Hey, let's go. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. So There's only one I've been used to I've already done this. Heat. Heat.
You know, like I don't really No serious. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. Board of County Commissioners acts as a quasi judicial body when it hears requests for resoning and conditional
use permits. Applicants must provide competent substantial evidence establishing facts or expert witness opinion testimony showing that the request meets the zoning code and comprehensive plan criteria. Opponents must also testify as to facts or provide
expert testimony whether they like or dislike a request is not competent evidence. The board must then decide whether the evidence demonstrates consistency and compatibility with the comprehensive plan and the existing rules in the zoning ordinance, property adjacent to the property to be reszoned
and the actual development of the surrounding area. The board cannot consider speculation, non-expert opinion testimony, or poll the audience by asking those in favor or opposed to stand up or raise their hands. If a commissioner has had communications regarding a resoning or conditional use
permit request before the board, the commissioner must disclose the subject of the communication and the identity of the person, group, or entity with whom the communication took place before the board takes action on the request. Likewise, if a commissioner has made a site visit, inspection, or investigation, the commissioner must
disclose that fact before the board takes action on the request. Each applicant is allowed a total of 15 minutes to present their request unless time is extended by majority vote of the board. The applicant may reserve any portion of the 15 minutes for rebuttal. Other speakers are allowed 5 minutes to speak. Speakers may not pass their time
to someone else in order to give that person more time to speak. Our invocation today will be delivered by Anthony Ma Meyers, Teen Missions International. Anthony here. Ladies and gentlemen, it's a privilege
to be able to give the invocation tonight for your meeting and uh thank you for your service. Let's pray. Father, we just are so grateful to be able to be here tonight. We thank you for this beautiful day that you've made. Father, we just pray uh right now uh a
blessing upon this meeting tonight. I thank you for the commissioners. I just pray that you would open their hearts and their ears to what is being said to those who will be speaking tonight. That lord you would give them clarity lord uh that you would give them uh the voices
to share their opinions and father that uh your will would be done in decisions that need to be made and uh lord the future of our community. Father, we're so grateful that uh your son died on the cross for our sins. And we have the hope of eternal life. And Father, there are things that mean so much more in life
than some of the things that uh that may be talked about here tonight eternally. But Father, we just know that you'll be here. We ask your Holy Spirit to be among all the speakers who will be coming up to this podium. Give them the words to say. Give them clarity. And give them a just a peace as they share
what's on their hearts and their minds. and Lord that everything that is said and done here tonight would be pleasing to you. So we thank you for your love and your guidance in each one of our hearts today. We love you and give you the praise in Jesus name and amen. >> Amen. >> Amen. >> Thank you. Our pledge today will be led
by Commissioner Rob Felner. >> Please join me in the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. I'd like to officially call the meeting to order. We have no amendments on the agenda for approval. Uh >> make motion for Yes. >> I'd like to make a motion for uh Commissioner Goodson to join us by phone
uh due to medical reasons. I'll second >> motion a second for Commissioner Goodson to join us by phone for medical reasons. All in favor say yay. I >> cares unanimously. Thank you. >> Mr. Chair, if I may, uh may I just ask
for the record? Commissioner Goodson, are you able to see the uh meeting on video, sir? >> Yes, I am. >> Thank you, sir. >> Okay, good. We have no resolutions, awards, or presentations. We'll go straight to the
consent agenda. Um, is there a card or question on the consent agenda? I see none. A motion would be in order for the >> I'll make a motion to approve consent. >> Motion to approve the consent agenda. All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay.
>> Opposed say nay. >> Carries. Thank you. >> Okay. Public comment item G. Do we have any no public comment cards? Move on to the public hearings. Uh we have some items that we're we're
going to hear at the first just uh to move along quickly. Item H5 has been withdrawn. So if there's anyone here for H5 u it's been withdrawn. It will not be heard. So you don't have to wait here for that unless you want to watch the
show. You're welcome to stay. Um item H8 and H9 uh the Turtle Mountain Ventures. Uh that is there's a request that we table that two items. One's a companion item. Uh typically on a first
request for table, we honor that. So anyone here for that? We'll we'll need a motion to table uh H and H9, but it won't take a second to spell that. So >> uh well without anything else sir I'll make do we need separate motions on each
one you want it that way >> if you can to the date certain of July 9 at the 5:00 pm zoning meeting. >> Okay I will make a motion to table H8 uh to July 9th at 5:00 p.m.
>> Second >> motion and second. All those in favor say yay. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Carries unanimously. Okay. A motion on H9 would be in. >> I will make a motion on H9 to table to
the July 9th uh meeting at 5:00 p.m. >> Second. >> Motion and second to table item H9 to July 9th at 5:00 p.m. All in favor say yay. >> Carries unanimously. Okay. So, we'll
move on to our agenda. Um, first agenda item H1. >> Item H1, Paul and G. Eric Derska, being represented by Bruce Moya and Kim Rosena, requesting a zoning classification change from RU-2-10
and RU-1-11 to RU-2-15 under application 25Z0062 located in district 1. You're recognized. >> Good evening, chairman, members of the county commission. Good evening, Mr.
Goodson. I am here on behalf of uh Milstone Ventures LLC, the contract purchaser for the Derska property. Um, also here are Eric and Carrie Derska representing the property owners. Millstone Ventures is
represented by Andy Weatherford, the co-founder of Millstone, Owen Hartman, and Sam Kramer. This is the request for a reszoning of 18.07 acres for multif family apartments from RU210 to RU215.
Um before I begin the presentation, uh Mr. Weatherford would like to tell you a little bit about the project and their company. >> Good evening, uh Mr. Chairman and commissioners. Um I'm Andy Weatherford. I'm uh one of the owners of uh Milstone
Ventures. Um so just want to start with a brief introduction of our company. Uh we're a small development shop out of Indianapolis. Um my business partner and I started this company in 2017 and uh we're a vertically integrated uh real
estate development company. Uh so we're like what we like to consider uh a cradletograve development shop. And what that means is we're here um through zoning and entitlements. We design the projects. We we function as the builder of the project and then at the end of
the project um we actually manage and operate the property once we've moved residents in. Um and we did this uh by design. You know, we think the advantage um for us and for the communities that we build in is for every step of this project um through planning and zoning,
through design, construction, and then the operation of the property. Uh there's one point of contact every step of the way, and that is me and my team. Um so that's a little bit about who we are, the type of product that we build. Uh we consider ourselves a luxury uh
resort style multifamily developer. Um, and so what that means is we deliver uh these projects with uh elevated finishes throughout the units. Uh quartz countertops, luxury vinyl plank, flooring throughout, no carpet, uh wood
shelving, no wire shelving, uh beverage coolers in the kitchen islands, and um you know, high-end amenities, uh fitness center, yoga studio, dog park, dog spas, resort style pool. Um, on this project, we're considering a two-story clubhouse
uh for a viewing deck to view the rocket launches um down here. Try to keep our residents on property and off the street during those busy times. And we think that'd be a great feature uh for our project and and for our future residents. Um and you know, being vertically integrated, as I mentioned
earlier, since we control construction, that allows us to control our costs. And what that means is that we can deliver this elevated product uh to our residents for just market rate rents. Um so that's another advantage of of our vertical integration. Um you know when
it comes to development, we have a very targeted approach. We try to be in places and in communities that need product like we can deliver. Uh and that's what we're seeing down here in Bard County uh and in the Titusville area. Um you know there's been a lot of job growth, a lot of population growth.
um industry especially spaceflight and aeronautics are really taking off. Uh but there hasn't been that much product uh developed here recently and so certainly not as much as we would expect to see with with the ele the amount of population growth and job growth we see
happening here in Bvard County. Um, and you know, another trend that we're seeing is a lot of people that are um, holding those high-paying jobs, those new jobs um, in those industries, they're commuting and we think a product like ours would encourage people to come
here and live, work, and play in Bvard County and the Titusville area. So, um, that's why we're here. That's a little bit about the product, uh, that we're we're planning on developing and a little bit about our company. and uh just wanted to kick things off introducing ourselves and our project
and uh wanted to thank you for uh for hearing us tonight. >> Okay, thank you. We have another card for Bruce if you'd like to be here. >> I'm I'm going to present the project now. I just wanted him to tell you about the project and Bruce has if you have
any questions, Bruce is here. >> Okay. >> So, I know this is in your packet. This is the future land use map. Um, all of this property is residential 15, including the RU 1111 zoned to the north. The Derskas have assembled these 15.
All that yellow is res 15. And you can see the property boundaries are all in the res 15 through here. These are 15 parcels that Derska's acquired over the years. Uh, they're now ready to retire and wish to sell the property.
Some of this was zoned RU11 back in 1955 with the Sun Valley Plat and those are the smaller lots which are not going to be used really for development um at this time. There's u some wetlands on those properties. So that that area will not be developed. As mentioned, all 18 acres have
residential 15 future land use. That the county's vision with the comp plan that was developed in 1988 was to have multifamily by the residential 15 designation. Also in your packet, we provided to PNZ the map of the area with what is
surrounding it. Um, this is the property in black. Down the middle there with the red line is the Breezy Lane. That's currently the access uh to the Durka's home. To the north is the fire station. And then to the south of that is the Bvard Bard County uh station. I think it's Barber
Pill station. Then you have many vacant lots. And then you have the new apartments down there to the south, the Milstone. Uh, with that, we believe this is compatible with the area. North and South is vacant.
There's multif family across the street to the north and the south. They're all old multif family. You have Summer Hill Apartments, 2005, uh, construction. You have the WW Apartments, 1985 construction, and then you have Milright, which is brand new.
We are 250 ft to the nearest single family home across State Road 405. The staff report states that the primary uses on 405 are commercial office and government facilities and that the only new development is homes and apartments.
Staff report confirms that this area is not an established residential neighborhood and this is truly undeveloped commercially zoned land. Uh but actually it's undeveloped multif family land. uh preliminary concurrency traffic will not cause a deficiency in the level of service. There's no school
concurrencies issues and the staff report says there's no material violations of relevant comp plan policies. Any environmental issues such as wetlands will be resolved during site plan with uh site plan standards and engineering standards and again the wetlands will be maintained except for minor impacts. The planning and zoning
board recommend approval of 9 to1 and we would request that you uh recommend approval of the residential 15 future uh the RU215 zoning. We're here to answer any questions. >> Okay. Uh we do have a card for Owen
Hartman. >> He's with the developer. >> He's he's covered. I thought he would be. We have no cards in opposition. Any questions? Yes. >> I just have to disclose I actually met um with Mr. Rzanka and the developer team um for this item uh for approximately 45 minutes on April 28th
to discuss their vision. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> And I'll disclose that I did drive by the site today. So >> if there's no other discussion, I'll make a motion to approve, sir. U there's
a motion, a second to approve. Any debate? >> Second. >> All those in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. carries unanimously. Thank you. >> Okay. Our next item H1.
>> Item H2 is J >> H2. Sorry. Item H2 is JJ Ventures LLC requests a zoning classification change from IU to BU2 under application 26Z
00002 located in district 1. >> We don't have any cards for good evening all >> sir. Did you fill out pink card? >> I did not. >> Can you do it afterwards for us? >> I absolutely can. Is it in the back?
>> Right in the table. Yes, >> I'll be more than happy to as soon as soon as we're down here. >> Okay, good. Thanks. >> All right. Um, yes. Uh, we would like to reszone from U1. Is that what it says? I'm sorry. This is my first time up here. Yeah. Um, IU to BU2. We plan on
putting a hardware store in the front of our of those properties as well as a parking lot in the back. And to be able to have outdoor storage, we need to have move it to a BU2. And everybody around us is already BU2. So, we asked for it
and they asked for me to be here today. >> Okay, good. Uh, any questions? We have no cards in opposition. >> I'll make a motion to approve, sir. >> Motion to approve. >> And I'll second. >> Second. All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay.
>> Carries unanimously. Thank you. >> I'll go back there. Sign the paperwork. >> Yep. Great. Thank you. >> Thank you'all. >> Next item H3. Item H3 is HQW LLC and HQW Homeowners Association
Incorporated request a zoning classification change from EU1 and AU with a BDP to RVP and AU with a CUP for boarding of horses and horses for hire
and removal of the BDP under application 26Z 0005. five located in district 1. Planning and zoning board heard this request in a unanimously recommended approval with a
BDP limiting the development to 36 recreational vehicle sites in eight cabins. >> Okay, you're recognized. >> Good afternoon. I'm John Holquist. I reside in Coco, Florida. this property as at uh 5405
uh West King Street or FL520. Um as stated, there was a building development uh binding plan that was requested. I have those to give at this time. My presentation is on slides. You can
access that. So, the future land use of this property is for uh R15 for the southern half of the property and uh neighborhood commercial on the northern half. The RVP uh does coincide with the neighborhood
commercial according to Zonia when I spoke to them. Um let's the current building development plan on the site is for uh 40 individual homes. And
when we reviewed this uh this is definitely a highest and best use of the property if we wanted to just divide it up and sell it. But I think that would be not the best thing for the community. um is regarding the R15. If that was
pursued, that would put over 300 units around this pond. And again, I think that would be a very poor use of of this property. Um after careful consideration and speaking with several different uh organizations in the area from Happy
Horse and Amber Acres uh to consulting with some family and friends in the area. Uh we have our civil engineered plan and are requesting for the northern portion of the property or the east, north, and west sides of
the pond to be zoned as RVP and then return the southern portion of the property to agriculture. The portion of the property on one side um on the west side is currently agricultural zoned.
The properties to the north and to the east that is maroon are uh commercial properties and the properties uh all around the rest of it is either agricultural agricultural
residential. The portion that we are asking to go to RVP um only backs up to two residential properties. Um after speaking with zoning with our own plans, we plan on fencing the community uh properly and
there's going to be uh 20 foot buffer between our property line and the residential property line because there's an easement there. And then between the property line and where we are going to have our cabins or uh the RV spots, there's going to be another
70 feet um that we want to keep as wooded. Our environmental report came back with no issues and we have done our preliminaries with uh the development and with Florida Department of
Transportation for anything that is needed with 520. This would be our final uh ask for the change in zoning. >> Do we have any questions? Okay, thank you. Um, our next speaker, we have any questions when we get
through the speaker Parish? >> Hi. Um, Skip Parish. I live across. You might want to pull that mic. >> Yeah, I am a bit I am a bit tall. Hi, Skip Parish. I live at 5250 King Street. So, I am basically across the street. His property is fairly long and
stretches out a goodly bit. Um, I was here for the initial initial advisory meeting. I talked to Mr. Hongquist. Is it I bad with last names the gentleman trying to develop this. And one of my main concerns, and this is really the
only thing after talking to him after the meeting when he was here last, and I was here last, is about traffic. Having lived on that property off and on since the 70s, as things come out west of 95,
there can be a lot of traffic. My main concern with that is anybody coming east from Orange County, the last red light they've seen before they get to Friday Road, which is past his property, is in Wedgefield at the other end of 520.
