?
[13:37] >> oh yeah, they're
[13:38] here, I believe.
[13:38] >>
[13:39] is michael the applicant?
[13:40] >> no, no.
[13:48] mr. Chair?
[13:50] >> yes? >> for the audience
[13:50] who
[13:51] showed up for this item, first of all thank
[13:53] you for showing up. Second
[13:55] is of all, I greatly apologize to
[13:56] you
[13:58] guys. You got a notice that it would happen
[14:00] today, and you know, there was tabling,
[14:02] so you took time
[14:04] out of your busy schedule. I completely get that.
[14:08] and
[14:10] I really appreciate you guys participating. Here
[14:11] is where we
[14:12] are, and I think staff could probably explain
[14:14] this a
[14:16] little bit better. We have a couple
[14:20] of options today. We
[14:22] can outright deny this. But here is
[14:23] the problem
[14:24] with outright denying so you understand. That
[14:28] might be a temporary victory, but
[14:29] we
[14:30] can turn to staff, but code would
[14:32] allow them to file the
[14:35] exact
[14:38] same
[14:41] thing six months from now.
[14:50] I
[14:52] don't know what the best one is, but
[14:53] understand
[14:55] no matter what decision we make today, unless
[14:56] it's
[14:57] an outright thumbs up, and I'll tell
[14:59] you right now, there's no way
[15:01] in god's green earth that I'll do
[15:02] an outright thumbs up,
[15:04] which I shouldn't say before the applicant
[15:08] speaks. But my
[15:12] understanding they weren't coming here. That's
[15:14] the box we're in. If I'm going
[15:15] to support this to be very clear,
[15:17] it needs to go, in
[15:19] my opinion, through planning and zoning
[15:20] again
[15:22] if there are substantial changes to
[15:23] give
[15:26] you guys
[15:29] an extra opportunity to engage
[15:30] there and then engage as you have
[15:32] with us
[15:33] after that planning and zoning. That's
[15:34] the wonderful thing that we get to
[15:35] hear
[15:37] what they have to say and then we
[15:38] get
[15:41] to hear what the neighbors have to
[15:44] hear. So keep that in
[15:46] mind. Those are our two options that we
[15:47] who have to
[15:49] the best of my knowledge.
[15:50] >> can I
[15:50] ask
[15:53] one more question to his point? If
[15:56] I understand
[15:57] that we're potentially considering
[16:02] a four-month
[16:05] delay or a six-month delay
[16:08] tonight they can
[16:11] come back in six
[16:13] months? Jeffrey, is that correct?
[16:14] >>
[16:14] so
[16:16] if the application is denied, we have
[16:17] a
[16:20] provision in our code
[16:23] that requires a six-month time
[16:26] frame before they submit another
[16:28] application of similar requests.
[16:29] >>
[16:32] okay. A motion tonight, I'm
[16:35] sorry. A motion tonight to delay
[16:38] this for 120 days and then they
[16:41] could start the process all over again six
[16:42] months
[16:43] from now. Does that seem like what
[16:44] we're down to?
[16:44] >>
[16:45] yes, sir.
[16:46] >> okay, commissioner pritchett, may
[16:47] I have the
[16:50] floor, please?
[16:51] >> the reason
[16:53] I'm
[16:56] doing this is because there
[16:59] was -- [ inaudible ] the
[17:02] motion or the e-mail was sent
[17:04] out to people at indian river isles
[17:05] in the area saying this
[17:08] was going to be continued. So I
[17:11] don't believe it's
[17:14] fair not to
[17:17] have the full contingent. So I'm not
[17:18] sure
[17:18] whether 120-day continuation is the
[17:20] best way to go or a table
[17:23] is the best way to go
[17:26] because I don't feel comfortable
[17:29] with them not having the number of people here.
[17:44] [ technical difficulties. Meeting will
[17:47] resume shortly ]
[17:50] >> the
[17:51] local planning and zoning board to
[17:53] start that process over again.
[17:56] >> yes,
[17:57] sir, application would be considered
[17:58] new and it would come back through.
[18:08] [ audio technical difficulties ]
[18:11] >>
[18:14] maybe they can't. So if they don't,
[18:15] then
[18:15] they can refile six months. That's
[18:17] all I'm trying to do. Trying
[18:20] to get
[18:23] somebody to work together.
[18:24] >> commissioner? >>
[18:26] commissioner goodson, would you consider
[18:28] a friendly amendment to table?
[18:28] >>
[18:29] sure. Given how long?
[18:30] >>
[18:31] until the next zoning meeting.
[18:31] >>
[18:32] until the
[18:33] next zoning meeting?
[18:34] >> the problem
[18:35] with that, they're
[18:38] only allowed one table.
[18:39] >> okay,
[18:41] well, this would be their one table.
[18:42] >>
[18:44] but then there wouldn't be time for
[18:46] revisions or anything like that and they're talking massive.
[18:50] mr. Chair, I think we
[18:52] are --I think the audience is probably
[18:53] here, and I think
[18:55] we're probably, we're going around
[18:56] in circles. We're all
[18:58] on the same page. Commissioner goodson
[18:59] was pretty close
[19:02] there in the beginning. I made it
[19:03] very
[19:04] clear to anyone who has called where
[19:05] I was on this one.
[19:11] and I didn't understand that
[19:14] you
[19:17] are in favor of
[19:20] that. I think with can table this
[19:23] and require planning and zoning
[19:29] on august 14 with a
[19:34] submittal date. And that is going
[19:35] to get
[19:37] us there, requires, gives the audience
[19:38] an
[19:41] opportunity to engage us, engage planning
[19:42] and zoning
[19:44] and
[19:47] all
[19:50] that and allows this board
[19:53] to this board. Is that your motion?
[19:54] >>
[19:54] yes.
[19:55] >> commissioner, do you want
[19:56] to take the floor?
[19:57] >> I'm sorry. So
[19:59] we have a motion on the floor, it's been seconded.
[20:02] all in favor, signify
[20:05] by saying aye?
[20:06] >> aye. >> all
[20:08] opposed?
[20:09] >> didn't we just make a motion to table?
[20:10] >> do we need to hear about
[20:11] it? Should we hear
[20:14] the cards first?
[20:15] >> we're going to hear
[20:16] from the audience. We're going to
[20:17] hear from those people. But we
[20:20] can do this. And here is my issue. I've
[20:23] got three or four little tiny zoning
[20:24] issues
[20:26] in front of them that will keep these
[20:30] people here for hours.
[20:31] >> I'm
[20:36] sorry, table this until after we
[20:38] go the other items. I'm sorry, I assumed
[20:39] it
[20:41] was for a later date. I apologize.
[20:41] >>
[20:42] I know, it's confusing.
[20:46] but just bare with me.
[20:47] >> okay, we'll
[20:48] move
[20:50] them to the end.
[20:50] >> right. Thank you,
[20:51] I'm sorry.
[20:52] >> that's all right.
[20:54] and real quickly, we'll put you
[20:57] on hold for just a minute
[21:00] and then
[21:02] we're going to get to the ones I know
[21:06] will be relatively quick.
[21:07] >>
[21:08] mr. Chair, if I may. Because it is
[21:09] contemplated that the
[21:12] applicant is going to come back
[21:13] with a substantially revised plan
[21:15] and go through pnz and come to
[21:17] this board again with a significant
[21:18] lapse in
[21:19] time and because the applicant isn't here
[21:21] tonight,
[21:24] it could create a really
[21:26] muddy record if we receive testimony
[21:27] tonight when the applicant
[21:29] is not here to ask questions to the
[21:30] witnesses
[21:32] and those kinds of things. It could
[21:33] create
[21:34] record problems in the future. I understand
[21:35] and feel for the folks who are out
[21:37] here tonight and want to be heard,
[21:39] it is probably
[21:40] in the best interest of everyone if
[21:42] they're heard at the time the board
[21:44] is actually going to make the decision
[21:45] based on the application
[21:46] that's submitted at that time. If
[21:48] you want to hear them tonight in
[21:50] regards to the application knowing
[21:52] that this particular application likely
[21:54] isn't going anywhere, you can do that.
[21:57] but
[21:59] it could create a confused record.
[22:00] >>
[22:00] I
[22:03] certainly got
[22:05] a confused chairman right now.
[22:05] >>
[22:06] typically
[22:07] when the item continued, you don't
[22:09] receive testimony from the
[22:11] public at the meeting at which it
[22:12] is continued. Although if you
[22:13] want to hear from these folks because
[22:15] they didn't know and went
[22:16] through the effort to come out, you may.
[22:20] but in all likelihood whatever testimony goes
[22:21] on
[22:23] the record tonight will be irrelevant
[22:24] to the application that's considered in november.
[22:26] >> commissioner
[22:28] pritchett?
[22:29] >> thank you, mr. Chair. Just
[22:30] a question. I know with
[22:32] what we have right now, it is not
[22:33] going
[22:35] to, I don't think it will get passed. So
[22:36] maybe it would be
[22:38] wise to hear from the applicant to
[22:39] see if
[22:42] he has some very substantial changes
[22:44] that is even worth continuing it if
[22:48] they would be willing to do it. I
[22:49] don't
[22:50] know. That is just a request to let things
[22:51] be
[22:53] solved now, I don't know.
[22:53] >> okay.
[22:54] >>
[22:57] what is your thought?
[22:59] >> if the applicant is available to
[23:00] speak
[23:02] to that, then my understanding, I
[23:03] thought I
[23:04] heard the applicant wasn't here although
[23:06] I saw
[23:08] someone moving forward.
[23:09] >> I believe
[23:09] landy is here, correct? Are you the applicant?
[23:11] >> yes. >> so you're available to speak?
[23:13] >> okay.
[23:18] >> if we could, please,
[23:21] I really would like to just get
[23:23] these other folks out of the way,
[23:24] so we can go there. I
[23:27] would like to have a
[23:30] temporary hold on this for
[23:33] discussion purposes and move forward.
[23:34] so we're coming back to you as soon
[23:36] as I get done with these and
[23:38] let these people get out, so we can
[23:41] have full discretion and disclosure on this issue.
[23:44] all right. Let me call up kim rezanka. Kim.
[23:51] this is on h3.
[23:54] yes, sir?
[23:55] >>
[23:56] jeff, I'm sorry.