If you I don't know if it's in his plan to have a turn lane put in for this, but that would be the main thing. We we have a lot of backups and a lot of people pulling sharp into different businesses that do not have turn lanes. There is the RV business
that is right next to 95 that does not have a turn lane and that has been problematic for a lot of us that live and have lived in that area for a long time. Having talked to the developer, he's a good guy. I think he has great interest
in doing what he's doing. I'm not trying to stop it. My main concern is traffic. I've got three kids. I'm assuming at least one of them is going to end up living on this property after I am no longer doing so. So, that's just my main
concern and that's all. Thanks for your time. >> Thank you, Lindseay Blair. Good evening. Um, that was just my husband. I also live at 5250 West King Street and I'm echoing his concerns. Um, I think the planned use is fine. I have
no real issues with horses. I like horses. Um, but much like we see issues with people turning into the RV place right next to 95 because there is no light controlling the flow of traffic
all the way from in Orange County Bifllo area all the way out to Friday Road. Having the sudden stop of RVs and horse trailers turning in, I've seen just one person slowing down create massive
issues. So, if there's any way we can get a turn lane or something installed to make it safer for families in the area and for the potent the people that do plan on residing there or boarding their horses there, I think would be a
benefit to the community at large. And that's it for me. >> Thank you, Gary Sereni. >> Close. How you doing? U my main thing is there's a question that wasn't brought up last time and um if you could bring
the survey up onto the board on the southwest side. There's a canal that comes from this lake. This lake is built on an aquifer and it constantly fills all the time. And that lake, that canal is the only thing that keeps that
lake in check. Now, the first map he had with his horse trails goes over that canal. And my question is, what is he going to do? Is there covert going in there? Is he completely blocking the canal? Because if he blocks that canal, then the lake's going to overflow and
that whole property is going to flood because it's on the aquifer and it's constantly running. And there's canal that runs completely along the south side of the property. And that canal supplies water to the pond on my property, which I live on the end of
Samard Lane. And my neighbor's property has a pond, and it fills both of those with constant with water. Otherwise, if there wasn't any water that they would just kill all the fish and everything that's in there. So my question is what he's going to do with that canal
on both of them that where the horse trail goes across and then where he's building in the horse barns along the south side there to mitigate the water issue that's coming through there. >> Okay. I can ask the I can ask the
applicant to answer that or if he sure >> yes >> you can come up. Yes, you can come up. Get you on the record. um southside canal and the uh drainage from the pond um are going to be maintained.
We are putting in a bridge for lack of better words. It's it's it's going to be a covert pipe, but it's going to be an oversized covert pipe so that we can have a horse trail and we plan on putting guard rails on the side of it so that it has a equestrian look to it. Um to answer the
other questions that were went went through here already, our preliminary with the FDOT said that we do not need a turning lane. We're requesting from them that we can have at least a 40ft turning lane at our cost put in because of that very situation. Again, I've been when they put a light on Friday, I thought
the whole world changed because I' I've been up and down this area since the 80s. Um so I agree civil engineering. Yeah. and civil engineering is doing the, you know, the the work on all that right now.
>> Anything else? >> I have a question while you're up. The um it may be a staff, I don't know, the issue of uh trailers slowing down to turn into the project. Will there be a
DXL lane built? >> Is that required? It's not required by FDOT at this time, but we've requested that we can do that for that very reason. We think just with the continued development of this area, it's it's going to be a concern. >> Okay. >> So, we're trying to stay ahead of the
game on that. >> Mr. Chair, I believe that would be something we would look at with DOT through the site planning process >> to make the termination with the appropriate traffic >> improvement. Be required. I would unless road as busy as this. >> I don't know that it would be required,
but it would definitely be something that we take a look at. >> Okay. You're seeking permits to do that, >> correct? >> Okay, that makes sense. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? That's all our cards. >> If that's it, sir, I'll make a motion to approve.
>> I'll second. >> There's a motion. Second to approve. If we make, Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. Go ahead. >> Oh, I'm I'm sorry. Yes, sir. Uh just so we're clear, we are good with the the BDP, right? >> The applicant >> if we So this is the first time >> let's withdraw that motion. Let's hear
from staff and then we'll >> I apologize, Mr. Chairman, but this is the first time we've seen this BDP. We It has not been reviewed. >> So typically the process would be, you know, approve a BDP in principle. Uh we work with the applicant to and we'll bring it back for final approval by the board. We would ask that be the case
here. While no particular term sticks out to me as wrong, it may be missing some of our standard language that we have. It may actually be overly restrictive even on what, you know, accessory buildings, things like that can be used. So, we would just ask that to work with the applicant to finalize it and bring it back to the board.
>> Okay. Uh, so what form should the motion take here then? >> Approved with the BDP is fine. Just just I just want to note for the record that you're not approving it as submitted today. >> Okay. Gotcha. Okay. Okay, I'll I'll rem make the motion uh
to approve with the BDP. I'll >> second. >> The motion second. All those in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Opposed. >> Carries unanimous. Thank you. Next item. H4.
>> Yes. I would also like to um disclose for the record that I met with the developers for item H4 on May 5th for approximately 30 minutes to discuss their vision of the the project. >> Okay. >> Item H4 is Dominique F. Co Pepper, Ralph
Williams III, Ralph Williams I 4th, Erica Williams being represented by Antonio Owens, request a zoning classification change from AU to RU215 under application 26Z
004 located in district 2 and planning and zoning unanimously recommended approval with a BDP limiting structures to one-story buildings. ings and occupancy limited to only senior residents.
>> Good evening, chairman and commissioners. Uh my name is Tony Owen and um I represent the owners on the reszoning of this property. Um what I have here on the
zoning map is the tropical park. This is the this is the property here in the in the center here. What's surrounding it is RU215, RU212, a school and there is RU19
residential next door to it. Um just asking that uh we get approval to do RU215 without binding development plan. Okay. Do we have any Oh, there's another card.
Chris Reese >> Chris Bear but I'm good for >> Okay. Good. All right. >> Okay. All right. We have no cards in opposition. So, any questions? Motion. >> I'd like to make a motion. Chair,
>> I'm sorry. >> I would like to make a motion. Chair. >> Okay. Go ahead. I make a motion to approve the RU215 with the BBP that limits the structure to singlestory and residence for senior
citizens. I also would like to allow all the permitted uses of RU19 which is compatible with the surrounding areas. >> Okay. >> With the understanding chair, it would have to come back to staff for them to
review BDP. That motion. Any comment? You okay? >> All right. Good. There's a motion by Commissioner Goodson. Is there a second? >> Second. All right. All those in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay.
>> Carries unanimously. Thank you so much. We'll move on to H5. Do we have any questions? >> That's one withdrawn. I think >> that's withdrawn. >> We have H6 next. You already said it. We're going to move
on to item H6 if that's okay. >> That was H5. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that's right. We tabled that. >> Yes. >> Marisik Family Trust being represented by Kim Rzanka request a zoning classification change from AU and GU to
EU under application 26Z 0003 located in district 2. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion for approval. >> Okay, there's a motion for approval. Is there a second? >> You don't have cards? >> I don't think we have any other cards,
but Kim Rosen, >> I'll second. >> There's a second. All those in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Okay, we will move to H7.
Item H7, Merit Bitco SPV LLC being represented by Kim Rosena, requests a zoning classification change from AU with a BSP to RU215 and RU230 with removal of BSP under
application 25Z 00054 located in district 2. And I also like to note on April 2nd, the board of county commissioners continued this item at the applicant's request to to its May
7th meeting, which is tonight's zoning meeting. The applicant stated the reason for the request was to uh for the continuence was because the entity is investigating the possibility of acquiring additional property adjacent to the current proposed apartment site
and they were reviewing potentially modifying the proposed number of units considering further modifications to access to the site and for offsite improvements. As of this date, the county staff has not received an
amendment to the application. >> Mr. Chair, if I may. >> Yes. >> Um, just for the record, I want to let everyone know that on May 7th, I had an approximately 15 minute phone call with Miss Razanka regarding this item. >> Oh, sorry. Uh, yesterday on May 7th, I
had approximately 15 minute phone call with Kimberanka regarding this item. Yesterday. >> May 6th. >> May 6th. >> Actually, it was this morning. >> It was this morning. It was this morning. Yeah. >> Don't worry. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. All right. Good evening, chairman, uh, members of county commission. Kimra Zena on behalf of Rangewater Development LLC with authorization from the owner Merit Bidco SPV LLC to file for the resoning. Uh, because of the anticipated um number
of speakers and the almost a thousand pages in the agenda, I'm going to ask for 30 minutes total for my team and my experts to present. Okay. Um >> um that's that's uh allowed under our procedures to make that request and it's
required that the board of commissioners have the vote to grant that. So is there a motion to grant an additional 15 minutes? >> I'll make a motion to uh give the applicant total of 30 minutes. Is that does that include the closing and everything? >> Yes, sir.
>> Okay. >> Rebuttal, experts, everything. >> I think we usually have a rebuttal. We usually have a rebuttal period off afterward anyways. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. 30 minutes. >> If that includes everything, I'll second it. >> Yeah. And I guess your experts could have filled out a separate card. They
got time. But, uh, one question um, I'd just like to clarify. I think the those in opposition, have they hired counsel? Have they hired an attorney? Are they here to speak? >> They are then.
>> If they are, we should grant them the same request if they need it. So, okay. There's a motion and a second for an additional 15 minutes for councel, expert witnesses, and consultants. All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Carries unanimously. Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Um, I do want to thank all of you and your staff. This has been a long process. you have fielded numerous calls, meetings, as I said, almost a thousand pages, and I know it's taken a lot of time. So, we really do appreciate the fact that you've listened. You've listened to everyone, and um it's it's
been noted. The reasoning for residential apartments is opposed by many, including in other states in this country from California to New York and other countries including Spain, India, Egypt, and Pakistan.
The public resistance is an emotional reaction to change, a concern for the loss of vacant land that has never been developed, and the fear of the unknown. Rangewater understands this and has and will continue to work with the neighbors, the neighborhoods, FDOT, the school
district, the sheriff's office, and others agencies to con construct and manage a first class luxury apartment complex. During this resoning started, we resoning process we started with a meeting with Myra staff. Myra staff at that time was supportive of this and
said it was a very necessary project in this area. We had a community meeting in November and there was opposition and from that meeting um Michael Oliver the representative from Rangewater met with several one-on-one to try to to assuage
them and that has resulted in the conditions in the binding development plan that's in your packet. Um speaking with staff they have some concerns about some of those conditions and if this is approved we'll certainly work with staff to make sure that the binding development plan meets the county code. Rainwater accepted many of these
comments and feedbacks and has substantially changed the design from where they started. It has offered the BDP with limitations and improvements in including a turn lane on Pioneer to assist with the traffic at that intersection of Pioneer and State Road 3. Rangewater hired a traffic consultant
to prepare a full traffic impact study. Uh the last one dated March 5th, 2026, which is in your packet. There's actually three traffic studies that were done based upon comments by staff. Usually a TIS is not required or needed until site plan. Again, we have prepared
the binding development plan, the BDP, so everyone knows what this project's going to be about. They're going to know the units. They're going to know the the the locations, the setbacks, the buffers, things along those lines. So, it's to be transparent so everyone knows what's going to go there. It has offered
a proportionate fair share contribution if there's one necessary during the site plan process. and to work with FDOT if there are improvements necessary. The VDP is to ensure that the multifamily use can coexist with neighboring properties and not negatively impact other land uses,
conditions or neighbors. We are here tonight with the developer and the experts to present evidence and to inform you of the need for the resoning and the legal support for the resoning. With us is Michael Oliver, the representative, Kyle Shastine of Bowman,
the engineer of record, Trent Ebersolaw, a traffic engineer, and they will be talking during this time frame. Uh, a brief overall overview of the project. It's a resoning of 7.5 acres adjacent to
single family homes to RU 215 and resoning west on State Road 3 of 3.66 acres to RU230. a total of 222 units possible. It's also seeking a removal of a 1983 binding site plan for hospital and CUPs for hospital and medical
clinics. So, this will remove those uses which currently according to Trina Gilliam is the only use of this property is for a hospital and medical clinic. This property is vacant and be and behind old 1986 medical buildings.
There's a double wide trailer located on it um next to the single family subdivision. The adjacent medical offices are not maintained and were subject to a bankruptcy proceeding when Steuart went out of off went out of business. It is unckempt and underutilized property. Um
as shown on the screen and in your packet, the property sought to be reszoned to RU 215 is residential 15. Again, that was the intent in 1988 when the comp plan was adopted when Mr. Alman, Chairman Alman sat on this very board and adopted the comp plan and that
was the intent of the comp plan was that to be 15 units the acre multifamily. To the west of that is neighborhood commercial and it's in a neighborhood commercial area. There is not a single single family home along State Road 3 from Skyline Boulevard north to State
Road 528. This res 15 and neighborhood commercial has not changed. So the comp plan was adopted in 1988. This is adjacent to res residential six six units to the acre which are two single family developments. But again
residential six is land use affords a transition in density between higher urbanized area and lower intensity land use. And that is what this is. This is a transitional use from single family to commercial uses in a commercial corridor. I provided a nine-page
memorandum on April 24th of 2006 and request that be incorporated by reference into my presentation. There have been so many um things stated about this project that it was necessary uh both from the as to what staff and the addendum stated into what to uh residential opponents have stated.
I do want to look at one of the issues of compatibility in the surrounding uses. Um, page eight of the staff report has often been cited in emails that have come before you. Um, as to administrative policy 3. Administrative
policy 3 requires compatibility with existing or proposed land uses to be a factor and you shall consider whether the proposed use would have hours of operation, lighting, etc. Similar to other uses. This is a residential use. It's just multifamily.
Whether the proposed use will cause a material reduction in value of existing lands. There's no information. There's no MAI appraiser that has said it will. Whether the proposed use is consistent with an emerging or existing pattern as determined through the analysis of
historical land patterns, actual development and development approved. And when you look at what the staff says in its staff report as to historical land uses, it says it's
not consistent with the pattern of surrounding development, which is single family and medical facility. No, it's a transition and it but it could be considered a transition from high intensity, which it is, but it does go on to state there's all kinds of mixed
use future land uses in this area. And then it goes on as also the actual development which is either or historical, historical or actual. And there's an assisted living facility immediately to the south and that is at
20 beds to the acre. It is a multifamily use. Administrative policy 4 regarding the character of the neighborhood uh has also been cited. Again, this is a transitional area. It's got multifamily.
It's got across the street. It's got single family. It has Starbucks. It has assisted living facility. It has a bank. And it has medical use adjacent to this property. This property will not introduce traffic into the identified boundaries of these subdivisions. These
people are not going to go into their subdivisions. The access is on Pioneer and State Road 3. Any statement that the character of these two neighborhoods will be a materially character of the neighborhoods will be
material or adversely affected is pure speculation. The access to the property will primarily be from State Road 3 with some accessing Pioneer Road, but the residents and guests of the apartment complex would have no reason to travel into Rainree or Villa Diploma. Based
upon the recent development of the 10 acres of commercial land to the south of this property, the Starbucks, the assisted living facility, Space Coast Credit Union, and Twins car wash, this area is transitional and not primarily residential. This resoning is supported
by the Myra staff report of December 11th, 2025, which stated the requested resoning is consistent with the county comp plan and the Myra redevelopment plan. And this is definitely in the myri development area. This portion of Courtney Parkway
exhibits a robust mixture of commercial businesses and single family residential property. In Merit Island, there exists a deficiency of newly constructed multifamily rental units. However, because of increased employment opportunities in the space industry as well as the tourist industries and other
industries at Port Canaveral, individually seeking to fill those vacancies require housing that is proximate to their work. apartments appeal to younger individuals because of decreased maintenance, enhanced security features, amenities such as on-site fitness and common gathering and a sense
of community. Uh clearly a request for development and multif family. Also that the Merit Island Redevelopment Agency mission statement says that they need housing to support the workforce. The Myra board did vote against it
saying they needed more information. Because of that, we got the traffic impact study uh to assist with the information that they sought. This luxury apartment complex is a logical transition from resix single family to commercial uses and it was
intended by the comp plan drafters back in 1988. Um with that, I'm going to bring up Michael Oliver to discuss the specifics of the projects and the conditions. Thank you. Good evening, chairman, commissioners, staff, and members of the community.
My name is Michael Oliver and I represent Rangewater Real Estate tonight. I am a Florida resident and I manage Rangewater's development platform across the state. Rangewater has developed two properties here in Bvard County, both within the
Vier community here. Across Florida, we have delivered 27 communities in more than 100 nationally. We have twice been recognized as the National Association of Homebuilders Developer of the Year.
We are excited about the opportunity to develop our third community in Bvard County on this property in Merit Island. Tonight, I'd like to focus on three points. First, as Kim mentioned, this
resoning request is consistent with the 1988 Bvard County Comprehensive Plan. Second, we have listened carefully to the surrounding neighborhood and made substantial changes and concessions to
our plan in direct response to the community feedback. Those commitments are memorialized in our binding development plan. Third, Bvard County's economy continues to grow rapidly
around the Kennedy Space Center and Port Canaveral. Yet, as Kim mentions and as Myra notes, new housing options near these employment centers remains very limited. This projects project represents more
than a $55 million investment in Merit Island and helps address that need. Over the past nine months, we have spent significant time meeting with nearby residents and addressing concerns. Many of those same concerns will be
raised again tonight and I would ask the board to consider the meaningful concessions we have already made. The property has 13 direct residential neighbors. In response to concerns about
compatibility and proximity, we have committed in the binding development plan to a 100 foot setback along the eastern property line. that is five times greater than what is required by zoning. We also committed to preserving existing
trees along the north and east property lines to create additional buffering and privacy. We heard concerns regarding wetlands and we completed delineations very early on in the process that were accepted by
staff at the St. John's River Water Management District. We are preserving the vast majority of wetlands on the site in compliance with Bvard County regulations. We also heard concerns about building
height. As a result, we moved away from a four-story product and instead prop proposed a three-story garden style community that better transitions to the surrounding homes. While it is not in the binding development plan, we are
willing and able to provide a 200 foot any with any buildings within a 200 foot setback from the eastern property line to be two stories. We heard concerns regarding storm water. Modern storm water standards are
stringent and the project will not move forward unless it fully complies with all county and state regulations. traffic. Although a traffic impact analysis was not required for this reasonzoning, Rangewater voluntarily
completed one because we took the community's concerns seriously. The study was reviewed and accepted by county staff and concluded that the project would not negatively impact the roadway level of service on North
Courtney Parkway or Pioneer Road. We also committed to tripling the length of the right turn lane on Pioneer Road to help reduce congestion during peak hours. I think it's important to recognize what could otherwise be developed on this
property today. The site, as Kim mentioned, has a conditional use permit that could allow for a 247 ambulatory care hospital with minimal setbacks and minimal buffers. The existing owner of this property is
motivated to sell the property. So, I would ask the commission this. Is a three-story and potentially some buildings two stories garden style multifamily community less compatible
with the neighborhood than a hospital use directly adjacent to their homes? >> The economic engine of Bvard County is centered around Kennedy Space Center in Port Canaveral. Blue Origin continues to expand. They just doubled, committed to
doubling the size of their manufacturing facility on Merit Island. SpaceX continues to grow. Port Canaveral is now the busiest cruise port in the world. These employers are creating jobs rapidly, but housing diversity near these employment centers continues to
lag behind demand. At the end of the day, we understand that not everyone supports growth. We believe this property is located on a major corridor, urban corridor identified for redevelopment and diverse
housing opportunities. Our proposal creates an appropriate transition between the existing neighborhood and North Courtney Parkway while bringing new investment, additional housing options, and economic benefit to Merit Island. Rangewater is
prepared to invest more than $55 million into the community and we respectfully ask for your approval tonight. Thank you for your time and consideration. >> Mr. Welcome and we're going to give you five minutes. So,
>> good evening. My name is Kyle Chastine. I'm with Bowman. Um, Bowman will be the site engineer for this project. Um, I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of Florida and um I've been practicing land development in the state of Florida for 10 years. um been working
with Rangewater on this project and they have uh developed this conceptual site plan. I just wanted to highlight some things that Michael has already covered in his presentation uh to kind of visually depict it to uh the commission.
You can see along the eastern buffer, this is the enhanced buffer that he mentioned to the existing residential neighborhood here. He also mentioned an enhanced buffer along the northern portion of the part property that will be zoned RS15. Uh adding additional
buffering to the residential houses here. Oh, sorry. They will also uh maintain and keep any existing vegetation where feasible along those buffers to help with buffering to the to the community. He did mention
that there are wetlands on site that have been delineated by a professional biologist. The wetlands have also been accepted by St. John's uh River Water Management District. Those are located approximately here. Any impacts to those wetlands will of
course be approved by the county and the state during the site plan process. Uh there's also an existing bald eagle nest that uh will probably come up tonight. It's located in the vicinity of the property, but it is not on the property. It's to the southeast. Uh you
can see this line here is the required uh setback by FWC to be met. So this project will meet all requirements um of FWC regarding the the bald eagle nest. Uh Mr. Oliver did mention off-site improvements. The site plan shows uh
where those are to be located. This is the turn lane on Pioneer Lane and then there will also be turn lanes on Courtney Parkway. I have uh Trent Eversol here. is the traffic engineer and he can expand more on those off-site improvements, but I'm here for any questions related to the site
engineering. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. Uh thanks for the opportunity to speak. Trent Esol with Bowman uh the the traffic engineer. Um I am a registered
professional engineer in Florida. uh 37 years of experience and I have been accepted as a subject expert in in judicial proceedings. Um with the time that's left, I'm going to most of what I was going to say has already been said to to to some degree. I'm going to jump to the end and
actually state uh why this is a favorable project as far as development's concerned uh with regard to traffic. Uh and I do understand where the statement was made and it's true that this project the site traffic will not uh worsen the levels of service on
any of the facilities uh in the study area. I understand the concerns because there are some existing con congested uh movements uh in particular the westbound left approaching uh approaching Courtney Parkway from from Pioneer Road. Um so
with regard to that uh Kyle mentioned If I could just change the graphic real quick that part of our proposal is to lengthen the westbound right turn lane. Um so today the left turn movement is so
long the Q the queue that it blocks the ability for traffic to get into the right turn lane on the top. That's the existing condition. The red cars would be those wanting to turn left. The blue cars not all or the right turns that can't get in there. with the lengthening of that right turn lane, uh the delays
for people wanting to make a right will be eliminated. Uh so so there will actually be an an improvement there. Um to paint a picture, the amount of trips that this project would put on that that that uh heavy movement of the westbound
left turn would be about one vehicle every two minutes. So to the naked eye, if you were out there and you looked at it today and you went back and looked at after the this was built, you would not notice the difference in in traffic. To to further that point, the traffic that would be generated by the byite use
of the hospital would be four times as many trips. So this is in effect a very large reduction in the potential traffic uh for development on this site. The only way that it would be less in effect would be to not develop anything. Uh, and so that's really the question here
is will there be development? If there will be, this is a very favorable development. And with that, I'm available for questions. >> Okay. Uh, is that the applicant? Are you >> do we have any questions? Yes.
>> So, you mentioned um possibly part of it would be twotory. Can you tell me where that would be? And is that actually reducing the number of units? >> So we right now this is
where I'm pointing right here is about a 100 foot building setback. What we're committing is that any unit within 200 feet, which runs pretty much from this line right here, 50 foot taper down here
would be we can commit to two stories. At this time, I I don't know how that affects our unit count. We would still request res215, but we're willing to commit to a two-story product so that there's no concerns about anyone anyone's units
looking into any rear backyards. >> But we don't but you don't know how many units that would reduce by. >> It would likely reduce the unit count by maybe 10. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Okay. That was one of my questions. I do
have another couple questions. Um, when you say garden style, what what does that mean? What what's the >> it's a um it's a lower density multifamily development style? Yes.
>> Does it does it um it sounds like it denotes more vegetation, garden? >> It's it's surface parked. It's more, you know, RU215 requires a certain amount of open space. I believe it's off the top of my head, I believe it's 35%. RU230 is
slightly less than that, but it's it's open space. It's surface parking rather rather than a structured parking deck. Um, but that's the definition of garden style apartment as I define it. >> And the other question I had, I know in the presentation
you mentioned that this would be a high quality residential >> Yes. >> multif family residential development. What in your binding development plan commits you to a high quality verse what
would be a non- highquality? >> Um we as a developer develop luxury apartment communities across the United States. We have developed two properties here in Vieiraa. Marisol at Vieira and
Aul at Vieiera. I would define those as high-end, highquality, multifamily developments. I understand that Vieiraa is very different than Merit Island, but I'm I simply was noting that we've done business in Bvard County. We've
developed in Bvard County, we like Bvard County, and I was providing that as an example. >> So, what is it that makes it higher quality? Is it the design? Is the exterior finishes? just the windows. What What
are you doing? >> It will be the from the exterior finishes in the rents that this property will command are north of $2,000 per unit. That will likely be higher than many mortgages in the surrounding
broader MSA. So, when we look at that, we'll have quartz countertops. We'll have, you know, enhanced cabinet finishes. you know, as Milstone developed previously, there's LVT, you know, flooring throughout the the the
units. It's a a luxury finish package that we provide to the residents. >> Okay. >> And we professionally manage the communities internally. We manage 75,000 multifamily units across the United States. >> And we're a top 25 property manager
nationally. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Uh, any other questions? Commissioner Goodson, do you have a question? >> No, sir, I do not. Not at this time. >> Okay. Okay. If that is the applicants
finished, we will now go to the cards. First speaker, Ray Nan science. >> Five minutes per speaker. >> Good evening. I live in the rainree development that
they're speaking about just behind this complex. Been there for >> Yeah. You don't pull that mic down. >> I'm a little short so excuse me. >> I live in the rainree development behind the proposed uh development. I've been there for 21 years. I've raised two
children there. They both gone to Louisis Carroll and I have uh my oldest daughter also has a home there. So, I'm very concerned some of the issues that have come up, especially traffic. Uh, I find it hard to believe that there
will not be more traffic there, which is already highly congested, especially with the Starbucks and at the school hours. It's very difficult to get in, out, and onto Courtney Parkway. I can say that with firsthand knowledge. But I am here today to point out the
administrative policy 4 which talks about no new intensity of traffic. Under administrative policy number four, the proposed use must not materially and adversely impact an established
residential neighborhood by introducing types or intensity of traffic including but not limited to volume, time of day, traffic activity, different types of vehicles, parking, trip
generation, commercial activity or industrial activity that is not already present within the identified boundaries of the neighborhood. I believe that the developer's own roadway capacity
analysis confirms this project will add 855 daily trips to the Courtney segment alone, consuming 25% of the remaining capacity with additional trips flowing onto Pioneer
Drive that the developer did not even study. A development of this scale would fundamentally change what our neighborhood is. and I'm asking that you would disapprove of this project. Thank you. >> Thomas uh Rei
Thomas Rey and the next speaker will be um Robert Baker so they can be ready. >> Hi, good evening. My name is Thomas Rey and I am here to oppose the development
case number 25Z0054, the proposed 220 unit three-story complex. This development, in my opinion, is not appropriate for this location. It places a highdensity multi-story complex
directly in the middle of an established single family neighborhood that's incompatible with the character that we currently have there. I know there was some issues brought up about the zoning and everything, but in talking to some of the um staff that I spoke with
yesterday, Courtney was designed to have commercial on the front, residential in the back, and you know, everything that was stated, yes, there is a commercial site directly across the street from that with the uh you know, the uh
assisted living home, the bank and such, but again, that's commercial and that's what it was designed for. or wasn't designed for a large um complex like this. And again, I know you've heard about the you know, I'm not going to go really into a lot about the
traffic, but you know, the traffic is a big concern. And my question is, has anybody here uh any of the commissioners actually went out and and witnessed it >> firstand are you know um have you have you seen it? You know, you you've seen a
lot of issues. You're hearing a lot about traffic, but has anyone gone out there to to witness it? I mean, when the when the uh when the bridge is up, it backs way up uh during, you know, when everybody's letting out, you know, coming south on Courtney uh from the
space center. It creates a huge impact there. Uh I mean, a lot of us that live there on the weekends now with the port traffic, you can barely move on 528. I mean, it's it's it's it's a very very congested area. So I mean that's something else to look at. Um you know
the few things about the traffic it increases the congestion and safety risk that are currently there. Um the about FDOT that's possibly putting in the medium all the way down past Publix which is going to there's the turn lanes are going to disappear. Um, you know,
there could be a delay in emergency response times and it's it's or it's it's going to overwhelm the intersection that cannot realistically be expanded with just the right turd lane to Courtney to head north. Uh, the infrastructure we haven't talked about
is strained. We I live in the in via de Palmos and in the last six months we've been out of power eight times and no hurricane, no storms and the infrastructure which basically the where uh via delena and it backs up the
rainree the power you know the power poles are in that area which causes a lot and now this will be there. Also there was a lot of work that was done on the sewer system uh and they're still continuing to work on it. Uh every once in a while we see uh Boulevard County
out there looking at it. They did put a couple new lift station in lift stations in but it was uh and it was an issue at that time and I'm I'm afraid that it's going to be a continuing issue. You know there this area is uh vulnerable to
flooding as we discussed in the past on previous meetings especially in Sykes Creek in that area Sykes Creek Cove. Um so without this you know this I think you know with non-permeable area that this is going to be built on
the rainwater has to go somewhere and I know we discussed that about ponds and such and there is wetlands in there but you know in closing this project would permanently change our neighborhoods and reduce our quality of life uh and also potentially putting our residents at
risk because yes the people are going come out. You know, right now people that live in the other development behind us on the via de Harve, nobody goes out to court. I'm sorry. Nobody goes out um to the end of Via Delerena. They all go past, you know, they go down
Via Delerena. They go down Sykes Creek Cove and everybody goes to the light currently right now in that residential area where we have over 500 homes or more. So, with all that being said, I respectfully urge the commission to deny this case and
and and also too, you know, well, I'm just asking that you really consider opposing this. Thank you for your consideration. >> Thank you, Robert Baker. And the next speaker will be Valerie Rei.