[23:56] >> mr. Chair. Let
[23:57] me read the
[24:00] items h3 and h4 into
[24:01] the record. Companion applications. You
[24:03] can discuss them together, but
[24:06] you need separate motions. Item h4
[24:09] is jen florida
[24:11] 48, llc, requests a small-scare comprehensive
[24:12] plan amendment to change
[24:15] the future land use designation from res 1:2.5 and res 1
[24:16] to res 4, application number
[24:19] 23ss00022. Tax
[24:22] account number is 3000365 and
[24:24] 3000569. Located in district five. The
[24:28] applicant is
[24:31] requesting two waivers. The
[24:34] waivers are for, to
[24:36] exempt from 621448g requiring the designation
[24:40] of an outdoor parking area to
[24:42] create travel and camping trailers
[24:43] and vehicles, boats,
[24:45] boat trailers and other similar vehicles. The
[24:53] other waiver that's
[24:56] being requested is from section 62-1446,
[24:57] d3b to allow residential structures
[25:01] two stories or less and minimum building separation
[25:04] at 10 feet rather than 15 feet.
[25:08] the agenda report, mr. Chair and commissioners
[25:11] have conditions
[25:14] for the board to consider and
[25:17] that is on the agenda
[25:20] report as well. Number one
[25:23] is
[25:26] a total number that should
[25:29] not
[25:31] exceed thinker approval of 62.14-46. Requesting
[25:35] a waiver from
[25:37] section 6214, 46d3b. And prior to
[25:41] county approval of construction plans
[25:41] and preliminary
[25:43] plat developership that the city of
[25:44] pom
[25:47] bay will approve the
[25:49] project in access connection to babcock
[25:50] street
[25:53] and determine adequate water
[25:56] and sewer service will
[25:59] be available to the issue. And
[26:02] during pnz,
[26:05] the applicant provided a revised
[26:06] plan that showed 44-foot locks that's
[26:08] not being redirect
[26:11] examination at this time. Thank you.
[26:11] >> okay.
[26:17] >> thank you, rim. I'm kim
[26:20] rezanka. I'm
[26:23] here
[26:26] with the developer sunterra's
[26:32] owner zip, which is g,
[26:38] , and planner justice
[26:44] anderson if
[26:47] you have any questions. Changing future
[26:50] land use
[26:53] with
[26:55] an agreement to limit three utes and
[26:56] snow
[26:57] sufficient open space, sufficient
[26:59] buffers, protection of wetlands
[27:02] as required by county
[27:04] code. We do have a presentation, however,
[27:05] all the
[27:07] information was in the minutes. We can go
[27:08] through it if you would like or
[27:11] if you have any questions, I
[27:14] believe that was all straightforward. Pnz
[27:16] recommended approval of both items and
[27:17] would ask approval of the changes
[27:20] future land use and the pud with
[27:22] the conditions as stated.
[27:23] >> I don't
[27:24] believe we
[27:27] have any cards
[27:30] in opposition to this.
[27:45] oh boy.
[27:46] >> with that, we'll
[27:48] hear
[27:50] the objections and then I'll respond.
[27:52] >> good evening, sandra sullivan. So I
[27:54] just want
[27:57] to read from
[27:59] the staff report first. Centralized
[28:00] portable water
[28:02] and sanitary sewer service is currently
[28:03] not
[28:06] available to the subject
[28:07] property. The applicant has represented these
[28:09] services
[28:12] will be provided by
[28:14] the city of palm bay, but they have
[28:15] not
[28:17] provided these service. I want to
[28:18] go
[28:21] to state
[28:24] statute, florida's growth policy act, sections
[28:31] 163.2511-1632.2520 of the florida
[28:33] statutes, collectively known
[28:35] as the growth policy act. A key takeaway
[28:36] from
[28:38] the policy act is the importance of
[28:39] con currency. Con
[28:42] currency as you
[28:44] know is provisions, requiring that certain
[28:48] infrastructure be in place
[28:51] before
[28:53] any new development is permitted. Portable
[28:57] drinking
[28:58] water and waste treatment facilities. So it
[29:00] says
[29:03] it's up to
[29:05] the local government to implement
[29:09] such requirements or
[29:14] to via, any way, in advance. There seems
[29:15] to be
[29:18] a lot of this lately where there
[29:21] is no sewage or way to pay for
[29:24] it and one comment was made
[29:27] here on the other
[29:30] item. The sooner we will be able
[29:31] to pay for it. Thank you.
[29:32] >> real quickly.
[29:36] jeff. Do we not
[29:39] have
[29:40] a letter from the city of palm bay
[29:43] on it this issue?
[29:44] >> we do, we do
[29:45] have a letter from the
[29:48] city saying they are going to provide
[29:49] water and sewer.
[29:50] >> and that the developer
[29:51] is going to
[29:54] pay for that to come down? Is that
[29:55] my understanding?
[29:56] >> that they would
[29:57] have to pay for
[29:59] those services.
[30:00] >> thank you. >> and
[30:02] that is correct. Palm bay has said
[30:04] they will provide wastewater, portable water,
[30:06] fire flows, and
[30:09] also to address con currency
[30:12] going forward
[30:13] into the florida statutes 163.182o
[30:15] as the fair share, put into
[30:16] place by the legislature just for
[30:18] this purpose, so the developer does pay
[30:20] for the growth. With that I would
[30:21] request
[30:22] that you approve these two items.
[30:23] >> mr. Chair?
[30:27] >> yes? >> and isn't is
[30:30] also true that you
[30:33] would not get a certificate of
[30:36] occupancy unless they have water
[30:37] and sewer?
[30:38] >> that's correct. There
[30:39] is a condition on the pud that had
[30:42] says water and sewer need to
[30:43] be available prior to issuance.
[30:44] >> we
[30:45] have spent months on making sure
[30:48] all these t it's were crossed
[30:51] and the I's
[30:53] were dotted. Anymore --is there a
[30:54] motion? And
[30:56] it is my district.
[30:56] >> I will make
[30:57] a motion
[30:59] for you.
[31:00] >> motion to approve items h3 and h4.
[31:03] >>
[31:05] he wants them separate.
[31:05] >> I make
[31:06] a
[31:09] motion to approve item h3.
[31:10] >> is there a second? >> second.
[31:12] >> any
[31:13] discussion? All in favor?
[31:14] >> aye. >>
[31:15] all opposed? The
[31:17] motion carries. Let's go to h4.
[31:17] >>
[31:18] make a
[31:21] motion to approve
[31:24] item h4.
[31:26] >> second. >> with the conditions that were mentioned.
[31:27] >> okay. Any discussion?
[31:42] I
[31:45] would like to get back to
[31:51] these patient people
[31:54] over here. Okay, you're up.
[32:18] >> 2002219, 2002228,
[32:24] 2002229, 2002230, 2002231,
[32:30] 2002232 located in district one. The
[32:32] applicant has requested a continuance
[32:33] to
[32:36] the september 5 board meeting.
[33:02] >> for the planning and zoning and that
[33:03] would be the september 5
[33:06] board of county commissioners meeting. That's
[33:06] for
[33:09] item h6 as well.
[33:09] >> okay.
[33:12] we have a
[33:13] motion to continue, correct?
[33:13] >> yes,
[33:15] sir, I'd like to table it
[33:16] to september 5 zoning meeting.
[33:17] >>
[33:18] is there a sect on
[33:21] that? That is not
[33:24] you guys. I'll
[33:27] second.
[33:27] >> any opposition
[33:28] or discussion? All opposed? I do have
[33:30] a card here
[33:33] on h5 I believe from
[33:35] sandra sullivan. Are you going to
[33:39] waive that? Thank you very much
[33:41] for your cooperation on that, I appreciate
[33:42] it. The applicants if nay
[33:45] could come up and sit here,
[33:48] so we -- on h2.
[33:51] >> I'm going to table
[33:53] item 7 and 8 too if I may, soon.
[33:53] >> okay, go ahead.
[33:59] >> okay. H7 and h8, you have to readvertise. Would
[34:00] you like
[34:03] to read it first or do I need
[34:06] to ask him to table?
[34:06] >>
[34:09] so item h7 and 8 will be readvertised. There
[34:13] is
[34:15] an issue with the application. So
[34:18] this one would be continued not to
[34:25] a date
[34:27] center because we're readvertising.
[34:27] >>
[34:31] okay, I make a motion
[34:34] to table.
[34:34] >> is there a second?
[34:37] >> all
[34:38] in favor?
[34:39] >> aye. >> okay, now I promise we're on you.
[34:43] kevin?
[34:43] >> I'm sorry, mr. Chair.
[34:46] I thought that the motion on h5
[34:47] included h6 as well to continue those. The
[34:49] clerk
[34:52] didn't hear
[34:53] that. Was h6 included?
[34:54] >> yes. >> yeah. I
[34:55] don't want to have my
[34:57] mistakes to come back on. So thanks,
[34:58] morris. I
[35:01] appreciate it very much. What
[35:02] do you need clarification on? It is
[35:04] the same item.
[35:04] >>
[35:07] september
[35:10] 5 for both items.
[35:10] >>
[35:13] correct. Okay, kevin fox,
[35:16] where
[35:18] are you? Come on up. We are back on h2.
[35:25] >> sorry,
[35:27] I apologize. What do we start out
[35:30] with? I don't know the protocol. I'm
[35:34] not the presenter.
[35:34] >> you're
[35:35] here to discuss the zoning request?
[35:35] >>
[35:37] you're in opposition
[35:40] to it, you have a red shirt on. Go
[35:43] ahead.
[35:43] >> I apologize to that. And I'm here to represent the north homeowners association.
[35:55] I'd like to point
[35:58] out the
[36:01] hazard area.
[36:01] >> I'm sorry. Did
[36:04] you have a
[36:05] question? I'm sorry, sir.
[36:06] >> is this
[36:07] us
[36:08] securing the item? I want to understand
[36:10] what where she done.
[36:10] >> the
[36:11] board announced a contention to continue
[36:13] this and it has been made clear
[36:16] that it will come back in
[36:18] a different form and go through prior. My
[36:19] recommendation would be
[36:21] for the board not to hear testimony on
[36:22] the item
[36:23] tonight because that testimony is
[36:25] all going to change. It is going to
[36:28] create a confused record. While I
[36:30] understand these folks are out tonight,
[36:31] anything they say
[36:32] tonight won't be relevant and the
[36:34] board can't consider it when
[36:35] it is considering the future application.
[36:37] so if you want
[36:40] to allow them to speak
[36:42] their peace because they're here, they
[36:43] may b nothing
[36:44] said tonight will likely be jermaine
[36:46] or be able to
[36:47] be considered when this is ultimately
[36:49] heard by the
[36:51] board. >> we only have a few cards,
[36:52] so you're recognizing this is not going
[36:55] to go on the public record in regards
[36:57] to? You're going to have to come back
[37:01] at
[37:03] the continuation.
[37:03] >> I'm confused.
[37:09] I thought you were going to talk to
[37:10] them first and
[37:13] after they spoke, then
[37:16] we would speak.