Good evening, y'all. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Not really. >> Not really. All right. That better. >> Awesome. So, uh, my name is Robert Baker. I live at 2395 Sykes Creek Drive. Um, when I got out of the military, we moved back
to Florida. I'm a native Floridaian. Uh, love it here. Absolutely was stoked to come back here. Um, like I said, we bought our house nine years ago. um great high finish floor elevation in a waterfront neighborhood is it was everything we could dream of. And then
as the development started to happen um with Hampton Manor and Starbucks and all that stuff, you know, everybody's everybody wants to talk about how um you know that development is, you know, it's zone for commercial, which is true and that's fine. Um but the as the I think
the important aspect to consider there is is it necessarily right? Is further development right? We've seen my house has flooded three times since 2021. I have no documented history. My house was built in 1980 and there's no documented history that has been disclo disclosed to me that that property has
ever flooded once. And I think what's even more concerning is that, you know, uh, the team proposing this development dismissed all of our concerns as fear of change as opposed to it being legitimate concern for houses and properties that
we've invested in for schools that our kids go to and we want them to go there safe. I sent you guys Thank you. I sent the board pictures today of vehicles that were going up the
middle of the two yellow lines as that as it was backed up down Pioneer trying to get Lewis Carol to let out and I'm sorry a 350 ft turn lane going into a development of what's probably going to be around another thousand people is not going to mitigate that.
Um so in you know and aside of that our aging infrastructure like the gentleman before me brought up we were we've never had any sort of power loss and then all of a sudden I actually sent you guys pictures of that too FPNL coming out because the storm water's so high it's
overwhelming the switches that are there and this is after improvements have been made here. The development that's gone on has already brought down our quality of life in the in the neighborhood and further development is damn sure not going to help it. I apologize for the
language. That's all I really have to say y'all. Thank you so much for your time and I really appreciate it. >> Thank you Valerie Rei. And next speaker will be Tina Tina Rowan. >> Hi. Um, my name is Valerie Lupus Reidi
and I live in the Villa de Palamas area and I'm here today because I too oppose the proposed highdensity rental apartment complex on North Courtney and Pioneer. Everyone keeps talking about progress. So, I decided to do a deep dive into the definition of what progress is and how it relates to this
project. We all agree that project progress should strengthen a community, not weaken it. True progress improves long-term economic stability, protects existing neighborhoods, and ensures infrastructure can safely support growth. This project does none of those
things. First, our infrastructure is already over capacity. North Courtney is a constrained corridor with no room for meaningful expansion. Adding a highdensity rental complex will increase traffic, slow emergency response times, and strain utilities and storm water
systems that were never designed for this level of density. When infrastructure fails, taxpayers, not developers, pay the long-term cost. Second, this project is completely incompatible with the surrounding area.
Our four subdivisions are made up of approximately 600 single family homes. Placing an eight building, three-story rental complex in the middle of established subdivisions disrupts the character, safety, and stability of the community that already exists. Third,
this development does not improve long-term economic stability. Highdensity rentals often generate less re less tax revenue than the public services they require. If property values decline because of incompatible highdensity development, the county
loses tax revenue. That isn't progress. It becomes a long-term financial liability. Finally, this project provides no benefit to the current residents. It is designed for transient renters, not for the families who've invested their lives and savings into
this community. Prog progress should serve the people who are already there, not displace their quality of life. Growth is the same as prog growth is not the same as progress. Progress improves a community's quality of life. This project does the opposite. For these
reason, I ask you to listen to our voices and vote on the maj vote with our majority and asking you to vote no on this proposal. I do have a couple of comments because I want to address some of the things that Miss Rosena said earlier and also the developer. Um, one
of the things that they did talk about was they won't use our roads. I live on Via de Lena. That's where the light is going from this new DOT project. I currently make a right into Pioneer Road. I would say about 90% of the time
going north because the traffic is so backed up. I can't even get to Via de Lena. So, you know what's going to happen when they come out of their development? They're not going to be able to make that right to get onto Courtney. So, they're going to make the left. I mean, onto Pioneer. They're
going to make the left. They're going to go down Pioneer onto Sykes Creek uh loop, I think it's called, and then up via Dena to go to the new light that's coming. So, all that traffic, they may tell you no one's going to do that. They do that because we have to do that now
to avoid traffic. And I know that even my husband sometimes when he's he's pulling his boat, he can't even pull into make the left into Via de Lena because there's so much traffic. We actually go to the light, make the left onto Pioneer and backtrack and come all
the way up to Via de Lena because there's so much traffic and it like he said with the port and on I wish you guys would go there on Saturday. We left the island one day on a Saturday afternoon. We couldn't get back to Saturday night. the all the roads 520
528 was all backed up because when 520 backs up that all overflows to 528 and vice versa. So when 528 backs up you can't get off 520 either. So we have no way of getting on and off this island and adding more of these highdensity uh
apartment complexes. These aren't even people that are going to stay within our community. They're here temporarily. They're renting because they're here for a project. They mentioned the cruise port. That's going to be Airbnbs and we already saw that happened down in Melbourne Beach. I think you guys are
familiar with the Harbor Island and what happened down there when the developer came in. They got the reasonzoning change and then another developer came in and did a completely different project. I have a friend that lives there. She they're literally on blowhorns in the middle of the night telling people to be quiet and they're
people are yelling back, "Sorry, we're on vacation. We don't have to be quiet." So this is what we don't want to see in our community. This will this project will ruin our community. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Tina Rowan. Tina Rowan. And the next speaker will be Susan Cole. >> Good evening, commissioners. My name is Tina Rowan. I live at 131 Cove Loop Drive in Sykes Cove. I'm here today to address the issue of school capacity as
it relates to the proposed 222 unit residential development. This is not a minor procedural concern. It goes directly to whether this board can lawfully and responsibly approve additional residential density when our public schools are already operating
under significant pressure. Policy 2.1 of the public school facilities element is quite explicit. It states that the county shall not approve any non-exempt residential development that increases residential development
rights until a school impact analysis has been completed and a capacity determination letter is issued by the school board confirming that adequate school facilities exist. That language isn't optional. It's not discretionary. It is mandatory. The policy uses the
phrase shall not approve which clearly establish establishes a legal legal prerequisite before any reasonzoning can move forward. Before the board can consider approving this application, there must be confirmation that the affected schools which include the Lewis
Carroll Elementary School, the applicable middle school and Merit Island High School have the actual capacity to accommodate additional students that will result from this project. And we must be honest about what we are talking about. A 222 unit
apartment development will generate students depending on accepted planning methodologies. That could mean anywhere from roughly 30 to 80 additional students entering the system. Those students will not be theoretical. They will require desks, teachers,
classrooms, and space in already constrained facilities. The adopted level of service for our school system is 100% of capacity. That means we are not planning for overflow. We are planning to operate at the limit. If any of these schools are already near
capacity, even a modest increase in enrollment can push them beyond what they were designed to handle. We know from publicly available data that Lewis Carroll Elementary operates with an average student teach studenttoteer ratio of roughly 15 to 16 students per
teacher. While that may sound very comfortable on paper, it's important to understand what that number actually represents. That ratio does not includes not only classroom teachers but also specialized staff. The actual classroom sizes are often significantly higher,
typically ranging from 18 to 25 students in elementary grades and sometimes more depending on the grade level and program needs. At Merit Island High School, classroom sizes commonly range from the low 20s to the upper 20s and in some cases exceed 30 students, particularly
in core academic courses. These are already full filled classrooms operating under state imposed class- size requirements with limited flexibility. So when we add an even relatively modest number of new students from a single development, those students are not
absorbed into excess capacity. They are absorbed into systems that are already carefully balanced at or near their limits. The land development code reinforces this concern. Section 62-602 section D
number seven requires the school district to issue a school capacity determination letter for non-exempt development and that clearly ties adequacy to the comprehensive plan. That means capacity is not a general planning concept. It is a required finding tied
directly to approval. The applicant has presented a school concurrency determination letter indicating no deficiency at this time. However, that letter is explicitly non-binding. The school board has reserved the right to amend its findings during the formal concurrency
determination process at the site plan and final development order stage. In other words, the letter is just a snapshot in time, not a guarantee of future capacity. The the distinction matters because the question before the board is not whether the schools had
capacity at one moment in time. The question is whether capacity will exist when this project is built out and begins generating students potentially years from now. Even the school board itself recognizes that uncertainty by reserving its that uncertainty by
reserving its right to revisit the analysis. That acknowledgement alone should caution us against treating preliminary findings as final asurances. We are also required to consider the broader public health safety and welfare impacts under factor 5 of section
62-1151 uh section C as well as overall consistency with adopted planning policy under factor 3. When school capacity is uncertain, those factors weigh heavily in the analysis. Overcrowded schools affect not only education quality but
also transportation, staffing, safety conditions, and overall community infrastructure. At minimum, if the board is inclined to approve this request, approval should be conditioned upon a binding and final school capacity determination finding adequacy adequate capacity at the time
of the final development order approval. Without that assurance, we are effectively approving population growth without confirmed infrastructure to support it. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Susan Cole. And our next speaker, Marcus Herman.
>> Thank you, and thank you for listening to all of us. Um, I want to remind you of the Bvard County's mission statement and vision. um as your role as commissioners, the mission is to contribute to enhancing and ensuring
Boulevard's quality of life today and always. Um the vision uh of the community which excels is and is recognized for one providing for the health, safety, education, and social
needs of our community. Um these are all things that you need to consider when is it going to happen? uh if this development takes place. Um number two is building a diverse strong economic base with the needed infrastructure to
support the quality lifestyle. Three, protecting the environment and conserving our valuable resources. Four, creating cooperative partnerships between government, businesses, community organizations, and our residents.
Five, maximizing performance and communications to provide excellent service to our customers. Um, these mission statement and the visions are directly from your uh uh website. um
reszoning this property is irresponsible and goes against the mission statement and each and every vision and goal for all the reasons that you've heard already, you've heard in the past and you will continue to hear. Um the health I'll go back to number one because
number uh the health the health facility if the resoning does not go back that would be fine and it I I I don't think anybody here agrees that the 24-hour traffic is going to be what a 22 unit uh luxury condo or apartment would be. um
they're only allowing 1.7 parking spots for each of those units and it's a one to threebedroom unit and as they stated it's 2,000 or more. There's not going to be one person in that unit. There's going to be there's so we already have
additional tra traffic safety huge concern. Kids ride their bicycles, they walk to school. Um with these traffic and these cars going at school time, it's it's terrible. the education that we've talked about some of the um problems with getting to kids to school.
Um all those that they've actually said in the past is that it's it's a it's a education board of education problem, but it becomes our problem, the taxpayers and the social needs of our community. We like our community as it is. We've got the infrastructure. I
mean, we've got the uh the Starbucks and the Target and the grocery stores and the restaurants. Um, there's nothing that this luxury condo is going to do to enhance our our uh lives. Um,
I respectfully suggest that you you focus the time and energy and our resources, including all the money that it's going to cost to fix these problems. We've already got a huge apartment complex that we haven't even dealt with the con the traffic that's going to be coming towards Courtney,
going to the space condo by the mall. All that's to come. We don't even know what's going to happen then. Um um but you um willing to you know if you work with the developers and businesses, they're willing to revamp all the empty
storefronts and dilapitated buildings and existing apartments along Courtney Boulevard between 520 and 528. and that would work towards the mission statement to enhance and ensure the quality of
life today and always. Um, I respectfully ask you to protect the residents of Bvard County and say no to reszoning this property. Marcus Herman and the next speaker will be Holly Olsen. Commissioner staff,
I am Marcus Herman, the current chairman of the Meridon Redevelopment Agency. First off, I I really want to give hats off to the developer and uh their representative for doing everything they could to try to make
this project work. It just doesn't. I am here representing the Myra board as well as being a concerned citizen who has lived in Merit Island for 60 years. I was sure that the county commission was very aware of the Myra board's
stance on this project. But to be clear, our board voted unanimously to deny this zoning change. We did so in part because we did not find it to be compatible with the surrounding area and we were concerned
with the level of density. Now for context, I feel it's important to understand that the Myra board is made up of individuals that are businessminded people. They live in Merit Island and they are very active in their community.
They were selected by many different commissioners over the years. These commissioners trusted their individual integrity and reasonable thinking skills. The board as a whole is made up of pro business individuals.
They along with the staff are always looking for ways where developments can enhance the well-being of the people in Merit Island. The board also understands the that growth is inevitable but we need the need for responsible
growth is also very imperative. Myra does support responsible growth. I make these statements so that this board can understand the decision that the Myra board made was not emotionally driven,
but more about the facts, more of a reflection of our individual experiences and an understanding of our community. The perception for most of the people in this audience and the members of the Myra board is that this will not have a positive impact in our community.
The reality or the facts of the matter also strongly indicate that this project could have more adverse effects than positive ones. The Myra board stands with this community and ask that you deny the request for the zoning change.
Um there's been a request for a 10-minute break. We typically take those after every hour and a half, two hours. So, we'll break until 6:45 uh and um come right back. We have quite
a few cards left, so we'll be up here for a bit. Thank you. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey, Heat. Where are you? Heat. Heat.
Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. I um wanted to let anyone Darren King had to leave, but I wanted to put on the public record that he came here to speak out against the project. And anyone who
wishes to wave their time can let us know for or against. Um, so you can go on the record if if you didn't want to speak. So, um, our next speaker is Holly Olsen.
>> Good evening, commissioners. Good evening, commissioners. It's my first time speaking here and I get a little anxious, so bear with me. Um, I have to say that I'm I'm a Merit Island resident. My name's Holly Olsen
and I feel like Bvard County is a beautiful county and we are so diversified in our businesses with the tourism, the space industry, all the things that Bvard County has. I have to say that for every speaker that spoke tonight, I'll double down on it because
I feel choked up because I feel like they were so smart and and they weren't being emotional, they were being correct as far as I see it. Um I specifically wanted to speak about a couple of different points.
I am speaking first of all to urge you to vote no on this project. It is because of three basic things. The water issue, traffic concerns and voters.
The water issue I would say is I'm my opposition is based on significant concerns regarding the water supply and management specifically as many p speakers spoke on tonight as well. Uh specifically I'm concerned about the
potential destruction of local ecosystems including the mosquito lagoon and Sykes Creek. I'm thinking a little bit like inside inside the box but more probably more outside the box because I think that we're all right now sort of glued to
comprehensive plan and everything is within that but the reality of our world is we don't live inside that comprehensive plan personally as residents we live learn live outside of it and the communities that we represent and the businesses that we have so
whereas that is very important to them to them and I think they did a fantastic job by the And I'm happy that they're such good builders, but for our specific area, it's not emotional. It's just wrong.
Um, so I said I had three things. The water issue is one. The traffic concerns I can't even say anything about because everybody spoke so brilliantly about the traffic concerns tonight. The other thing is the voters. I don't know a voter as in a local
resident who hasn't been against this project. Uh we have a great county. We're very blessed. I want to say I respect you and I thank you for all you do. I think but I think we'll be well served in the future with considering renovations,
conservation efforts, tearowns with improved rebuilds, which might be a great thing for builders builders and other recycle strategies that would benefit our county's maintenance. I also think that that will bring down the
expense for the county because they wouldn't have to pay for all the growth issues that we always get behind on. It seems we build the things and then we have to catch up with our in infrastructure. It's not supposed to be working like that and you're supposed to
be the people that defend our safety. I feel like people that come in to change the zoning, they come in to change the zoning, but they're not the residents and they are not the voters. They're from Indianapolis.
And we vote for you. We're your constituency. So, when you weigh one against the other, you have to say, who do the commissioners care about? And that's kind of what I care about. Um,
anyway, I think that's that about wraps it up. I think we love our businesses here. We love our communities. We like beautiful buildings, but not when it comes at the expense of our destination's charm and quality of life. Um,
in my opinion, we would be better served with renovation, conservation. I probably already said this, tearowns with improved rebuilds and other recycling strategies for future benefits. Uh we love businesses here,
etc., etc. And um for our sake and uh the sake of the tourist industry and mother nature and quality of life, we should vote this
down. That's it. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, next speaker, Diana Schmer and after her will be Veronica Oak,
I think. But Diane Schmer. Okay. >> I should have called your name soon. >> Um, hi. My name is Diana Schmer. I live on uh Andrich Street on Merit Island. Um and have been there for quite a while. I
am also against this project. And I think that it it it's maybe kind of important that that nobody has talked about this, but the the whole thing that got all of this started and it started all over the country in this state. It
started with the live local act and it it's what promoted all these highdensity projects and they gave these developers many many perks. Um they don't have to pay impact fees. They they don't have to
um pay sales taxes on up to $5,000 of sales tax per unit. So they can buy all their materials tax-free. They don't have to pay all their property taxes. um they can build these things in any zoning. This is what the state law said.
And so all of these people jumped in and these things are going up all over the country. I mean they are just everywhere now. And I think it's part of the World Economic Forum where they said, "Oh, you'll live in these places and you'll you won't have anything. You won't own
anything, but you'll be happy." And that I'm not happy that way. I'm not happy to live like that. I I think it's overcrowding. It's over dense. I mean, years ago, Harvard did a study with rats
and they put rats in a in a building of not a building, but a a facility rat maze and they fed them, but they didn't add any more food and they let the rats multiply. And in the end, the rats were eating the other rats
because that's what it's too dense. It's just too dense. Anyway, the other thing that I'm very upset about is I've read that there's going to be a $200 million upgrade to our sewage, our Sykes Creek sewage facility. $200
million. Now, the developers aren't going to pay for that. I'm guessing we're going to pay for that. And that's a lot of money. And shouldn't that upgrade happen before we have You've
already approved 300 units on Merit Island that we don't have room for. And we have all these sewage spills all the time. We voted this tax that we pay every month. It's a half a cent sales tax to go towards cleaning up the Indian
River Lagoon. Well, this money amounts to roughly $4 million a month. Meanwhile, the lagoon isn't looking any better. Probably because the sewage treatment plants aren't upgraded and we still have the spills and you we're
spending I mean $4 million a month, that's $48 million a year. We should be able to make an impact. How are we going to deal with all the overflows if we don't have this facility in place to handle it before these units? And they
put them up fast. It doesn't take them long. And the other thing that I take issue with is they are not luxury apartments. Everybody knows on Merit Island your housing should be made out of concrete
block. If it's not made out of concrete block, every time we have a hurricane, you're going to have to evacuate out of those. They're built out of sticks. The only thing that's concrete is the stairwell. That's it. So, all of those
people in all of those units are always going to have to evacuate every time there's an evacuation notice. Already the evacuation time is well over 6 hours. Another 300 units here, another 200 units there. You're adding hours to
the evacuation time. Sometimes there isn't that much time. These are barrier islands. This is not like in in interior land. We are subject to the weather here. Um let's see. I know I must have had more
to say than that. Anyway, um cuz anyway, I just I don't think it's right to saddle the taxpayers with all these expenses to help the developers. These are not a needy group of people. They do not need to be subsidized by me or any
of us here. And um I I realize that you know you you have a difficult job and and all of that but this I am emotional about this one. I am
emotional because I travel that road and they are going to concrete what they call the suicide lane which is our turn lane. There are businesses on both sides. When they s when they do that you're going to have to make U-turns to go places. You're going to make more
congestion. Thank you for your time. Please vote no. >> Veronica and our next speaker, Michael Wilson. >> Actually, I'm the attorney who's representing the community association. And since um we are getting more time for the attorney, I'd rather go at the
end if we can do that so it doesn't interrupt the flow of all the community members whose voices should be heard first. >> Okay. >> Okay. I'll go after. >> Did you fill out a Did you fill out a card? >> Yes, I have a card already out. >> What was your name again? >> Veronica Oakler. >> Okay, I'll put you at the end. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Oh, that's right. I called your name, didn't I? Duh. Okay. Hello, commissioners. Michael G. Wilson. I'm the chairman of the Space Coast Patriots in Merit Island, but more
importantly, I am a Merit Island resident. I live at 2562 Sykes Creek Drive. And uh the first point I want to make tonight is uh Miss Rzinka prepared a addendum and she sent it and I assume
all of you got it. And there is a key point of wording in her addendum. It says Bvard County may approve reszoning applications. And the key word there is may. That doesn't mean you have to. It
means you may if you decide it's a good use of the property and good for your constituents. And I'm going to ask you to vote no on the resoning. And I'm going to tell you some of the reasons why I think you should do so based on
the addendum that Miss Rzinka provided. Uh in the addendum, Miss Rzzinka said that they may consider going to uh the live local act to put in affordable housing which would increase
the number of units to 337. Now, I've taken a look at the developers website and as far as I uh can read, they are not in the affordable housing business because and when you're in the affordable housing business, it requires
that you manage these properties for 30 years. You have annual audits. So, I think these guys are willing to throw anything out to get you to do the resoning, and I don't think that that should happen. Um,
another point that I want to make is they hired a traffic uh, study, Bowman Engineering, which is fine, but they were unwilling to go an extra step and do the site plan. If they want it so
badly, they should provide a site plan and they have not because I think it would reveal other problems that are of quite a serious nature. But you don't know until you have the site plan. The other thing that they have said is that Hampton Manor is a high density uh
application and it may be by definition a high high density application but I can tell you based on going by there every day it's a low traffic output because the people who live in Hampton Manor for the most part do not go back
and forth to work. These are people who are in assisted living. So, that's another point that they thrown out that I don't think is a good point. They are also threatening, as they did tonight. They said, "Boy, oh boy, if you don't let us in, they're going to put a
hospital in. That's going to be really, really bad." Well, I don't agree. For those of you, and most of us do live in Merit Island, and most of us access Cape Canaveral Hospital, whether as a patient or a visitor, you can go to the hospital
any time of the day, and you'll see just a few cars coming and going. And realize that a hospital, the people who work at the hospital work shifts. It's not like everybody goes to work at 8 and goes home at 5. So everybody can attest that the traffic is fairly low volume even
though a hospital is 247. So let's disregard that point. As part of the traffic study that these guys have provided, they failed to mention that uh the evacuation component and I think that's very very important
uh and I think they should not have left that out. The other thing that they did not consider was that FDOT is going to improve, so they say the uh access on 528 and they're going to put a hard median in the middle. That's going to
create a lot of problems. They also said that everyone or almost everyone will access the new complex through State Road 3. Yet, they provided no proof of that. That's just what they say. That's what they believe. Who knows? Uh the last thing I want to point out is they
keep saying over and over again, gosh, we don't have any uh homes or apartments for these people to live in. I did a quick check today on realtor.com and they say that in Coco and Rocklage there are 2,24
apartments or homes for rent. So I think that dispels that. Commissioners, thank you very much for your time and please vote no. >> Thank you. Lindsay Lindsay Buckle is our next
speaker and after her will be Barbara Giles. Right. Good evening. Um, I'm Lindsay Buckle and even though I stand here in uniform today, I am a Florida and Bvard County voting resident, Florida native, born and raised. And I'm so happy that six years ago I got to come back and put
my roots down here. Um, I live on 2645 Rainree Lake Circle. My kids attend Lewis Carroll Elementary, ride their bikes to and from school every single day. They like to play in those woods um that are behind our neighborhood development there. And they also like to play in the storm water every single
time it rains and floods our neighborhood. And I'd like to share some pictures with you if I can. Um, I don't know if we can pull that up, but my kids every time it rains. And some of the pictures I'll show you, this one is from 200 Oops. Get the glare off here. This
one is from 2022. >> And what I want to show you here is I live this a little prettier for you guys. There you go. >> I live directly I live directly where two storm drains are. So, right at the end of my mailbox
is a storm water drain and across the street from there is a storm water drain. As you can see here, it is lightly raining. This is not a hurricane. This is a rainstorm. I'd also like to point out This right here, walking across my back back patio is
from 2024. Flooding in my house. And in 2022, I have pictures here that I have emailed of us paddle boarding and kaying down the street. All three of these events are again from rainstorms, not from hurricanes, normal rainstorms.
And each one of these events, uh, several of them, I reached out to the county commission and I asked, "What is your storm water maintenance plan for this neighborhood?" Because it's not working. Across the street from us is Rainree Lake Circle. The lake is not flooding in these events. The storm
water drains are not taking care of the water like they should be. I talked to some of my neighbors that have been in the neighborhood for a long time. There are culverts that used to run all behind the houses. Those are not maintained. They no longer exist. They've been filled in. We have the coverts that run all along
Pioneer that are not accounting for this storm water. And so my issue, I applaud the development team here that has taken the site plan. They have listened to the community and tried to mitigate as many of the concerns that they can that are within their span of control. But my issue here is with the county
maintenance of our storm water. That is not the responsibility of these developers. They will be responsible for taking care of the three inches of rain that their code requires them to take care of on their site plan. The problem is is that site plan is going to include some field dirt. It's going to include
going to a retention pond and it's going to include going out to our storm water maintenance that connects to our neighborhood that is already not maintained. And as they as they tie into that storm water maintenance, that flooding that I experience on an annual and persistent
basis in the six years I've lived in my house is going to continue and get worse. I have already spent tens of thousands of dollars trying to get drainage companies out to my house. The only thing they can do is put drainage ditches in and send it out to the
street, which I just showed you is already flooding. That's not going to get the flooding out from around my house. I don't know what I can do anymore within the neighborhood and the development that's going on around me is going to raise the dirt level. It's going to tie into our storm water and it's going to make the flooding of my
house in my neighborhood worse. And so my issue I applaud the team for listening to the community. It is not their responsibility to make sure the storm water drain at the end of my street is clear for their development to occur. That is the responsibility of this commission. And I can tell you
after each one of these events, I have also reached out to the commission as an engineer myself and as a as a program manager and government employee. I said, 'What is your storm water maintenance plan for my area? Crickets. I got emails about if I this
is a once in a-lifetime rain event. We can't account for this. I said, that's funny because this has happened about five or six times now since I've lived here. I have been told, well, here is our GIS data for what our storm water plant is. looking at the map of where all the drains and ditches are, I have
asked repeatedly, "How are you going to maintain our storm water system in this area?" And I have not gotten an answer from our county. And so that concerns me when we talk about adding hundreds of development units that are going to tie into our storm water plan and how that's going to affect the flooding that's
already occurring in my neighborhood. And so I am a no on this project and not because they haven't done their due diligence but because the county has not done theirs on maintaining our storm water system. >> Thank you
Barbara Giles. Barbara Giles. And our next speaker is um Gregory McCcluskey. >> Good evening, commissioners. My name is Barbara Giles and I live at 203 Kovaloop Drive, Merit Island.