[37:16] >> stop
[37:18] over there, please. No, ma'am, please. We
[37:19] can handle this. We're
[37:21] big people here. We can have a conversation, thank
[37:22] you. So first
[37:24] what I'm telling you is that this
[37:28] is going to be continued
[37:31] to another date. I said to
[37:34] everybody that I still wanted to
[37:36] allow the people that are here to
[37:37] speak,
[37:40] so they did not
[37:43] make
[37:44] an unnecessary trip. Mr. Richardson
[37:46] said we can do that or we
[37:49] could just send you all home without saying
[37:51] anything and then you'll have to come back any way.
[37:55] what I'm trying to do
[37:58] is give you the opportunity if you
[37:59] are against this to spike tonight,
[38:01] but you still need to come back when
[38:04] we have our next meeting.
[38:04] >>
[38:07] I thought if you voted it no, they can't
[38:10] come back for six months or it is
[38:13] a four months. I thought you were
[38:16] going to discuss that and
[38:17] make your decision. That is my confusion
[38:19] as of right now if you're going to
[38:19] do
[38:21] that tact and talk to the developer if
[38:22] they
[38:23] won't have a substantial plan. That's
[38:25] the confusion for me.
[38:25] >>
[38:27] I mean the developer is welcome to
[38:28] say something,
[38:30] but once again, this will be continued. And
[38:31] so all of this stuff
[38:34] is going to be for not. The only reason
[38:34] that
[38:36] I stopped this tonight is I didn't want you
[38:37] walking out of
[38:39] here without having the opportunity from driving all
[38:40] it this
[38:42] way to be able to say something about this if
[38:43] you would
[38:45] like to. If you don't want to and
[38:46] you all want to go
[38:48] home and eat some dinner and stuff
[38:49] like
[38:50] that, that's fine with us too.
[38:51] >>
[38:52] myself I believe there's letters
[38:55] we've written that will stand for
[38:55] themselves
[38:56] because it won't be pertinent. And
[38:58] that is the way I understand it now listening to the attorney.
[39:01] I can just stop. You know
[39:04] we're in opposition to it and at
[39:07] the present land use level. I'll say
[39:10] it, 17 units per acre.
[39:10] >>
[39:13] okay, we are trying to be fair
[39:15] to both sides and I think we're in
[39:19] good shape now
[39:22] and there are other people.
[39:22] >> go ahead. >>
[39:24] sorry, one quick question. Are you in
[39:25] favor of the
[39:28] six months or four months?
[39:28] >> I would
[39:31] say the six months. I mean the four months then.
[39:34] >> I thought you were going to discuss
[39:34] that,
[39:36] so we could better understand it. I
[39:37] don't know all the
[39:40] ins and outs of this, so I
[39:43] thought you were going to
[39:46] come talk to the developer.
[39:46] >> I get
[39:48] it. And I appreciate it. This is just
[39:49] new
[39:52] for us and that someone
[39:54] tabled that late. So I apologize. This is
[39:55] just that we
[39:58] got thrown a curveball and I appreciate that
[40:01] and the chair has done a good job
[40:02] of trying to.
[40:03] >> I don't want other
[40:04] people coming back
[40:07] when they did not have that opportunity. The reason
[40:09] I wanted to continue it in the first
[40:10] place is because of
[40:13] the notice that was sent out that stopped people from coming.
[40:16] >> yes, sir. >> it
[40:17] could have potentially hurt the developer also.
[40:19] and so all
[40:22] of a sudden we get into a lawsuit that
[40:22] said
[40:24] well, what happened here? What happens
[40:25] here is that somebody sent out
[40:27] a notice, they didn't show up, and
[40:28] now we've got
[40:29] a big mess.
[40:30] >> yes, sir. >> and I
[40:31] want
[40:34] to cross our t's and dot our I's if
[40:37] it's going to be killed or not. Whatever.
[40:37] >> can you give us the dates again?
[40:41] >> yes, planning
[40:43] and zoning and all that.
[40:43] >> we will. Hold on.
[40:51] hold on.
[40:52] >> I was trying to determine where
[40:53] the
[40:54] commission was going to land. Would
[40:56] you
[40:57] pull the commission and see if they
[40:59] are apt to sending
[41:02] it back to pnz
[41:03] and coming back on the 7th.
[41:04] >> you
[41:05] wanty me
[41:06] to poll the commission on where they
[41:08] stand on the
[41:10] issue?
[41:11] >> on whether or not we're agreeable
[41:14] to table to the 7th.
[41:14] >> that's
[41:16] fine with me.
[41:17] >> okay. >> where do
[41:20] you stand?
[41:20] >> yeah, I
[41:22] have to clarify. I got yelled at. So
[41:25] let me change the dates because this
[41:29] is very important and I
[41:32] move
[41:35] to approve the application
[41:38] number 23pud00001 to the
[41:39] november 7 commission zoning meeting
[41:41] and
[41:44] under the within that it
[41:47] is reheard
[41:50] on october 14 of 2024
[41:53] and that would
[41:56] require the
[41:59] party to do so
[42:01] by august second. And it will be on
[42:03] november 7 and I apologize for getting
[42:05] those dates wrong the
[42:07] first time. Kevin, are you okay now?
[42:07] >> I didn't understand.
[42:11] >> hold on. >> and I
[42:12] got it, guys.
[42:13] >> I'm asking him to
[42:14] hold on.
[42:14] >> I'm calling you.
[42:17] >> thank you. Okay.
[42:23] >> question, yes, sir.
[42:26] it is 52 units you
[42:28] said, right?
[42:29] >> how many acres? >>
[42:32] per lot you mean?
[42:32] >> how many
[42:35] acres per total?
[42:35] >>
[42:37] half of 52, so everybody is about half
[42:41] an acre if you count the canals.
[42:41] >>
[42:44] thank you,
[42:45] sir. Thank you, chair.
[42:45] >> certainly.
[42:47] and let's continue
[42:50] with the polls.
[42:51] >> okay. >> that's
[42:53] good. And I'm in agreement with that too. Where
[42:56] are you with
[42:59] this poll?
[42:59] >> I'm okay
[43:02] to continuing it to his motion.
[43:02] >>
[43:03] all right, so we are all in agreement with that.
[43:08] all in
[43:09] favor of the continuation signify
[43:11] by saying
[43:14] aye?
[43:14] >> aye. >>
[43:17] all opposed nays? The motion carries. Was
[43:19] there something else that you need
[43:20] to say? No, please do.
[43:26] okay, wow.
[43:29] this is fun. All right.
[43:32] so the reason this was done
[43:35] is to be
[43:37] in complete fairness to everybody. I
[43:38] apologize
[43:41] that we did this tonight, but
[43:43] I don't think that we had a choice. So
[43:47] thank you all for
[43:50] coming, we appreciate it very
[43:53] much. I'm certain you'll
[43:55] be hearing from the developer or mr. Fox and
[43:56] other
[43:59] people. So thank
[44:02] you for coming
[44:05] this evening. All right, let's
[44:08] move on. Where are we?
[44:08] >>
[44:11] my record is that we need to start
[44:14] on item
[44:15] h9.
[44:16] >> thank you, jeff. I appreciate
[44:17] it. Go ahead,
[44:20] jeff.
[44:21] >> h9 and h10 are companion applications. I'll
[44:23] read them into the record.
[44:26] you'll need separate motions for
[44:29] each. Item h9 is alexis dejesus
[44:32] and rosemary dejesus and brandon dejesus
[44:32] request
[44:35] a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment 24s.07
[44:38] from cc and
[44:44] nc to all cc. Application number
[44:47] 24ss00007. Tax account number
[44:50] is 2102561 located in
[44:53] district 1. And item h10 is alexis
[44:56] dejesus, rosemary dejesus,
[44:58] and brandon dejesus request a request
[45:01] a change of zoning classification from bu-1
[45:05] and au to all bu-2. Application
[45:14] number 24z00021, tax account number
[45:15] 2102561. Located in district 1. A
[45:17] part of the
[45:20] planning and the zoning recommendation
[45:23] for the zoning
[45:26] application was to submit a bdp to
[45:29] restrict the uses for all
[45:32] one uses and the
[45:35] sale of automobile and
[45:38] mobile homes
[45:41] with a
[45:47] six-foot wall along the
[45:53] --I'm sorry,
[45:55] along the eastbound including any
[45:56] residential
[45:58] use. I wanted to put on the record
[45:59] if the
[46:01] board approves the request, then the
[46:02] next up would
[46:05] be the site plan process, where the applicant
[46:08] would work with an engineer to make sure
[46:10] that what the code will
[46:13] require that is in place before the actual
[46:15] use of the property will take place.
[46:22] >> thank you, sir. Applicants are here.
[46:28] I have a request. Love your application.
[46:34] but I don't like concrete walls.
[46:39] usually natural resources works with me on another avenue.
[46:44] so I'm going to have
[46:46] mr. Jeffrey read a recommendation that I
[46:49] have if you would do this, I think
[46:53] it would be a great
[46:55] project. Binding development plan. So
[46:56] he's
[46:58] going to read it. It's pretty much
[46:59] what you're wanting to do, but
[47:01] just kind of protects it.
[47:02] >> I'm here for the warming.
[47:05] >> okay, yes,
[47:08] please.
[47:09] >>
[47:10] and so the proposed conditions -- [
[47:11] inaudible ] would restrict
[47:14] the uses to
[47:17] all bu-1 uses and only mobile home sales
[47:20] from the bu-2
[47:22] zoning district and prohibit access to contrary road.
[47:23] >> that's
[47:26] good.
[47:27] >> I thought you would be
[47:29] good with it.
[47:30] >> that's perfect.
[47:32] >>
[47:34] commissioner, a couple quick questions. One,
[47:35] the staff, is
[47:37] there still an open code enforcement violation
[47:38] on this
[47:41] property?
[47:42] >>
[47:44] it is
[47:47] my
[47:48] understanding that -- [ inaudible ]
[48:02] >>
[48:05] and as long as we don't have to put
[48:06] up
[48:08] a wall, yes.
[48:09] >> absolutely,
[48:11] go ahead. The sale of mobile homes.
[48:24] [ inaudible ]
[48:31] required information that is required
[48:32] to support that use. And just because
[48:35] they approve the use today. If the
[48:38] board approved that, that will have
[48:42] to come
[48:44] back and the subsequents planned would need
[48:47] to be approved today.
[48:47] >> you can not
[48:48] go selling homes tomorrow.
[48:49] >> I understand there's a procedure.
[48:51] >> thank you, sir. Good catch.
[48:54] >> okay, so you got it. You
[48:55] understand where we are?
[48:56] >> yes. >>
[48:57] do we have a motion?
[48:57] >>
[49:00] what kind of
[49:01] boundaries are in questioning here? Shrubs,
[49:02] fence?
[49:03] >> let me say this to you real quick.