I want to address the most critical procedural point before you tonight before your vote. Your authority and your obligation is to evaluate the infrastructure impacts at this hearing before you vote. Your own guidelines and the
comprehensive plan are clear. You must consider the impact of a zoning change on traffic patterns, water and sewer systems, and the established character of the neighborhood before granting new development rights. These are not
suggestions that you can just consider at a later date. They are mandatory factors for your decision tonight. If the infrastructure cannot support the proposed intensity, the reasonzoning should not be approved. You've heard
from a lot of people here that we can't sustain another building like that. It we don't have the infrastructure. It's not there. There's already flooding. The reason your rules require a
preliminary evaluation is precisely so you don't approve a density that the community cannot physically handle. You cannot responsibly grant increased development rights today without first confirming that the roads and utilities
have the capacity. If the capacity isn't there now, you can't you can't approve it. The project is incompatible with the area. I believe you have an obligation to the public to evaluate infrastructure
impacts of the proposed apartment building change right now before you vote on that change. You already started that process and already concluded that this project is going to endanger the users of Pioneer Road, families,
neighbors, school children, and parents. So, you're making a decision. The decision impacts thousands of people. Thousands of people. All the users of Pioneer Road and Courtney Parkway. And by the way, I
think Courtney Parkway is being at that Pioneer in Courtney. They're going to make be making some changes. Um it was just announced. They're going to be working on it because it's so dangerous. There are so many accidents right there. Pioneer and Courtney.
If infrastructure cannot support the project, the zoning change should not be approved. You cannot responsibly grant more development rights today without confirming there's capacity for the development. If the capacity is not
there, this project is incompatible with the area. And you've heard from all these fine people who dressed in red and came here and came here before and came here before. It's important. It affects lives. It's dangerous to allow this and
to just go ahead and say, "Yeah, go ahead and build when you already are on alert that there are serious serious traffic problems." Now, thank you. >> Thank you, uh, Gregory McClaski. And the next speaker will be Daniel Dude.
>> Hi, >> Danielle Dude. My name is Gregory McClaskkey. I live at 1899 Sykes Creek Drive. I'd like to address the traffic safety and talk a little bit about the developer study that shows Courtney is already at 88% of capacity. Their study
projects that by 2027 it will be 91% from the background growth alone. This one project wants to grab 25% of the tiny bit of space left on that road. and who will be responsible for the major changes required when growth exceeds the capacity within a short period after
2027. I was trying to come here tonight and I was in that right turn lane. No other traffic and but Courtney was backed up well beyond uh Pioneer Road. So I had to wait for the light to change in order to be able to make a right turn because the
capacity wasn't there for me to be able to make a right turn. It was that crowded on Courtney. Worse yet, the study completely ignored Pioneer the side road which are kids and grandkids to go to school at Lewis Carroll Elementary. That emission alone should concern this board.
I've seen some personal examples. Uh I happened to leave one time and forgot and went during time that uh school was let out. It took three traffic light cycles for me to get through to make a left turn. The traffic has gotten so bad that many people now are cutting through behind
Starbucks and going past the uh the assisted living to try to get out onto Courtney. Uh to the point where Hampton Manor, which my uh my wife's grandmother or excuse me, my wife's mother lives in uh they have warned all the residents who may be walking over to Starbucks or
the bank to be extra careful because of the cars and the additional traffic going through there. um the uh the extension of the right turn lane really isn't going to do anything. And if you look at the drawings that they gave you that shows the cars that are trying to make left
turns and those making the right turns, their exit is going to compound that because people are going to be trying to get over into the turn lane to turn left and cutting across where this traffic is supposed to be flowing through on the right that they they are bragging about.
My kids go uh to Lewis Carol. My grandkids uh go to Lewis Carroll and they ride their bikes there and so I am very concerned about the safety uh and and the issues there um because they're coming over from uh the Glenwood Circle
area um Glenbridge Circle. If 1400 new car trips are added daily as their study suggests and over 500 of those use the school road, it's a massive safety risk for children walking and biking. The comprehensive plan's administrative policy 5 criterion G requires this board
to evaluate whether a proposed resoning mode would and I quote materially and adversely impact the safety or welfare of residents in existing residential neighborhoods. Criteria B, C, and D also requires you to consider three additional criteria about Pioneer Drive
regarding road quality. A, whether the physical quality of the existing road system is sufficient to support the use without significant deterioration. B, whether the surrounding road system is sufficient width and construction quality to serve the use without the need of substantial public improvements.
And C, whether the road system is of such width and construction quality that the proposed use would pose a potential for material danger to public safety. It does not qualify for that. And this only makes it that much worse. We need to be able to turn left and right now it's
very difficult to turn left during school hours particularly but also at other times. Policy five criterion E asks whether the proposed use would result in a material and adverse change in traffic capacity that design capacities would significantly would be
significantly exceeded. Commissioners, I along with thousands of area residents and parents of of children going to school respectfully ask you to deny the reasonzoning application because the traffic it would generate poses a clear and material danger to the safety of
these children and families who depend on Pioneer Drive every day. The developer has not even studied that impact. In addition, we elected you as our commissioners, all of your constituents to protect us from overcrowding and for this this impact on
our quality of life. Thank you for listening to us. >> Thank you, Danielle Dude and our next speaker will be Pam Steel. >> All right. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Danielle Dude. I live on Merit Island and I will try to get
through this as quickly as possible. I want to speak about the serious water, sewer, and utility capacity impacts of the proposed 220 unit development on Pioneer Road. Bvard County Land Development Code section 62-602D3. The adopted level of service for potable
water is 250 gallons per day per residential unit. For 222 units, that equals approximately 55,500 gallons of potable water demand per day. Section 62-602D2 sets the level of service for sanitary
sewer at 200 gallons per day per unit, which equals approximately 44,400 gallons of sanitary sewer demanding per day. These figures do not even include the swimming pool, the 6,500 foot clubhouse that they're wanting to put in
there, or other amenities. Section 62-1151C3 of the land development code expressly requires this board to consider the impact of proposed resoning on water and sewer systems and other public facilities at the resoning stage, not
defer it to site plan. Additionally, chapter 13 of the comprehensive plan policies 5.2 2 and 5.5 require preliminary uh concurrency evaluation during zoning review and rent verification from the utility provider that adequate capacity and water supply
are available. To date, no such verification has been provided to the board. Bvard County is already facing a massive in infrastructure backlog. What was it? 800 million dollars between sewer and water infrastructure. Are you serious? And they're talking about
busting the cap, guys. Now, Bvard County is already facing that we should not approve additional demand that could degrade service to existing residents who have already paid for our current water and sewer systems. I respectfully urge you to require clear rent confirmation of adequate utility
capacity before any approval and to deny this application if that capacity does not exist or will not be fully funded by the developer. Thank you. >> Thank you. Pam Steel and the speaker after Pam will
be Drew or is that right? >> Pardon? >> I was Next speaker will be Drew or think I got it right. >> Um, good evening commissioners. I'm Pam Steel. I live on Merit Island at 203 Sykes Loop Drive, which my entrance and
exit is definitely on Pioneer Road. And um I just got through paying $1,000 two months ago for the mildewed molded drywall from the last two years floods in my house. So what they say I have incurred as well. Um so I'm going to get
my emotional stuff over first so Miss Rosinka is happy and then I'll get to the facts. Um so first of all I've worked at NASA for 35 years. I'm now retired. 55 years I've lived on Merit Island, so
I think I know the place pretty well. My dad was there 20 years before me. I know a lot about the workforce, the number of people that were there. I used to collect the numbers for NASA for the KSC annual report. In the shuttle program, we had over
14,000 people at that at that space center working. We have half of that right now. Have the demographics changed as far as the types of people working out there, the demographics, the age, etc. the transients coming and going,
construction and all. Yes, the the demographics have changed, but I don't believe we have a housing need overall. We have what I think is opportunistic greed. We have
and and it's it's not just y'all. I'm not really against, you know, it's not you personally or anything, but I my son lives in Sarasota. I just it's everywhere. Every time I go visit him, there's another one of these Matchbox apartment buildings going up. It's
miserable getting around over there. Today when I left Pioneer Road to come here, it took me 9 minutes once I made the right turn after fighting to get in the left lane. 9 minutes, three turns of the light just to get on 528. When I arrived in Vieira, I'm like, "Wow, what
a great They planned this out. The roads are wide. They can expand. You can get around. It's a planned community. It's a beautiful thing. I'm happy Vieira is here and growing. But that is not Merit Island, okay? That's not what it has
been. what it should be. And when you cut yourself, you don't put salt in the wound. Well, that's what we're doing. We've already approved as a county and the port commission and the state and all of that, all that growth at the port. We on Merit Island are
very, very impacted by all of the port growth on 528. We can't move around it. It quite a lot of times. These homes, these new apartments, in my opinion, are not going to be, if they
are for the employees at the space center, they're going to be transient renters. The construction will eventually die off because NASA is only going to lease out so much land. And then you're going to have it's going to be northern seasonal people, not
long-term residents vested. They're only here part of the year. or it's going to be you're going to be gouging Elon and Jeff Bezos for their employees to stay there. But it's a whole different island. It's not the kind of people we have now in residence, long-term vested,
generational, a nice community. There's plenty of growth in Bvard County outside of that for for all of the rest of this. Um, okay. Aside from that, I'd say I'd like to address factor 2 of section 621 1151C,
change in conditions. In factor two, it requires you to evaluate the change in conditions of the land use of the property being considered in the surrounding property since the establishment of the current applicable zoning classification. This is one of five mandatory decision criteria that
you must consider. It focuses on the property and the surrounding property, not the regional trends. Just because it's happening in Vieira doesn't make it right for Merit Island. >> The developer must demonstrate that the conditions they actually have that will
actually change in a way that warrants this resoning. The burden is on them to prove it. Administrative policy 3C reinforces the change in conditions inquiry. It requires you to evaluate whether the proposed use is consistent with the emerging or existing pattern of
surrounding development through an analysis of historical land use patterns, actual development over the immediately preceding three years and development approved in the past three years but not yet constructed. This three-part test that the comprehensive plan requires you to apply, let me walk
you through it. The developers going to argue that the conditions have changed since the AU zoning was assigned. That regional employment has grown. I just explained it hasn't. Is my five. >> Finish your thought. Five minutes, but go ahead and finish your thought. >> Oh, wow. Okay. That original environment
has grown and the space industry has expanded. There is demand for rental housing on Merit Island. But the relevant inquiry inquiry under factor 2 is not rather countywide or regional market change has shifted. It's what has changed in our immediate area. Nothing
has changed in our immediate area. It's still a residential area. There's still a school there. AU1 and RU1 character of this corridor has not changed. Pioneer Drive is still a local resident road. The wetlands still exist. We're still flooding. The single family
neighborhoods east of the site will define this still define how this community should continue. The developer own aerial map confirms this. Um, let me apply the three-part test. Historical land use patterns. The historical land use pattern is overwhelmingly single
family residential. It has been for decades, 55 years. I can attest to it. Actual development in the preceding three years. This includes Hampton Manor, but as someone's already pointed out, that population is of an elder sector. They live in assisted facil
assisted living. They don't mostly drive, so they're not going to impact us on Pioneer Road. um approved and unbuilt. There's a 22 unit mobile home community that's been approved, but it's not been built yet. Pretty insignificant.
Um nothing that compares to this. Uh the developer own traffic study shows Courtney is already at 88%. I think that was already a point made by Greg, so I won't belittle that. Um Merit Island um requires travel to Lewis Carroll Elementary. You already have heard all
about that. The change in the conditions is increased congestion. That's all that's changed and this project does nothing to help that. It only adds to it. Um the exceptions do not create a trend. Just because some have been
built, that doesn't mean you should build more. The others have been substantially smaller, built under different conditions, and none of them involve the kind of market rate luxury rental intensity being proposed here. These are going to be tourists. They're
going to be, you know, people renting them out or construction workers at the space center. They're not going to be long-term residents of Merit Island. Thank you. >> Thank you, Drew. Uh, Drew or and next speaker is Rebecca.
>> Uh, commissioner, I got to apologize. It's Dean or I. My handwriting Dean. That's okay. My handwriting is not that good. >> Well, I'm not the greatest reader either, so >> Okay. All righty. Uh, yeah. My name is Dean Ore. I live at 172 Cove Loop Drive in Sykes Cove. I've been there for 25
years, raised my kids there, and it's a wonderful community. I love it there. Um, tonight I'm going to talk about density, density of developments. The maximum density is a ceiling, not an entitlement. The developer and staff may
suggest that because the future land use designations of neighborhood, commercial, and residential 15 technically allow up to 15 units per acre that the board is required to approve the project at or near that density. That's not correct.
Policy 1.1 of the future land use element expressly states that approved densities may be lower than the maximum allowed by a residential land use designation. Therefore, the board of county commissioners has discretion to
approve densities below the Florida land use maximum. Maximum density is a ceiling, not a floor, and it is certainly not an entitlement for developers. Policy 1.1 identifies six six uh specific reasons
the board can approve at a lower density or not at all. um environmental constraints, land use compatibility under administrative policy three, unavail unavailability or inadequacy of
public facilities and services including educational facilities, a lot of which has been mentioned already. And the character of the general area should be considered hurricane evacuation and other policies such as the Myra Myra
plan. Um, so a lot of different factors must be considered other than just the maximum on the uh Florida land use agreement. Neighborhood commercial and residential
usage areas must be compatible under policy 210. residential development in a neighborhood commercial designated area is only permissible and I quote provided that the scale and intensity of residential and mixeduse
development is not compatible with abuing residential development or is compatible but the the problem here is it's not compatible with with the local residential development. Um,
uh, the the density is the problem here. And we just want to make sure you guys realize you don't have to approve the maximum density that's on a map. You know, you can approve lower if or none at all. And, uh, you know, this is a lot of technical stuff, but I kind of want
to step back and talk big picture now a little bit. Um, I've lived there uh for 25 years in the Merit Island area and you know the congestion has gotten more and more dense over the years on especially on Courtney there. And uh if
you think about it that intersection of 528 and Courtney is like a crunch point for the whole Space Coast at rush hour. The whole Space Coast is coming to try to get through that area. So we are super densely populated during rush hour. that that whole place is packed
and to put a highdensity apartment right in the middle of all that is is just trouble on all fronts as has been stated here today. So, um you're here to protect our community and not our develop not developers profits here. So, we we implore you to please vote no on
this and think about the homeowners like me that have been here for 25 years. We love our community. We don't want it ruined with a big development. Thank you. >> Thank you,
Rebecca Howser. Our next speaker, Hanky Jonner. Jonard. >> Oh, good evening, commissioners. My name is Rebecca Hower and I live in Sykes Cove Association. Um, I'm also on the board
of directors. I've been on the board for five years. Um, and I have three kids currently at Lewis Carol School. Um, I wanted to show some pictures of what Pioneer looks like during pickup hours. Um, I know nobody has brought that up
yet. So, let's see if I can show these. That would be great. All right. Now, I got to flip it. Sorry. Okay. So, this is what Pioneer looks like. Um the whole side
on Pioneer is completely full. They're supposed to be pulling over on the right hand side, but no cars pull over. So, as you can see, you have cars passing the entire right side to go past the school
pickup line. And you can see there's a car going forward. So, there's lots of kids that are coming out of the school. And I'm going to show a picture of how close these kids are. So in the same picture right here is where the kids get to go.