[49:06] you're going
[49:08] to need to develop a binding development plan. It's going
[49:09] to
[49:12] have to be submitted to planning
[49:15] and zoning and they
[49:17] will approve it and you can go forward
[49:18] and they will talk
[49:21] about everything else that you
[49:23] need to think about. And that's it
[49:24] and
[49:27] you
[49:29] need to get a bdp.
[49:30] >> but you will
[49:32] be in agreement with this. You just
[49:33] said so. And
[49:36] as they work
[49:38] through that, they will bring back
[49:39] other abilities to comply with all
[49:42] the things you need
[49:45] to
[49:46] comply with.
[49:47] >> that's fine. >> okay. Let's
[49:48] see if
[49:51] we can get a motion.
[49:52] >> I make
[49:54] a motion to approve item h9.
[49:54] >>
[49:57] is there a second?
[49:57] >>
[49:58] second.
[49:59] >> any discussion? Hearing
[50:03] no discussion. All in
[50:03] favor?
[50:04] >> aye. All opposed? Motion
[50:06] carries.
[50:07] >> I make
[50:09] a motion to
[50:12] approve item h10.
[50:12] >>
[50:15] is there a
[50:18] second? And any
[50:21] discussion? All in favor?
[50:21] >>
[50:22] aye. Motion carries. You're good to
[50:24] go for tonight.
[50:24] >>
[50:27] that's it, thank you
[50:28] so much.
[50:29] >> once we put together a development plan,
[50:30] we have to get it approved
[50:31] through zoning and then we have to
[50:33] come in front of the board again?
[50:33] >> hold on, you'll
[50:42] be able to talk to planning and zoning and that handsome fellow over there.
[50:43] >> all right,
[50:48] thank you. Thank you,
[50:54] guys.
[50:55] >> talk to george.
[51:05] >> commissioner steele? My apology. I
[51:06] believe we
[51:08] had a motion on h9, but we also need
[51:09] a motion on h10.
[51:14] >> I did both.
[51:15] >> we did both. >> I'm
[51:16] sorry.
[51:17] >> that's right. >>
[51:18] just so the clerk knows on h9 and
[51:20] h10, you got that? Okay, cool. We're good.
[51:24] >> and the motion for 10 included
[51:26] the bpd with those conditions.
[51:27] >> okay.
[51:31] >> commissioner pritchett? >> thank
[51:34] you. You guys are clear
[51:37] on that. Okay,
[51:39] thank you. H11, jeffrey?
[51:40] >> item h44 is
[51:43] put it in me storage,
[51:45] llc, requests a small-scale comprehensive
[51:46] plan amendment
[51:49] 24s.04
[51:51] from industrial to commercial. Application
[51:55] number 24ss00004, tax account numbers
[51:58] 2322557 located in district one.
[52:01] >> okay.
[52:04] the applicant
[52:06] is here. Come on up, please.
[52:06] >> I
[52:07] was going to
[52:10] make a motion to approve it.
[52:11] >> and
[52:11] go ahead.
[52:13] >> I'm sorry. Sir, I didn't
[52:13] catch
[52:15] your name or the company?
[52:15] >> I did
[52:16] not give it
[52:19] yet. My name is vaheed teimouri.
[52:22] >> okay. I'm
[52:24] here to answer any questions.
[52:25] >> I
[52:25] didn't
[52:28] catch the company name.
[52:29] >>
[52:30] timori and associates.
[52:30] >> I'm sorry.
[52:31] I make a motion
[52:32] to approve item h11.
[52:33] >> I second it.
[52:37] >> any discussion? There is
[52:38] a motion by commissioner pritchett.
[52:40] seconded by commissioner goodson.
[52:46] no discussion. Signify by
[52:47] saying aye. The motion carries.
[52:48] >> thank you.
[52:52] >>
[52:55] okay. We are moving now. H12,
[52:56] this is me.
[52:58] >> item h12, richard jones requests
[52:58] a
[53:01] change of zoning classification
[53:04] from gu to ru-1-9, application number 24z00006,
[53:07] tax account number is 2716623, located in district 5.
[53:13] >> mr. Jones here? >> yes.
[53:14] >> come on up, young man.
[53:24] I just want you to know
[53:26] that in the event they have any questions that
[53:27] I would like
[53:30] to open up the floor.
[53:31] >> and
[53:33] make a
[53:36] motion
[53:39] to approve.
[53:40] >> seconded by commissioner tobia. Any discussion? All
[53:42] in favor?
[53:43] >> aye. >>
[53:43] all opposed? Motion carries, you're
[53:45] good to go.
[53:46] >> all right.
[53:51] >> all right, h13. Jamine
[53:54] kent. Go ahead.
[53:55] >>
[53:57] item
[53:59] h13 is jamine kent, carlene sapp-kent,
[54:00] jermaine kent,
[54:03] request the
[54:06] classification from au to
[54:09] ru-1-11. Application number 23z00013,
[54:12] tax account number
[54:13] 2103548, located in district one.
[54:14] >>
[54:15] commissioner?
[54:16] >> I make
[54:17] a motion to approve item h13.
[54:17] >> second.
[54:18] >>
[54:21] there is a motion on the floor,
[54:24] seconded by commissioner tobia. Is
[54:27] there any discussion? Hearing no
[54:30] discussion, signify by saying
[54:33] aye. The
[54:36] motion carries,
[54:39] you're good to go
[54:40] >> it's
[54:42] the community ink, requesting the
[54:45] classification from in
[54:48] l to ru-2-15, application
[54:51] number 24z00014, tax account number 2501136, located in district two.
[54:57] so mr. Chair and
[55:00] commissioners, there is an error with
[55:01] the planning and zoning approval. The
[55:03] vote should have
[55:05] been 8-1 with the recommendation of approval.
[55:09] >> okay.
[55:12] the applicants are here. Bruce, I
[55:13] guess you're representing them? >> yes, sir.
[55:15] >> it looks like we're going to have
[55:18] a little bit of a discussion on this, so
[55:19] you might as
[55:20] well make your presentation.
[55:21] >> yes,
[55:22] thank you very much. Good evening, commissioners.
[55:24] mr. Chairman, my
[55:26] name is bruce moia, representing the applicant.
[55:28] very
[55:30] excited to be here today to present
[55:31] this project
[55:33] to you. This would be possibly the second one
[55:34] that we
[55:37] would do should it
[55:40] be approved. This is
[55:42] a model for housing children that
[55:43] are
[55:44] coming out of foster care. So when
[55:46] they get kicked out
[55:47] on their 18th birthday with nowhere
[55:49] to go, they're planning on
[55:50] building a facility to take these
[55:52] kids in, teach
[55:53] them how to earn a living, train them
[55:55] on how to be
[55:58] a productive member of society.
[56:01] so we own
[56:02] the construction on the first model in
[56:04] melbourne. Very well
[56:07] received by the city. And it
[56:09] is affordable housing for these kids. So
[56:10] we
[56:13] are trying
[56:15] to do this again here. Very low impact
[56:17] because most of these kids don't drive. They will
[56:19] be following
[56:20] all the rules of the county. There's
[56:22] some issues about floodplain,
[56:25] which is why you guys
[56:28] have such strict rules about
[56:29] developing in the floodplain, so we
[56:30] will be abiding by those requirements. But
[56:31] in order
[56:34] to do this, we have to change
[56:36] the zoning to a multi-family zoning. And what we
[56:37] will be doing
[56:39] is we will be bringing utilities to this
[56:40] property
[56:41] because currently it is on septic
[56:43] and we'll be putting
[56:44] it on sewer.
[56:46] >> okay. >> so if you
[56:46] have any
[56:48] questions, we'll be happy to answer
[56:49] them.
[56:50] >> okay, who is katherine?
[56:52] okay.
[56:55] you have a card here
[56:57] that basically says, are you here
[56:58] to answer
[56:59] questions? You want to make comments is what
[57:01] you would like to do? Okay,
[57:03] that's fine. I was just confused by
[57:04] the card. All right, bruce,
[57:06] let's sit down for a second and we'll
[57:07] call the cards
[57:10] up. Katherine, come on up.
[57:16] >> I've never done
[57:18] this before, so you will have to forgive
[57:19] me.
[57:19] >> I haven't either.
[57:21] >> yes, you've been around for a while. I've
[57:25] been here for 59 years. I recognize all the names.
[57:28] any
[57:31] way I just, I'm opposed to it
[57:33] because it's going to create a big
[57:35] problem with the junior high school,
[57:37] we have this going up
[57:40] across the street. We have tons of
[57:43] traffic now as it is,
[57:45] and then I understand this attractive
[57:46] homes
[57:49] are going up also? I was
[57:52] told it was 43
[57:55] homes besides the housing
[57:58] for the kids. So I don't know.
[58:01] >> ma'am, you
[58:03] have to address the board, okay. You
[58:04] can't turn around.
[58:05] >> I don't
[58:06] know much about it, I was just brought
[58:07] into this right now.
[58:08] >>
[58:10] we're fine with you. But being a person
[58:11] that
[58:13] lives on that street, I just see
[58:16] a tremendous amount of problems there. There's
[58:17] problems
[58:18] now. So that is my concern.
[58:18] >> all
[58:19] right, your
[58:20] comments have been noted.
[58:21] >> okay,
[58:24] good. Thank you so much. Allen, commissioner
[58:25] goodson?
[58:26] >> ma'am, ma'am.
[58:28] >>
[58:31] oh, I'm sorry.
[58:32] >> where do you live? What
[58:32] street?
[58:33] >> on banana boulevard. Which
[58:34] is right where
[58:36] all of this is going to go on. The
[58:40] church is
[58:42] there and then that property south.
[58:42] >>
[58:43] north of there.
[58:44] >> you
[58:46] live on the west
[58:48] side? How far down banana?
[58:49] >> not
[58:49] quite
[58:52] half way.
[58:53] >> so does
[58:53] banana tie into tropical trail? Does
[58:55] banana tie into tropical trail?
[58:56] >> yes. >> thank you.
[58:58] >> thank you.
[59:00] >> do you a question, commissioner? No.
[59:04] >> all right.
[59:07] allen, did you want to say
[59:09] something?
[59:10] >> yes. Come on up. And
[59:10] then if
[59:12] you would be kind enough, I'm going to
[59:16] give allen and this
[59:19] other lovely lady's
[59:21] address, which is 435 banana boulevard. So
[59:22] allen, go ahead.
[59:23] >>
[59:24] yeah, I just got a question. A couple questions.
[59:28] but
[59:29] before you give them permission to
[59:31] build something, do you go
[59:32] through the flood plan? This is not
[59:34] for the flood plan and you
[59:36] know nothing about the flood plan. But if
[59:40] there is the flood plan, my house
[59:42] going to get into the danger flood
[59:43] path
[59:46] you might say. I just want to know,
[59:49] you don't add that into consideration. Somebody
[59:50] does.
[59:51] >> that's a pretty simple question.
[59:52] we
[59:54] go through a thorough analysis of
[59:55] what's
[59:58] going to happen with it. They've got
[1:00:01] to submit a site plan
[1:00:04] to the building
[1:00:05] department, the planning department. Those
[1:00:07] issues node to
[1:00:10] be resolved and talked about. Is that
[1:00:13] a good enough answer? Okay. Do
[1:00:15] you have anymore to say?
[1:00:15] >> not really
[1:00:16] except for
[1:00:18] the traffic problem. I guess they're
[1:00:19] going
[1:00:20] to go through and have to figure out where
[1:00:22] they will go from the school. They
[1:00:25] have a school there. If they are
[1:00:27] going to put --I wasn't understand
[1:00:30] the impression they would put 43 houses
[1:00:31] on three acres of property.
[1:00:32] >>
[1:00:33] we are not addressing the 43 units,
[1:00:34] and I
[1:00:37] don't know if that is accurate.
[1:00:40] we are addressing this
[1:00:41] particular zoning request tonight,
[1:00:43] and I don't
[1:00:46] know if there are
[1:00:49] 43 units being applied for not
[1:00:51] there. That is speculation at this point.
[1:00:51] >>
[1:00:52] all right,
[1:00:55] thank you very much.
[1:00:56] >> I appreciate your comments. Somebody
[1:00:57] else, anybody on this side have a comment?
[1:01:00] >> tad, were you going to say something? >>
[1:01:01] I was going
[1:01:03] to say they need to go through the
[1:01:04] site
[1:01:06] plan after they're throughed with this. And
[1:01:07] the proposed, what
[1:01:10] where she on our
[1:01:12] staff report shows that it will be
[1:01:19] a 43 unit development.
[1:01:21] >> commissioner goodson? >> thank
[1:01:22] you.
[1:01:23] >> yes, sir, this might be
[1:01:25] to bruce. Are we
[1:01:27] talking about 43 houses or 43 apartments. Can
[1:01:28] you help
[1:01:31] us?
[1:01:32] >> yes, sir, it will be 43
[1:01:34] units will be the maximum
[1:01:36] potential, but we have floodplains
[1:01:37] to deal with and wetlands possibly
[1:01:40] to deal with.
[1:01:41] >> you're not talking
[1:01:42] about 43 houses?
[1:01:43] >> no, 43 multi-family
[1:01:43] units.
[1:01:44] >> okay. Explain to
[1:01:46] us what is a multi-family unit.
[1:01:47] >> it will be like an apartment.
[1:01:48] >> okay.
[1:01:51] and it wouldn't be single-family homes
[1:01:52] where they
[1:01:54] would be detached. It will be multi-family.
[1:01:58] but the zoning would allow up to
[1:02:01] 43, but I don't know if we can get
[1:02:02] 43 by the time
[1:02:04] we do retention and all that. We just
[1:02:05] need the
[1:02:06] zoning, so we could actually put together a plan.
[1:02:07] >>
[1:02:10] bruce, would you try to get with some
[1:02:10] of
[1:02:11] these homeowners around and kind of
[1:02:14] meet with them a little bit and
[1:02:17] show them your plans at some
[1:02:19] point?
[1:02:20] >> we don't have
[1:02:21] a plan we don't even know.
[1:02:22] >> oh,
[1:02:23] absolutely, yes, sir.
[1:02:24] >> will
[1:02:24] you be more than happy to meet with
[1:02:26] them?
[1:02:27] >> yes, sir. >>
[1:02:27] okay, that's what I wanted to hear.
[1:02:28] >> okay.
[1:02:32] thank you.
[1:02:32] >> commissioner?
[1:02:34] >> thank you. Just for your guys comfort, they're
[1:02:35] going
[1:02:37] to have to still go through a traffic
[1:02:38] study and all
[1:02:39] those items as well. So after this,
[1:02:41] there is
[1:02:42] still a lot of hurdles to get through that,
[1:02:44] that will give
[1:02:45] you a little comfort.
[1:02:46] >> thank you for being here.
[1:02:52] >> joe ikenlaub? >> right on the money.
[1:03:02] >> there
[1:03:05] you go.
[1:03:06] >>
[1:03:08] how are you doing? Go ahead. You got
[1:03:11] a comment
[1:03:12] on this issue, go ahead.
[1:03:13] >> I want to
[1:03:14] congratulate them on
[1:03:16] what they're doing for the children
[1:03:17] or
[1:03:18] young adults, I'm guessing from what
[1:03:20] I heard 18 or over possibly.
[1:03:23] I don't know
[1:03:24] how many number of children or adults are
[1:03:26] going
[1:03:29] to be in the 43 units in the
[1:03:33] area. You just brought up
[1:03:36] a good point, rita, that this is
[1:03:38] an ongoing thing and a lot of things
[1:03:42] need to be addressed. What
[1:03:45] I would like to
[1:03:47] address of, these two gentlemen back
[1:03:48] here
[1:03:51] is our
[1:03:52] neighborhood that accidentally got
[1:03:54] notified that this
[1:03:57] was even happening. The
[1:03:59] signage, the minimal, looks like a
[1:04:00] sad
[1:04:02] garage sale sign that you couldn't
[1:04:04] read. Nobody in the whole neighborhood of
[1:04:06] the beach knew any of this was going on.
[1:04:12] we would like
[1:04:15] to have the consideration of h2
[1:04:17] to have this continued, so we could notify all
[1:04:20] the neighbors and get their opinions
[1:04:21] and to
[1:04:23] have a get together with them and
[1:04:24] maybe show up
[1:04:27] like the people that they
[1:04:30] would
[1:04:33] try to do here. Understand what in
[1:04:35] janet is trying to do. We would like
[1:04:36] to support it and the
[1:04:38] school with all the children across
[1:04:39] the
[1:04:42] street is kind of
[1:04:45] a concern
[1:04:47] for safety purposes, traffic naturally. And we
[1:04:48] would try to get
[1:04:51] people to the school buses on banana boulevard
[1:04:54] is the main thoroughfare
[1:04:57] besides courtney and
[1:05:00] tropical trail to get to right here. I
[1:05:03] would like to ask if
[1:05:06] this could be continued, so
[1:05:09] we
[1:05:11] could notify the neighbors ourselves, since
[1:05:12] you'll
[1:05:14] be able to do that for us as requested
[1:05:15] and so
[1:05:17] that we could have some time to put this
[1:05:18] all
[1:05:19] together and understand it.
[1:05:20] >> okay,
[1:05:21] thank you for
[1:05:23] your comments. Let me explain to you
[1:05:24] that there is a process that
[1:05:26] will go on before the zoning will be called on.
[1:05:30] we send out notices to everybody and
[1:05:32] there are signs that are posted on
[1:05:33] the land
[1:05:35] and things of that nature. So if you
[1:05:36] did
[1:05:39] not get
[1:05:41] a notice, I'm very surprised. Normally
[1:05:42] we don't
[1:05:44] do continuation on things unless there
[1:05:48] is some sort of confusion in regards
[1:05:50] to like what happened here tonight. There
[1:05:53] was some confusion in regards to somebody
[1:05:54] sending out a notice
[1:05:57] saying that the
[1:06:00] thing would be continued. I asked
[1:06:01] mr. Moia
[1:06:02] before he gets into the potential
[1:06:03] for site
[1:06:05] plan and things of that nature if
[1:06:06] he would come meet with
[1:06:08] you and he said he would. So that is
[1:06:09] the best
[1:06:12] that we could do tonight. I don't
[1:06:13] believe anybody wants to continue
[1:06:15] this tonight?
[1:06:16] >> I have a
[1:06:18] question.
[1:06:19] >> and did we send
[1:06:21] out notices in the mail.
[1:06:56] >> I believe so. But if you send out the
[1:06:58] mailer, you don't know if they receive it or
[1:06:59] not, but you make an effort to send
[1:07:00] it
[1:07:03] out, correct?
[1:07:04] >> yes, sir. And
[1:07:05] that mailer is a courtesy and it is
[1:07:06] above and beyond
[1:07:09] what the statue would require.
[1:07:12] so the
[1:07:15] request is posted on the property. It's
[1:07:17] advertised on the county website and
[1:07:18] a courtesy notice will
[1:07:21] go out.
[1:07:22] >> thank you. Okay.
[1:07:23] >> do you live within that radius
[1:07:24] that you might
[1:07:25] not have received it?
[1:07:26] >> yes. And
[1:07:27] 30 other people
[1:07:30] that I have notified and told about
[1:07:33] this, two of which
[1:07:36] got notification and they happen to
[1:07:38] be just 500 feet maybe.
[1:07:39] >> I got you. >>
[1:07:39] from there.
[1:07:40] >>
[1:07:41] thank you, chair.
[1:07:42] >> yes, sir. >>
[1:07:42] okay. Thank you
[1:07:45] very much for your time tonight.
[1:07:51] >>
[1:07:54] elizabeth?
[1:07:55] >>
[1:07:57] okay,
[1:07:59] we're getting close here.
[1:08:00] >> and I remember
[1:08:00] you
[1:08:03] and I was here tuesday. I sent you
[1:08:04] four
[1:08:06] images today and this is the image
[1:08:09] of what 500 feet looks like. Barely
[1:08:12] 12 homes. It's nice that
[1:08:14] it is a courtesy. And I sent each
[1:08:15] of you a picture of
[1:08:18] that sign
[1:08:21] that is sitting on the front
[1:08:24] of the property. The only
[1:08:27] reason that we have people in
[1:08:30] this room
[1:08:33] tonight because I went door to door and it shouldn't
[1:08:36] be my job out there to convey information
[1:08:38] to my neighbors, but it is important and
[1:08:39] as you can see
[1:08:42] by the few that are here, it
[1:08:45] san important issue. I requested
[1:08:47] a couple of things. When I was here
[1:08:48] on tuesday, I gave each
[1:08:51] of you a packet. Now inside that
[1:08:54] had packet, I don't think
[1:08:56] that there were emotional issues. These
[1:09:01] are things that
[1:09:04] are listed by fema and the
[1:09:06] fact that this property is in the
[1:09:07] middle
[1:09:09] of the high risk area should be a consideration. You're
[1:09:10] saying
[1:09:12] it's in the 43 houses. That's fine. But
[1:09:13] they're
[1:09:14] requesting the opportunity for an
[1:09:16] ful change that will
[1:09:19] put 15 houses per acre.
[1:09:21] and I'm just saying when we did the
[1:09:22] comp plan back
[1:09:25] 40 years ago, I'm not sure they
[1:09:28] really thought
[1:09:31] about the floodplains,
[1:09:33] the coastal hazard areas. I have talked
[1:09:34] to
[1:09:36] john smith and this is not a good
[1:09:39] idea really honestly in any shape
[1:09:40] or form. I would
[1:09:43] love to talk to mr. Moia.