And back here are where the kids are. So they're crossing across the street while cars are driving around the cars parked on Pioneer and going back and forth. Um Lewis Carroll also has a crossing guard at that intersection.
They do not have a crossing guard at North Courtney and Pioneer Road because it was determined to be too dangerous for a crossing guard to be there. Um, so I just wanted to bring that up that Pioneer and Courtney, it's a scary
intersection as it is. Um, I love that they would be able to make the right hand lane longer, but the left side is the problem. You're going straight and left at the same time. I always kind of wait before I'm going left, hold my
breath to make sure the cars aren't going to keep going before I actually turn. So, I just wanted to note that. And then I also am I allowed to ask a question? >> Sure. >> Okay. So, I wanted to ask the question
about the live local act. Um, from how I understand it that it does not apply to AU land. Is that correct? because currently this lot okay sorry >> let's okay >> okay >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, that is generally
correct that um agricultural use in prov county is a residential use. The local applies to commercial and industrial land uses. >> Okay. So currently that lot is AU as well as those commercial buildings are AU and the only
reason why the commercial buildings were allowed was because they got the cup. So, I wanted to point that out that even if they said that we could do the live local act, make the apartments bigger, that doesn't apply to the current zoning
right now. Um, then just to end it with, I'm going to be kind of quick. So if this board approves 222 units at this location and at this intensity, you are establishing
a president for this immediate area. You are signicling signigling that the single family residential character of this community can be overridden by any developer who points to a future land
use map designation and demands maximum density regardless of compatibility, character or infrastructure. So I am so I am requesting that you please deny this based on um what everybody else is
saying and then also um what I just mentioned. Thank you. >> Thank you Hanki Jert. >> Uh it's hikah >> hikah >> yenut hikah what? >> Yanut. It's German, but that's beside
the fact. >> Um, good evening, commissioners. My name is Hiker Yinard and I live at uh 67 uh 29 Mangrove Drive, Merit Island. I want to address the wetlands and the environmental constraints on this
property. Number one, wetlands confirmed on the property. The myra staff report and the final wetlands delination both acknowledge that this property contains wetlands over two acres that must be preserved. The staff report itself
states that a portion of the property containing wetlands is required to be preserved. Number two, con conversation element objective five no net loss. Objective five of the conser uh of the
conservation element establishes the overarching standard. It directs the county to preserve, protect, restore and replace wetlands to achieve no net loss for functional wetlands in Bvard County. It requires that protective activities
uh to be prioritized in this in this order. Number one, avoidance of impacts. Number two, minimization of impacts uh and number three, mitigation for impacts as the very last resort. This is
binding county policy, not a suggestion. Number three, policy 52E1, density within wetlands limited to one unit per 5 acres. Conservation Element policy 52E1 states that residential land uses
within wetlands shall be limited to not more than one dwelling unit per 5 acres net acres. This is dramatically this dramatically constraints the developable um area of this parcel. Number four
policy 52e4a NC designation with wetlands. There is an additional constraint that is critical. Policy 52e4 provides that um institutional or residential professional land developments on property which contains
wetlands and which are designated on the future land use map as neighborhood commercial or community commercial shall be considered commercial as set forth forth in policy 52e3. And what does policy 52e3 says? It pro prohibits
commercial and industrial land development activities in wetlands based on the FLU designation not the proposed or actual intended use. This means the wetland constraints on this property are even more restrictive than the developer
may have represented. Certain types of residential development on this NC designated parcel with wetlands are treated as commercial and commercial development in wetlands is prohibited. Number five, effective density increases on uplands. If the developer must avoid
all red lands, which the cons which the conversation element requires as the first priority, then the effective density on the remaining upland portion increases substantially. This raises serious concerns about building height, building mass and intensity on a reduced
footprint. This also raises compatibility issues because the buildings will be more concentrated, more imposing, and more impactful on the surrounding single family neighborhood. Number six, the last one, the site plan,
the site plan uh places buildings on wetlands. The developer's own density study and conceptual site plan show building footprints that extend directly into wetland areas as identified on the
wetlands delination. The only storm water feature shown is the single area labeled SW SW1 at just 04 acres. This alone demonstrates that the developer has not taken the conservation
elements requirements seriously and it calls into question whether 222 units can be feasible constructed while complying with all applicable wetland protections. Commission commissioners the developers the developer bears the burden of
demonstrating feasibility. That burden has not been met. I urge you to scr to scrutinize whether this project project can actually meet the conversation elements element requirements and to deny this application if it cannot.
Thank you. >> Thank you Tracy True. >> Did I get that right? >> No. >> Chelsea, I didn't see the L. Well, I'll work on my handwriting. >> We'll get there. Okay. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Chelsea TR and
I live in the neighboring single family residential neighborhood to the north of this property. I have spoken several times in opposition to this application. And there's still far more that could be said, but tonight I want to focus on key issues that remain unresolved. Section 62-1151
of the land development code requires you to consider five mandatory factors before granting a resoning. And the comprehensive plan's administrative policies impose additional binding criteria covering compatibility, neighborhood character, transportation impacts, environmental constraints, and consistency with the element of the
plan. The burden of proof rests on the applicant, not on this community. The applicant has stated time and time again that the infrastructure is a site plan issue. However, section 62-1151 and section 62-602
and administrative policies 3 through6 contradict this statement. You are required to evaluate these impacts at the resoning phase. Administrative policy 5 requires you to evaluate whether this material materially and adversely impacts the safety of residents in our neighborhood and the
staff analysis stated it does. Additionally, the surrounding area remains the same as when the AU zoning was assigned. It is a single family residential. The three-part development pattern analysis under administrative policy 3 does not support this intensity. The one condition that has
changed is the increasing congestion on Courtney and that argues against this project, not in favor for it. A housing shortage doesn't automatically make a project a good one. We can acknowledge that there is a housing issue and still expect thoughtful planning. we need housing should not be a blanket justification to build anywhere at any
scale uh without considering the long-term impacts on local roads, schools or the environment. I also want to address the worst case hypothetical scenario, the hospital. The market for healthcare landscape has significantly changed dramatically since
1983. A new hospital is slated to open within approximately four miles of this site in 2027. And there is no market demand and quite frankly not probably not enough staff to employ two hospitals on Mar Island. My last point I have to make is about
administrative policy 3 which is compatibility because this site and the existing or proposed land use in this area. This requires evaluation of impacts to the enjoyment, safety and quality of life in existing neighborhoods and to property values. And with this criteria, this project
plainly fails. The character of these neighborhoods that abut this property are single family residential with nothing remotely comparable to a 222 unit three-story apartment complex with 389 parking spaces within 2 miles. Taken together, every mandatory review factor
under the land development code and every relevant administrative policy of the comprehensive plan weighs against this resoning at this intensity. The developer has not proved that 222 apartment units are compatible with this community, that infrastructure can support the demand, or that public
health, safety, and welfare will be protected. Commissioners, I humbly ask you to look into the crowd tonight and see the faces of everyone this affects. These faces are just some of the many people behind the overwhelming disscent you have heard for the last six months about this project. These neighbors of
mine have provided real lived testimony and impact. The impacts are substantial enough to require ongoing revisions and mitigation discussions. These are not concerns fabricated by the residents there. There is nothing spurious as described by Miss Rzanka in regards to their statements. We are not
misinterpreting section 62-602 and we are not asking you to ignore the code. We are asking you to enforce it, including the parts the applicant would prefer to minimize. After six months, multiple continuences, evolving access plans, shifting density discussions, and ongoing mitigation revisions, the core
issue with this project remain unresolved. And as you can see, we have a lot of people here in opposition. But I also want to mention the voices that aren't. There is a petition that has been going around that has over 3,000 signatures against this proposal. So on behalf of the entire community who will
live with the consequences of this decision long after tonight, I respectfully ask you to deny this application. Thank you. Thank you, Brandon Shannon. And then our next speaker is Teresa Clifton. >> Can't believe I have to follow that one.
>> What? I'm sorry. >> I said I can't believe I have to follow that one. >> Um, so my name is Brandon Shannon. Um, I've lived in Bvard County for the last six years and on Merit Island only for the past six months. Clearly, I wasn't born and raised here, but I'm standing
here before you because of the community and and the people in it. Time and time again, this community has shown commitment to responsible development and preserving what makes this place special. And that commitment is what brought me and my family here uh into the fold in the first place. That mentality and that commitment to
community is what my family and I call this place home. This is my community and these are my neighbors and my peers. I love living here. The friendly faces I see at the store, the simple kindness between neighbors, the gorgeous weather, and the low-key way of life. That's what makes Merit Island and our community
great. It's our responsibility as residents to make our voices heard. And it's your primary responsibility to act in the best interest of the people you serve. That that means listening to us and rejecting this proposal to reszone the parcel.
The proposal resone the parcel from agriculture residential to medium density multiple family residential with the intended use as a dense pack complex is irresponsible, largely irreversible and risks setting a damning presence.
According to the traffic study by Bowman uh cons consulting group, this project would generate 1379 daily trips in and out. That's 1379 additional turns across traffic or U-turns. That's 1379 more opportunities for crashes and that's
1379 more vehicles feeding into the 528 interchange. None of that is in the best interest of the residents who live here. The same traffic study also claimed that the current agriculture residential zoning could generate up to 5,500 daily trips. um attributed to the proposed future
land use for a hospital. But we have to ask, do we really think a hospital will ever be put in this place? Cape Canaveral Hospital down the road is roughly the same size of this um size of this uh plot. The replacement Rocklage
Hospital will be about double the size. And it would be a stretch to make a business case uh to build a hospital at this specific location. Even if it were, um, it at least would provide long-term, um, quality jobs for hundreds of people for decades into the future. This
apartment complex simply, uh, will not. Attachment three of the study also lists the traffic impacts for other potential uses of this land, 36 daily trips for single family homes, nine for a park, 341 for plant nursery, 42 for a golf
course, and if I may, I'll add zero if we just leave the land alone. I also want to acknowledge the need uh for afford affordable housing is is very real in our community. Uh this proposal does nothing to create affordable living for people who live here and work here
without clear enforceable affordability commitments. It would simply add more expensive um market level market rate apartments, not the attainable homes that this community and people that we want to move into this community uh desperately need. I want to be clear,
I'm not against growth. My family's here because of thoughtful growth made um it it's what made this a great place to live and it's what brought us brought us here. What I'm asking for is growth in the right place, at the right scale, and for the right reasons. Zoning is a
promise to current residents and to the future buyers about what they can reasonably expect next door to them. If this promise is broken here, you don't just change one parcel, you weaken the trust that keeps people um engaged and supportive of of our mission.
Individual choices add up to big change. Uh none of us intended. If there is any doubt on the side of protection, we can always consider a better proposal later. We cannot unbuild a project that doesn't fit. Today you have an opportunity to show that local voices matter more than distant interests to show that
stewardship outranks short-term gain and to show that your duty to the public interest guides you when it counts. This proposal is being brought forward by um outside interest. Um approving the resoning of this parcel for agriculture from agriculture to
medium density multiple family residents would not reflect your core responsibility to the people of this community. It would mean ignoring the voices of the people who elected you in favor of those who don't live here. Uh please listen to your constituents and reject reszoning. I I do want to quickly acknowledge I see you guys are are tired
and hungry and thirsty and I appreciate you guys listening to us and I do want to acknowledge the the effort you guys put forward. It was clearly a lot of work and uh very expensive. But I do want to reiterate that this is our community and not yours. This is Vieiraa and this is this is not Vieier. This is
Merit Island. Thank you, >> Teresa Severson. Good evening. Theresa Clifton. I own a house at 2350 Rainree Lake Circle. I bought it in October of 1998. So, my
heart goes out to the young lady. She probably lives on the back side of the neighborhood because when it rains that it the water flows down towards the river and that's why that happens. Anyway, um I'm not going to add comments for everything that's already been said because I don't want to waste y'all's
time. I'm tired. I got other stuff to do, too. What kept me here is I had an interesting conversation with people from FDOT. My conversation had more to do with this project that they're going to do with North Courtney Parkway safety
improvements that will literally to me cause more traffic jams than save more lives. But that's that's not here or there for today. Uh the interesting part was they're not aware of that development coming in. That wasn't part
of their study to try to fix Courtney Parkway. Also, I've I've heard um remnants of there's about 40 acres on the other side of Pioneer that well, they're looking at seeing what happens here to see if they can do that with theirs. So, Pioneer is
already uh under stress and when they go ahead and do what they're going to do with the concrete barriers, I'm not real big on what I call suicide lanes because yeah, that gets scary on Courtney, but it is creating a really bad situation
and it's only going to get worse and you don't want to stop development. I get that. I do have concerns about the environment. I don't think that you can concrete in around one acre and whatever creature is living there in that wild
area in the wetlands is going to survive it because I've seen it and it just doesn't it just doesn't happen. You might as well just go ahead and just mow it all down because whatever's there is going to one day come out and get mushed in the road and then it there won't be
it there. So anyway, um that's pretty much what I had to say. I just want to make sure y'all are aware that the um two people I spoke with last Thursday from FDOT who came over from Sanford who are in charge of this project were not aware that we're we have all these other
building things happening. So they were not taken into account with any of that traffic study or whatever that was. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Joseph Severson and Kimberly Jarvis be next. All right, good evening. Uh, my name is Joseph Severson. I am also an engineer
here on the island. So, I applaud you guys coming up and giving your credentials. That's great. Um, however, my background is uh in the US Army as a veteran and currently as a safety engineer with a background in environmental um studies and environmental sciences. My career both in uniform and outside of
uniform working as an engineer now um has been built on identifying hazards, evaluating risk pathways, and protecting people from preventable harm, which by looking at this zoning um question here, that's what we're doing. We're trying to protect people from preventable harm by coming here and speaking against this
effort. From that perspective, the proposed the proposed development at North Courtney Parkway and Pioneer Road presents multiple high severity risks that cannot be responsibly mitigated. And so far from the planning that I've seen have not been responsibly mitigated. Several of these risks directly conflict
with the current Florida law. Um I want to begin with the most immediate and unacceptable risk which is the school zone safety. I know a lot of folks that have been here um including an couple veterans have already spoken on that tonight and so I won't hash over a lot of their things that they've already covered but Pioneer Road is the primary
access for Lewis Carroll Elementary. During drop off and pickoff, the corridor already experiences congestion, unpredictable traffic behavior, limited visibility, including introducing a highdensity residential complex to that flow will increase the number of conflict points between vehicles and
children, which in my understanding is the worst case scenario we're looking at here, overarching all of the other discussions that we've had this evening so far. And I'll get to that at the end of my discussion here. Um, under Florida statute at 163.3176
section 6A, local governments must ensure that land use decisions protect public safety and maintain a safe transportation maintain safe transportation conditions. Looking at all of the things that have been discussed here this evening, that's not what's happening. Um, and especially if this gets approved.