[1:09:46] but the thing is in order
[1:09:48] to do that, the neighborhoods need
[1:09:52] to know that it is
[1:09:55] happening. And sorry, I went
[1:09:57] home on tuesday with no voice. And it's
[1:10:00] an request because on tuesday night,
[1:10:01] I was
[1:10:03] asked to what end? Why am I here? What
[1:10:06] do I want to convey? Number one, I
[1:10:11] do not believe in any way that adequate
[1:10:14] notice regarding the proposal was provided to
[1:10:17] the neighbors or I provided proof and
[1:10:18] it
[1:10:21] is in all of your e-mails.
[1:10:24] >> I know the rules, I'm
[1:10:26] sorry. I believe that the relationship with
[1:10:30] the
[1:10:33] zoning board might
[1:10:35] have complicated things. Because you're
[1:10:36] willing
[1:10:39] to apologize, but the irony is
[1:10:42] in the item
[1:10:45] that they went through the floodplains
[1:10:47] and all the issues with the soils,
[1:10:50] whereas in this, it san eight-page
[1:10:51] thing that they forgot to
[1:10:53] mention that it is a floodplain and
[1:10:54] provided pictures of it
[1:10:57] in color for you in
[1:10:58] e-mail. Please, please, please. I'm not asking
[1:10:59] for you to kill it. I would love for
[1:11:00] you
[1:11:02] to kill it right now. But I'm asking
[1:11:06] that it goes back to the board and
[1:11:07] that we advertise it correctly. I
[1:11:09] would like to see more
[1:11:11] people get involved with this. It's not a big ask.
[1:11:15] >> you got a minute and 44 seconds left?
[1:11:17] >> do
[1:11:18] you have any questions? Do you
[1:11:20] want me to show you images? And we're
[1:11:23] here to listen to you.
[1:11:24] >> well actually
[1:11:24] I sent
[1:11:26] them all information about the insurance and
[1:11:27] what is going on
[1:11:30] in lee county and what's happening from
[1:11:32] fema as we went from a class 7 to
[1:11:33] a class
[1:11:35] 8. We are costing our residents more
[1:11:36] in
[1:11:38] flood insurance. And if we do not
[1:11:40] start to properly manage our floodplains. If
[1:11:42] we do not
[1:11:44] properly consider what our wetlands
[1:11:45] are for. Listen,
[1:11:47] wetlands to a barrier island is what
[1:11:48] a barrier
[1:11:49] island is to the mainland. And it
[1:11:51] is a form of protection.
[1:11:54] no matter how much you think
[1:11:55] you'll put a pond in. It's not going
[1:11:57] to do
[1:12:00] the same thing as what mother nature is capable of doing.
[1:12:03] I hope
[1:12:06] you consider it. I'm not telling
[1:12:09] you what I think is, this
[1:12:12] is what
[1:12:14] is, all right? Just readvertise it where
[1:12:15] the sign actually
[1:12:18] stands up and you can
[1:12:21] see it. And do you mind if
[1:12:24] I give
[1:12:25] you this?
[1:12:26] >> no, go ahead. >> okay.
[1:12:30] thank
[1:12:33] you for your -- I'll submit
[1:12:35] this to the clerk. Okay, any discussion from the board?
[1:12:39] >> oh my
[1:12:42] goodness. Sandra sullivan. How
[1:12:43] could I miss you? Come up, please.
[1:12:51] >> it is almost like it's
[1:12:53] on purpose at this point. Sandra sullivan. Okay,
[1:12:54] so as you
[1:12:56] know, I'm very passionate about the
[1:12:57] barrier island,
[1:13:00] I live on it. Our lives depend
[1:13:03] on protecting the barrier
[1:13:06] island for evacuation. I've come out
[1:13:07] here
[1:13:09] for
[1:13:12] numerous times. This is
[1:13:14] a public safety, life safety issue. And
[1:13:15] I have
[1:13:18] been coming here as you
[1:13:21] defer to whose district it is, so
[1:13:24] I want to remind you on that
[1:13:27] and according
[1:13:30] to the studies. We are
[1:13:33] 56.6 hours, to evacuate the
[1:13:36] barrier islands in
[1:13:37] a category 5 hurricane. We are lucky
[1:13:39] that we have not been hit by
[1:13:42] one and we did not get hit by it
[1:13:45] and not to say that we won't
[1:13:48] get hit
[1:13:51] by another one. It's not
[1:13:54] if, but when. And to
[1:14:00] get off? We have
[1:14:01] flooding issues, where some haven't
[1:14:02] been able to go and they had to use this road.
[1:14:06] and
[1:14:09] then I wanted to talk about your
[1:14:11] comprehensive plan in not increasing
[1:14:15] density on
[1:14:17] the coastal high hazard area. I also
[1:14:18] want
[1:14:21] to read this
[1:14:24] article that came out
[1:14:27] today. The emergency management agency confirmed,
[1:14:30] wait a
[1:14:32] second here. Earlier this year, stripping cape coral.
[1:14:39] fort myers beach. 25% flood
[1:14:45] insurance discounts. Under the
[1:14:48] federal flood insurance
[1:14:51] program, the county has an agreement
[1:14:54] with this federal agency in
[1:14:57] order to get discounts. You are suppose
[1:14:59] to be protecting the floodplain. You're
[1:15:00] suppose to
[1:15:02] be. But what I'm seeing is you're not
[1:15:03] and
[1:15:05] we're going to end up like lee county
[1:15:06] where
[1:15:09] we're going to be on top of all the other
[1:15:10] insurance
[1:15:12] crisis that we're dealing with. You're
[1:15:13] going
[1:15:15] to cause people to suffer more with
[1:15:18] even higher increases. And so
[1:15:21] not only are you potentially endangering
[1:15:22] lives for
[1:15:23] evacuation because we cannot get off because
[1:15:27] of the growth at 98% capacity
[1:15:30] to get off the causeway. But
[1:15:33] now the appropriate place
[1:15:36] to put kids that are
[1:15:39] coming out is on the main lands, and
[1:15:40] I also want
[1:15:42] to read from the
[1:15:45] staff reports on this that
[1:15:48] says that the closest management segment to
[1:15:51] the subject property is on courtney
[1:15:54] parkway between south tropical trail
[1:15:55] to
[1:16:00] banana boulevard, which has an acceptable
[1:16:04] level of service of e.
[1:16:07] some
[1:16:08] of the people here have discussed
[1:16:10] traffic issues
[1:16:12] in that area as well. And the key
[1:16:13] issue
[1:16:15] is the evacuation and not putting
[1:16:19] more density on the high
[1:16:22] hazard area and to
[1:16:24] protect the floodplain as you're required
[1:16:28] to do under the flood program.
[1:16:31] and that as affordable
[1:16:33] housing, they're waiving their impact fees,
[1:16:34] and so that will be burden by the people
[1:16:37] as well. Thank you.
[1:16:38] >>
[1:16:40] thank you very much. Mark rosen?
[1:16:49] >> good evening.
[1:16:52] so
[1:16:53] I found out at the last minute because
[1:16:55] of
[1:16:57] the way your rules work, which I came
[1:16:58] -- [ inaudible
[1:17:01] ] I came from
[1:17:03] dade county, born and raised floridian. We
[1:17:04] do
[1:17:06] things differently there and people participate.
[1:17:10] I live on 360
[1:17:11] banana boulevard. So I don't know
[1:17:13] enough about the floodplains
[1:17:14] and all the technicalities, so I'm
[1:17:15] not going to pretend to do it, but
[1:17:16] I support
[1:17:18] it. If they exist, they should be abided by. But
[1:17:19] I
[1:17:21] can tell you that traffic is a real issue with the schools.
[1:17:25] I
[1:17:28] can't even get out onto courtney
[1:17:31] in the morning
[1:17:33] during school sessions on jefferson. You
[1:17:34] can
[1:17:35] go around or wait for courteous people
[1:17:37] a lot
[1:17:40] better here than they are in miami. People
[1:17:45] line up on banana boulevard from almost
[1:17:46] a block and
[1:17:48] a half, two blocks. Morning and evening.
[1:17:52] now
[1:17:55] they're going to
[1:17:57] add more congestion to congested area,
[1:17:58] which
[1:18:00] is a concern to me and a safety hazard. So
[1:18:01] I would
[1:18:04] say was there any kind of impact
[1:18:06] study done to understand what it will
[1:18:07] be? And
[1:18:10] how that's going to
[1:18:12] be safe for people, you know, that
[1:18:14] we don't think anyone wants that traffic light.
[1:18:18] and due to increased population. That people
[1:18:19] and
[1:18:21] so has that been considered? And if
[1:18:22] it
[1:18:25] isn't, would you kindly do
[1:18:31] it? Because we live there. And
[1:18:34] as people who do. Thank you.
[1:18:37] >> paul hoskins?
[1:18:46] >> I live on
[1:18:49] hibiscus boulevard, the
[1:18:54] road north of that. I'm thinking they
[1:18:55] could put 48 houses out
[1:18:58] there and that is wrong, it's
[1:19:00] 48 units, so I'm glad that's clarified. But
[1:19:01] you
[1:19:04] see all
[1:19:05] these apartment buildings popping
[1:19:07] up everywhere and any way, you
[1:19:10] know, I guess I would like to know
[1:19:11] what's
[1:19:13] going on and I appreciate the
[1:19:15] 500-foot notice, but that is ridiculous.
[1:19:19] and it
[1:19:21] is in your policy, whatever, but it
[1:19:22] would be nice to
[1:19:24] know what they are really going to
[1:19:25] do
[1:19:27] there. Is that a four-story building, five
[1:19:28] story? I
[1:19:31] don't know, you know. I guess I can't
[1:19:32] ask
[1:19:34] them. And I'm learning your
[1:19:35] rules here. That's my concern. I would
[1:19:37] like to know what's going on, that's
[1:19:40] all. >> we appreciate you sharing your
[1:19:41] comments. Anything else? >> I have four minutes to spare.
[1:19:44] >> and commissioner goodson, this is your district.
[1:19:46] >> and chairman, I would like to bring bruce back up.
[1:19:54] bruce the site is 2.9 acres.
[1:20:01] could you tell us --
[1:20:07] give me the process to get plans approved.
[1:20:12] >> in the county, we create the plan drawings and engineer
[1:20:21] the stormwater, comply with floodplain, traffic study,
[1:20:27] environmental study,
[1:20:33] surveys of property
[1:20:36] and coordinate with utilty company for water and sewer.
[1:20:40] so...
[1:20:43] and I wanted to say this as a part of
[1:20:46] the discussion or not, but it
[1:20:49] is irrelevant of the zoning and they could go
[1:20:51] and develop this right now [ inaudible ]
[1:21:02] it will be limited to meet your rules
[1:21:03] and the floodplain rules
[1:21:05] are stringent, which is why you have
[1:21:06] the good grades you have because
[1:21:08] of your rules not because of what
[1:21:09] will get constructed. [ inaudible ]
[1:21:31] >> and come back again. Just an average. >>
[1:21:34] I can't even tell you how many times
[1:21:35] that
[1:21:36] happens, every time and multiple times
[1:21:37] on every project,
[1:21:38] yes, sir.
[1:21:40] >> and so they are very efficient in
[1:21:40] making
[1:21:43] sure you act right?
[1:21:45] >> yes, sir, absolutely. >> okay, I
[1:21:45] thought so too. The other issue, just
[1:21:46] asking, the church
[1:21:48] is there now, right?
[1:21:49] >> yes, sir. >>
[1:21:49] is that church going to remain or
[1:21:52] do you not know?
[1:21:53] >> it will
[1:21:55] not come down, it will come down. If
[1:21:56] you
[1:21:57] had 2.29 acres and retention that
[1:21:58] you need to hold on to
[1:22:01] your property for 24 hours,
[1:22:04] how much of that
[1:22:06] 2.92 gets developed usually of what percentage
[1:22:10] of an acre gets developed?
[1:22:11] >>
[1:22:13] you have restrictions that you
[1:22:16] cannot go above that and
[1:22:20] a site has 28%
[1:22:21] devoted for stormwater retention.
[1:22:23] >> and you
[1:22:25] have no intentions of mitigating?
[1:22:26] >> I
[1:22:26] don't
[1:22:29] know if there are, we don't
[1:22:32] know that yet. We have
[1:22:34] not done that study. But we don't impact
[1:22:37] anything that we are not allowed to.
[1:22:38] >>
[1:22:38] and
[1:22:40] I know that traffic is a concern,
[1:22:41] which makes
[1:22:43] this a great project because most
[1:22:45] of these kids don't drive. So this
[1:22:47] is not
[1:22:49] typical where you see that is being
[1:22:50] restricted
[1:22:52] all over the place where everybody has
[1:22:53] two cars. That's not
[1:22:54] what's going to happen here.
[1:22:55] >> thank
[1:22:56] you, chair.
[1:22:57] >> do you have
[1:22:58] a motion?
[1:23:00] >> I would like to move. >> I'm sorry.
[1:23:01] >> the light is on and somebody is home.
[1:23:04] >> thank you. Go ahead, commissioner pritchett. >>
[1:23:05] I
[1:23:07] do know from the notes that right
[1:23:10] now, there could be 133 trips, and
[1:23:12] then you're removing the church as
[1:23:14] well and churches typically have
[1:23:16] a lot of traffic too. Just another
[1:23:17] comfort
[1:23:19] thing is that they're going to have
[1:23:20] to do a lot of hoop
[1:23:22] jumping here to still get the project
[1:23:23] done, and I'm sure you're going
[1:23:24] to sit with the community then at
[1:23:26] that time and
[1:23:28] let them know what you're designing and
[1:23:29] planning. As
[1:23:31] far as the parameter of what we sent
[1:23:32] out notices
[1:23:35] for is what we have always
[1:23:37] done. If the board deems to have another
[1:23:39] consideration to expand that. That has been
[1:23:40] an add went amount that we've never
[1:23:41] had that problem
[1:23:42] in the past. So I want to mention
[1:23:44] that it is not new
[1:23:46] for this project and the staff has
[1:23:47] add wently done
[1:23:49] a great job again. That's all I want
[1:23:53] to say, sir.
[1:23:53] >>
[1:23:54] thank you, commissioner.
[1:23:55] >> yes, I
[1:23:56] would like to make a motion that
[1:23:58] we will approve this and the change
[1:23:59] of zoning
[1:24:02] and the classification
[1:24:05] through the inl to ru2-15.
[1:24:06] >> is
[1:24:08] there a second?
[1:24:09] >> second. >>
[1:24:11] is there
[1:24:13] a discussion? Hearing no discussion.
[1:24:14] >>
[1:24:14] aye.
[1:24:15] >>
[1:24:15] motion carries.
[1:24:16] >> thank you very much.
[1:24:20] >> and whose card would that be?
[1:24:31] >> beth. >> your name is beth? >>
[1:24:35] yeah, I
[1:24:41] filled out a card.
[1:24:47] >> you can go ahead and
[1:24:49] come on up, but I believe we haven't taken
[1:24:50] a
[1:24:53] vote yet, have we? Okay, come on
[1:24:55] up. Let's hear what you have to say.
[1:25:02] >> thank you. That's okay.
[1:25:05] >> just one moment, ma'am. Will
[1:25:07] you reon the part public hearing on
[1:25:08] the item?
[1:25:09] >> yes, sir.
[1:25:11] >> is there a motion to reopen the
[1:25:12] public
[1:25:13] hearing?
[1:25:14] >> so moved. >> is there
[1:25:14] a second?
[1:25:15] >>
[1:25:17] I'll second.
[1:25:18] >> signify by
[1:25:19] saying aye.
[1:25:20] >> aye. >> opposed nay? Thank
[1:25:20] you very
[1:25:23] much.
[1:25:24] >> my name is beth.
[1:25:26] I'm
[1:25:29] retired from
[1:25:32] federal government, which don't
[1:25:34] mean much. And what I thought was
[1:25:35] pertinent that he's
[1:25:38] not sure about
[1:25:41] the wetlands. When it rains, I always
[1:25:43] notice this when I'm driving, the
[1:25:47] water never
[1:25:50] goes away for weeks, weeks,
[1:25:52] weeks, it just sits there. It is a
[1:25:53] wetland and
[1:25:56] I can't imagine anybody that is
[1:25:58] building anything on that and there
[1:25:59] is no reason to do that.
[1:26:02] and as far as they don't have
[1:26:05] vehicles, somebody has to
[1:26:08] take these people to
[1:26:10] doctors or whatever, to the grocery, whatever. It
[1:26:11] will add
[1:26:13] more traffic that I personally don't
[1:26:14] even go that direction
[1:26:17] when I walk, drive down banana boulevard. I
[1:26:20] have to turn and
[1:26:22] make another trip because the traffic
[1:26:23] all day long
[1:26:26] now is getting worse. And I didn't
[1:26:29] know myself, who do I contact to tell
[1:26:32] somebody that hey, it's getting worse
[1:26:33] out here. I've
[1:26:34] seen two children almost get hit by
[1:26:35] cars,
[1:26:38] which is just because there are
[1:26:40] so many people. And like the one gentlemen
[1:26:41] said, people are
[1:26:44] lining
[1:26:46] up on the streets. It is ridiculous. Thank you so
[1:26:47] much for what you do.
[1:26:50] I believe in the government.
[1:26:56] and thank you so much,
[1:26:58] I have lived here for ten years. I'm
[1:26:59] not going
[1:27:02] back to ohio, I do love ohio.
[1:27:03] >> I'm sorry we missed your card.
[1:27:05] >> in
[1:27:08] light of those additional comments,
[1:27:10] and I apologize, but take that vote
[1:27:11] again,
[1:27:14] please.
[1:27:15] >> we have
[1:27:17] not taken a vote yet.
[1:27:18] >>
[1:27:20] okay. I would like to make
[1:27:23] a motion that we approve
[1:27:29] this and
[1:27:32] I
[1:27:34] can't find it, okay. Okay, thank you,
[1:27:35] thank you.
[1:27:36] >>
[1:27:38] it is a motion on h14.
[1:27:41] 24200014.
[1:27:44] okay, is there any discussion?
[1:27:47] commissioner feltner?
[1:27:50] [ inaudible ]
[1:27:53] there's
[1:27:55] a motion by commissioner goodson,
[1:27:56] second by commissioner
[1:27:58] pritchett. No more discussion. All in
[1:27:59] favor signify by
[1:28:02] saying aye?
[1:28:03] >>
[1:28:05] aye.
[1:28:06] >> the motion
[1:28:07] carries. Okay, thank you. Let's go on to h15.
[1:28:08] jeff, please.
[1:28:11] >> scott
[1:28:14] martin requests a change
[1:28:17] of zoning classification from bu-1
[1:28:23] and ru-2-15 to all ru-2-15,
[1:28:26] 24z00015, tax account number
[1:28:28] is 2520270, located in district 2.
[1:28:29] >> okay.
[1:28:35] is the applicant here? Scott?
[1:28:38] scott martin? All right, so you just
[1:28:40] sit right there for a second, scott. Let's
[1:28:41] turn it
[1:28:44] over to commissioner goodson for
[1:28:47] his analysis of this. It
[1:28:49] is his district. Commissioner? With
[1:28:50] a say you?
[1:28:51] >> I have no conflict.
[1:28:53] >> okay. >> you might be off the
[1:28:55] hook, but let's try. Is there a motion
[1:28:57] to approve?
[1:28:58] >> I'd like
[1:29:00] to make a
[1:29:01] motion, mr. Chair, to approve. >> is there a second?
[1:29:04] >> second.
[1:29:07] >> motioned by commissioner goodson,
[1:29:08] seconded by commissioner tobia. Any
[1:29:12] discussion? There is no
[1:29:16] cards out there. I think. Okay. All
[1:29:20] in favor? Motion carries. Thank you
[1:29:21] so much.
[1:29:22] >>
[1:29:24] see ya, scott.
[1:29:25] >>
[1:29:25] thank you.
[1:29:26] >>> all right, let's go
[1:29:27] to
[1:29:29] the next one.
[1:29:30] >> h16 is brevard county
[1:29:31] board of county commissioners requests a
[1:29:33] change of zoning classification
[1:29:36] from au with the cup
[1:29:39] and gml to all gml institutional
[1:29:42] with the removal of
[1:29:45] a cup, application
[1:29:48] number 24z00017, tax
[1:29:50] account number 2055557, located in
[1:29:51] district two. >> okay, commissioner goodson?
[1:29:53] >> I have
[1:29:54] no issue of this. I would
[1:29:57] make a motion
[1:30:00] for approval. And that is
[1:30:03] the sheriff's farm.
[1:30:04] >> there
[1:30:05] is a motion by commissioner goodson
[1:30:07] and any discussion? Hearing no discussion,
[1:30:09] all in favor signify
[1:30:12] by
[1:30:14] saying aye? All opposed nays? Motion carries.
[1:30:15] you're up,
[1:30:18] jeff.
[1:30:20] >> h17 is borrows west suite developers,
[1:30:21] llc, requests a cup for
[1:30:22] on-premises consumption of alcohol
[1:30:27] in a pud
[1:30:29] zoning classification. Application
[1:30:30] number
[1:30:32] 24z00019, tax account number 3030134,
[1:30:33] located in district
[1:30:34] four.
[1:30:34] >> commissioner feltner? >>
[1:30:35] I make a motion to approve.
[1:30:36] >> is
[1:30:39] there a second?
[1:30:40] >> second.
[1:30:42] >> motioned by
[1:30:44] commissioner feltner, seconded by commissioner
[1:30:45] tobia. Any discussion? Hearing
[1:30:48] no discussion,
[1:30:51] all
[1:30:54] in favor?
[1:30:55] >> aye. >> all opposed? The motion carries.
[1:30:56] >> h18, walter chlewicki requests
[1:30:57] a
[1:30:59] change of zoning classification from
[1:31:00] ru-1-13
[1:31:03] to ru-2-4 with a bdp. The
[1:31:06] application is requested to be tabled
[1:31:08] to allow readvertising the applicant
[1:31:09] who did not appear at the pnz meeting.
[1:31:12] >> okay, so we don't
[1:31:14] need to do anything on this?
[1:31:15] >> this
[1:31:15] will be
[1:31:16] readvertised.
[1:31:17] >> okay. So that one is done.
[1:31:18] okay.
[1:31:21] >> all right,
[1:31:23] we have any unfinished business? We
[1:31:27] have some public comments. Sullivan?
[1:31:57] and it is a 9:00 a.m. Meeting.
[1:32:21] and to bring this forward.
[1:32:24] and they are leaving.
[1:32:38] and our current lagoon decision should be with the commissioners.
[1:32:42] and for the next ten years.
[1:32:57] and with
[1:32:59] no burden to make poor decisions to
[1:33:00] not fix what is wrong.
[1:33:08] and the voters this year and that
[1:33:09] I
[1:33:11] believe the decision of the commissioners will
[1:33:12] go on
[1:33:14] in district three and district five without burdening them.
[1:33:21] and the strive.
[1:33:27] the money that were paid for the fund.
[1:33:33] and now weaponized.
[1:33:48] and of $50 million down to palm bay.
[1:33:57] and the modification.
[1:34:13] and so we know what will happen and that will end up there.
[1:34:24] and the commissioners that are
[1:34:26] coming in here and the conflict of interest issues.
[1:34:47] and the infrastructure tax, 2.775.
[1:34:52] [ inaudible ]
[1:35:08] >> stella snooks?
[1:35:17] >> good day, county staff. I'm steven
[1:35:23] snooks, born here
[1:35:26] at cape canaveral. And I'm looking
[1:35:27] to improve brevard
[1:35:29] county as best as I
[1:35:33] can and we have cruise
[1:35:35] ships coming to town twice a week
[1:35:42] on schedule for one shift. And
[1:35:44] so we have them coming to town and
[1:35:45] what do
[1:35:47] they do? They come here. [ inaudible ]
[1:35:51] they leave
[1:35:52] here. They go to orlando and they
[1:35:57] seek enjoyment and things
[1:35:59] like that and so it's to central florida.
[1:36:02] and if they wanted to increase revenue and profits.
[1:36:23] >> and to have a competition course constructed in
[1:36:26] the northwest sector and
[1:36:29] in the '05, '06, '07.
[1:36:31] and 16, 17, 18 parcels. It is a
[1:36:37] lot of land out
[1:36:40] that way. Currently it is owned by
[1:36:42] the miami alternatives, the llc. And
[1:36:43] about 10,
[1:36:45] 12 acres out there to my record search
[1:36:46] and I
[1:36:49] was able to find
[1:36:55] one payment on all those.
[1:37:01] and so this
[1:37:04] is in great conflict to the
[1:37:07] plans to bring
[1:37:08] profit through entertainment for brevard
[1:37:09] county as 10, 12 acres going to the
[1:37:13] area would
[1:37:14] mean a proposal for residentials housing,
[1:37:16] things of that nature. And you could
[1:37:19] imagine the competition course and
[1:37:21] next to the residential areas, they would
[1:37:22] not be a
[1:37:25] great thing that there would be noise
[1:37:27] complaints and such. As this area
[1:37:28] is still
[1:37:29] untouched, there's been no ground
[1:37:31] broken for the
[1:37:34] name of this company, and their
[1:37:36] pursuit for over 12 years. That tells
[1:37:37] me that
[1:37:38] they are stalemating the efforts of brevard
[1:37:40] county to have growth.
[1:37:43] I would like
[1:37:46] the county to consider to put in
[1:37:48] land near this development into a
[1:37:49] land trust, so
[1:37:51] that way their stalemating can be
[1:37:52] combated with putting land
[1:37:55] into
[1:37:58] a trust that could then
[1:38:00] have the investors confidence in following
[1:38:01] through with
[1:38:04] contributing more funds
[1:38:06] to this land trust to then develop the
[1:38:07] competition courses for brevard county.
[1:38:13] and at this point, I would
[1:38:16] like to
[1:38:19] be in touch with
[1:38:21] frank abbate to complete that task.
[1:38:21] >>
[1:38:22] thank you, steven.
[1:38:22] >>
[1:38:25] can I ask a question? When you say
[1:38:26] competition course? What is
[1:38:28] that? What does that entail?
[1:38:28] >>
[1:38:31] competition
[1:38:34] course would be a street
[1:38:36] course, a drag strip, a dirt course,
[1:38:40] a pump track, which would be
[1:38:42] for bmx, bikes, and such. And this
[1:38:43] would
[1:38:46] be on the scale of olympic
[1:38:49] level tracks for all the
[1:38:52] respective sports,
[1:38:55] and also to include aerial
[1:38:56] tracks, the scaled down for first person view
[1:38:58] racing. I think that would be
[1:39:01] more of a hit for the kids to be able
[1:39:01] to learn
[1:39:03] racing before they would get into a vehicle themselves.
[1:39:10] it's great because it's not
[1:39:12] causing the hazard or the risk to
[1:39:13] nasa and things
[1:39:15] of that nature, which will have no fly
[1:39:16] zones.
[1:39:17] >> I'm
[1:39:17] curious of the drag strip. How long
[1:39:19] does that have
[1:39:22] to be
[1:39:25] in that modern era?
[1:39:26] >> other tracks are comparable to quarter
[1:39:28] miles, half mile. The street course,
[1:39:31] they could take up as
[1:39:34] much as 100
[1:39:37] acres. I would feel to
[1:39:39] include each and every track. 500
[1:39:40] acres
[1:39:43] to a thousand acres would be the
[1:39:45] absolute bare minimum and then you
[1:39:49] would have to include the
[1:39:52] parking infrastructure, the frontage
[1:39:52] for
[1:39:54] stores, things of that nature. So
[1:39:55] I feel that it
[1:39:58] would be a great
[1:40:01] starting
[1:40:02] bid for potentially getting brevard county
[1:40:03] into land approved to be better.
[1:40:04] >>
[1:40:05] not that far away from us?
[1:40:05] >> correct.
[1:40:10] >> and it is primarily
[1:40:13] only a quarter mile track. This would
[1:40:16] not include street courses, dirt courses, aerial courses. And
[1:40:18] I've reached out to them to see if
[1:40:22] they would like to expand their mission
[1:40:25] and to include partnerships that would
[1:40:25] help assemble
[1:40:28] that. And they denied that. They have no
[1:40:28] aim
[1:40:30] for growth and they are also not in
[1:40:31] brevard county. So
[1:40:33] the revenue and those events would still be lost.
[1:40:37] >> thank you, sir. >> you're welcome. >>
[1:40:38] any other questions?
[1:40:39] >> commissioner pritchett,
[1:40:39] do you have a question?
[1:40:46] >> I think that it sounds like a very fun idea. So I
[1:40:49] think if
[1:40:52] you will go out and find
[1:40:54] investors and you can start working
[1:40:55] on that. And then we could
[1:40:57] get a plan. I might be willing to
[1:40:58] consider zoning changes, but
[1:41:01] you'll need to go out first to find
[1:41:02] some investors and
[1:41:03] find some funds.
[1:41:04] >> certainly. >>
[1:41:04] thank you. That's all I wanted to say.
[1:41:10] >> okay, thank you, steven. >>
[1:41:11] thank you very kindly.
[1:41:12] >> all right.
[1:41:13] board reports?
[1:41:16] county manager?
[1:41:19] >> I have no report.
[1:41:22] >> county attorney? >> no report,
[1:41:23] mr. Chair.
[1:41:24] >> commissioner pritchett? >> thank you, sir.
[1:41:25] I did
[1:41:27] want to just mention one thing that
[1:41:28] we just came
[1:41:30] out of a very heated meeting. And
[1:41:31] I do
[1:41:34] understand that people needed a need
[1:41:36] to say what they needed to say and
[1:41:37] I totally get it
[1:41:40] and that
[1:41:43] we
[1:41:46] would
[1:41:48] put up the civility. That they want
[1:41:49] to state their strong
[1:41:51] opinion without yelling at people
[1:41:52] or typically getting personal with
[1:41:52] people, so
[1:41:55] I want to commend you on that and that I
[1:41:56] think that we
[1:41:58] have a couple of people right now
[1:41:58] that will
[1:42:01] be crossing the line as I wanted to mention.
[1:42:04] the personal attack on our staff that
[1:42:06] they don't deserve that as we signed up
[1:42:08] for it and
[1:42:09] that we are thick skinned and we would
[1:42:14] deal with it and
[1:42:16] that county staff, it's out of bounds. I
[1:42:17] want
[1:42:19] to apologize to all the county staff
[1:42:20] that
[1:42:22] would have to deal with that and tay
[1:42:23] kind of caught
[1:42:25] me off guard and I give you my word
[1:42:26] that
[1:42:29] I'm going
[1:42:30] to be very strong and proactive of not letting
[1:42:32] you guys ever
[1:42:34] get beat up again like that on personal attacks
[1:42:35] and so
[1:42:38] that is what I wanted
[1:42:39] to say. You're wonderful people. I
[1:42:41] thank
[1:42:42] you for your integrity and all that you
[1:42:44] do as you
[1:42:47] bring a
[1:42:50] lot to the table. And
[1:42:53] to talk without
[1:42:55] being mocked from the front and most
[1:42:56] of the
[1:42:57] time that this is happening, they're
[1:43:02] going out there, so you handled
[1:43:04] it beautifully, but I'm getting thin
[1:43:05] on the way they're treating you as well. And
[1:43:06] if you want to, you certainly have it.
[1:43:09] >> thank you, commissioner. Commissioner goodson?
[1:43:12] >> none, sir.
[1:43:14] >> commissioner tobia? >> no report, mr. Chair.
[1:43:17] >> no report. >>
[1:43:19] commissioner steel? No report. Do I hear
[1:43:21] a motion to adjourn?
[1:43:23] >> motion so made.
[1:43:24] >> is there a second? >> I'll second.
[1:43:26] >> all in favor? >> aye.
[1:43:29] >> all opposed? Meeting is adjourned.