Um, this project knowingly elevates probability of vehicle and pedestrian incidents is an area where the consequences are severe and irreversible. We're talking about the lives of children. And once again, I'll get to that again at the end here. But um second, not as serious as the first um issue that I was bringing up is the
flooding and storm water risks are substantial and well documented. Not to mention that there have been lived experiences here this evening that have documented that and showed that to both the board and the other members of the development team here. um elevating a new development and
adding large areas of imper imperous surface will alter the drainage patterns and push water onto adjacent properties unless engineered with extraordinary precision. And looking at the plan that was proposed, that doesn't seem to be happening. There was not a lot of planning and a lot of um proposition that went into the storm water area
there. Um and so that's going to create a significant issue. And any engineer worth their salt knows that the more concrete you add to an area that's currently under not developed is going to create water issues. Um and so looking at that alone in from a layman's
perspective knows that it's going to create an issue. Um I also want to make the point that under Florida law the burden of proof is on the developer not the public to discriminate to demonstrate reasonable assurance that this project will not increase flooding, degrade water quality
or create off-site impacts. Um, once again, looking at the plan that was proposed, that's that's not being addressed. Um, and it's not creating reasonable assurance in my eyes and of those that are already here for the meeting as well. Um, the community does not have to prove that this project will harm us. The
applicant, meaning the developers, must prove no harm. And in that case, it's not happening. Um, so it would be negligence in order to to approve this zoning this resoning. Um, and I apologize. I'm a little bit nervous here. I wasn't emotional when I started out this process, but when the individual came up and spoke and and
spoke to the emotionalist and almost insulted all the folks in this room, it kind of set me off a little bit. So, I apologize for that. Um, section 303D of the Clean Water Act in Florida statute at 403067 governs BMAPs.
um our um and I apologize now I'm drawing a complete blank on the acronym for BMAP um basin management action plan. All right, so that's an environmental science term. Basically, we already have a BMAP for this area. We already have a BMAP covering the damage to the Indian
River Lagoon that's already occurring, most of which is occurring due to, you know, a lot of the facilities and storm water drainage that's already present. We're looking at adding more concrete which is going to exacerbate that situation even further. Um, not to mention the amount of pollutants that are going to come off of these parking lots. Not to mention the amount of
pollutants that are going to come out of the folks that are living in these highdensity um, housing areas. It's going to add more pollution to an already struggling BMAP. Um, and it's going to cost us, the taxpayers, more money to try and fix those issues. So, we're basically shooting ourselves in the foot by approving something like this. It's going to cost us more money
in the future. Um, lastly, I want to say that as a safety engineer, I evaluate risk for a living. Um, looking at this reasonzoning effort, we're we're looking at a risk where the severity is very high. That worst case scenario of a vehicle impacting a child is the highest case
and the worst severity we're looking at. It's already got a high likelihood that that will occur based on the traffic patterns and admittedly the traffic patterns that um most folks here have admitted and then the failure of the analysis that was conducted by the other engineering group here. Um, and the mitigations are either non non-existent
or insufficient to prevent that from happening. All in all, I want to say that in the event that that worst case scenario does happen and that there is a death of the child in that area because of that school's proximity to this um proposed high density living area, that blood is going to be on the hands of the individuals who approve this, not on the
hands of the developers because they don't care. They don't live here. So, I think it's obvious my vote is no. And I hope that you guys see that as well. Thank you for your time. Kimberly Jarvis. Then Lynn Knight. Don't mind me. I got a torn hand.
My name is Kimberly Jarvis. I am a Marin resident. I'm also a member of the Space Coast chapter of the National Autobon Society. And I'm a volunteer with the Ottabon's Eagle Watch program. There is an active bald eagle nest just southeast of that property.
Hello. I have it right. Hey, I have it right for you. That's Courtney. That's Courtney right there. There's the nest. This is the property right over here. The right
here. The southeast the south the uh 660 ft buffer for the nest crosses the southeast corner. The 660 ft buffer for the nest crosses the southeast corner of that property. To put it in perspective that most everybody here can understand
660 ft is two football fields and two two first sails. I'm sure everybody everybody can relate to that. That gives you perspective. Bald eagles have exceptional eyesight. They can see rabbitsized prey in the grass three miles away. Their hearing is
equivalent to that of an adult human being. This development will have a very negative impact. We've already had I show you some pictures of my nest. >> Microphone. I got some pictures here.
Oops. That way. Come on, Kim. >> That way. I'll figure it out. I'll figure it out. I took this picture in January. See the little critter? I took this picture in early March. He fled two days after I took that picture.
I couldn't wait for me to get back there. There are also owls on that property. There are barn owls. B A R R E D. Of course not. I'll figure it out one of these days.
That is a fledgling barn owl. Somebody who lives in Villa Deal sent me that picture. I went out there one rainy Tuesday night before the uh planning and zoning board meeting in March and I recorded Owl's calling. I can play the
call for you. I don't know how you can hear it. My phone's not that loud. But anyway, there are there are b owls on that property. I also heard black belly whistling ducks
at the end of the uh space coach partnership meet uh preseason meeting in um April. I spoke with one of the men from FWC and he said an environmental impact study is required to be done and developers have a bad habit of skipping
that part. If the resoning is approved, I'll be on the phone with FWC first thing tomorrow morning to make sure an environmental impact study is done. There there are more eiglets in that net. There's at least one more eagle in the nest. I've seen the female laying in
the nest and I've seen her sitting up on a branch above it being very watchful. There's only two times the eagles lay in the nest. One is when they're incubating eggs and the other is when they're brooing brooding igllets. Since the owl since adults are not there all the time,
there's igllets in that nest which means we're hopefully we're going to have another fledge. So the nest is not only considered active, it's considered successful. And I will be ensuring that my eagles are protected.
I love my eagles. I keep calling it my my nest. And somebody asked me, "Well, how can you own eagles?" I said, "I don't I just own the nest and rent it to the eagles." >> Thank you, Lynn Knight. Lyn Knight. The next
speaker will be Tracy King. My name is Lynn Knight and I've lived in Merit Island for 46 years. My husband was the head man head engineer at the air force station and he passed away at at 49. Anyway, I wanted to tell you we
moved here because this was the dream of his life. He never wanted to go any place but the space center. And we when we came here, I believe if I'm not wrong and my pardon me for being dis discombobulated, but I think we had $30,000 here or
30,000 people here in Merit Island. I may be mistaken in 1980, but I know that Thaad was a child and we introduced him to this stuff. Anyway, um my reason for speaking today is because you know there's so much about the planning and
zoning board that they are I appreciate everything that you are doing and I appreciate all that the young people are doing at the planning and zoning board but county is like uh a backwood politics. It's like the oldest of the
oldest of the oldest and they're so far behind in everything that it's really sad because when it comes around we're the ones that are suffering. I want to thank our commissioner uh Goodson. I appreciate very much him being sick and
listening to this from all of us people because we're very concerned. Um, I want to tell you I went to the Department of Transportation yesterday and I spoke with a woman that was very involved and had been doing this for many, many years. She was out of Dand, which is the
district of Dan, which is where we're from. That's where we go for our transportation. She told me at that time that we had at the present time 30 uh 27,500 uh cars and and that on uh uh Courtney
uh up to 34,000 and it was 30,750 south of uh of Courtney off of five past 520. So, we have way way more than anybody ever knows out there that's traveling up and down our waterways and
our riverways or uh streets. I just want to tell you that uh one of the gentlemen said that if this was approved that would be 1329 trips per day. Okay, for the amount of people that they had. Well, you can more than double that.
It'll be 26,58 because the property directly across was is not addressed at the present time is what's coming up next. And so we're going to have that many more apartments right across the street. And my child
went to Lewis Carroll Elementary and graduated and it's a fabulous school. We have so many schools off of Kourtney. We have so many churches off of Kourtney. We have so many businesses that we welcome. But I'm just telling you, when
you have like even a hotel, when it comes to the evacuation, I've been through the evacuation three times. And I want to tell you something, it's not funny. And that was back when there was 30,000 people. I paid 115,000
for my house back in 1980. and I went to a commission meeting and was so dis dis dissatisfied with what happened I joined the committee to save Sykes Creek. And this is not any better than it was back
in 1980. I it's nothing against the uh planning and zoning people that work it. It's the information that's given to them. You know, that's what is happening in our in our Merit Island because just like out at the space center when they
bring in the third starship, I wonder if any of you know that the uh velocity or whatever it's called from the the noise from the shuttle is going to be 10 times more than it is now with a space
shuttle. And all of us are going to have to have our windows replaced. My house right now is worth I paid 115,000. It's now worth a million. And and it's really sad because we also have property
that's on the street um right down the street at Lewis Carroll. And at the end of the street, it is very marshy and watery. And we have uh on our street Topaz, we have uh they were talking about traffic. The traffic on our street
is horrendous. The cars are doubled up to wait for their children to get out of there. That street was originally manufactured because of Lewis Carroll Elementary. Um, I have the numbers and stuff uh for all these different places
that I've corre got gotten together, but there's so many things that I could say that I'm not going to bore you because I know you have to go to bed, too, you know. But I'm just telling you the the sewage that I dealt with back in 1980. I
want to tell you honest to God, I worked for seven years. I raised the money. I was the person that went out there and the Today newspaper called an iate idiot. Well, I told him, I said, "Let me bring my information to you and you'll
see how many I rate idiots are out there." We we sued the county. We got rid of all of the commissioners, which you know, they had done their share, but uh we raised the money to get a million and a half sewage treatment plant. And
we've got people now that are going to be dumping into the river that have just been approved. And and they're huge corporations. And so, I mean, it's just it's tragic. It's really tragic. And we just do not need anymore anymore. It's
too overfilled right now. Thank Thank you. Tracy King is our next speaker and then >> Veronic here. >> Thanks. So >> Tracy is waving her speaking time, but she's against the project. Let that be
reflected. Thank you. Thank you. Veronica Oakclair. >> All right. Before my time start, I just wanted to be clear. Is it 30 minutes? Is do we also get sir rebuttal here? Okay. >> We give you the same as the presenter. >> You have no rebuttal. >> Sir rebuttal.
>> It's included. >> We gave you 30 minutes. >> It's a rebuttal to to their rebuttal is what I was asking. That's common in, you know, litigation work. >> Let's ask more. >> No. >> Okay. Just wanted to be clear. I know every county is different, so I always
double check every single time. So, well, good good afternoon, or should I say good evening uh commissioners. My name is Veronica Oakler. I'm here to represent the uh Sykes Cove Community Association. This entire community has come out in droves. So, I can't say the
entire many people are still working and couldn't physically be here, but over 3,000 signatures. That's something quite significant that I thought I should point out. I also wanted to acknowledge and recognize everyone who has come to speak here today. They've kind of stolen my thunder. So, great job everyone like
they they have covered a lot here today. Um, I do want to give you a little bit of background for my about myself as well because not all of you have met me. Um, I am an environmental, land use, and real estate attorney. I have worked in both the real estate development side as
well as standing up against real estate development at times. I've worked in state government for department of transportation. I've worked in the governor's office in their environmental and land use area. I have kind of seen all sides of this coin. I understand being in the government you have to find
a balance. It is a balancing act between all of these different interests. And that is a very difficult um a difficult burden that you do have to carry. So I want to acknowledge that and I know everyone here acknowledges that as well even if we all have disagreements as to
how best to do that job. I also want to acknowledge that yes the development team here has made efforts. They have made efforts based on some public feedback and some efforts were based on things that they simply just did not know because they're not from this community. They're not local. A lot of
work that comes into this is based off of on the ground, boots on the ground, knowing what's going on. And it's not simply doing a desk review. I'm very familiar with desk reviews. I'm an attorney. We're at I'm at my desk most of the time. It's kind of the downside, so to speak. I don't get the exercise
I'd like to get, but it's part of the work, right? The desk review is only one phase of the work. Getting out into the community, that's a very important phase. And as a land use attorney, this is something I often try to recommend to developers. Talk to me before you
purchase the property. Talk to me before you start doing your market research analysis. We have experts that help you analyze whether this is a good business decision, whether this is the right property in the right project at the right time in the right location. There's a lot of right, right, right when it comes to this. And that's
because, well, you've heard it from realtors, location, location, location, right? Um what it comes down to is if an individual or a company wants to do some kind of a development, they have to consider not just the local laws but the impacts to the individuals in that area.
And I believe that they did make quite a bit of effort when it comes to that. But there are a number of factors that were originally not really considered that our community had to raise to their attention or bring to their attention and that was really important. I think that's why we have this public um this
public comment process. In particular, I wanted to talk a little bit more about storm water drainage and surface water impacts, but I didn't want to waste your time. I just want to drive home some of these points because we had a fantastic engineer um environmental engineer who came out here earlier and actually answered and stated a lot of
things that I really wanted to point out. But I'm going to elaborate a little bit further. In my experience as an environmental real estate and land use attorney, in my experience working at DOT that has a lot of imperous surface, I had to deal with a number of
environmental impact statements, environmental analysis, storm water drainage capacity analyses, and I looked at it from not just an environmental perspective. Thankfully, my background included an ecology degree for from the University of Florida. So, I also understand the engineering and the
science that goes behind it, not just the well, we'll just call it the boring reading of the law, just the words. I can actually read these maps as well. And that's something that is very difficult for the average person to do sometimes when they're not involved in this on the day in and day out. So,
that's something that we often recommend when we're speaking with developers as land use attorneys. We say, "Hey, let me help you with your site plan before you start trying to do your resoning. Before you start making offers to a property owner to see if this is even feasible
for you." I argue that this project is not feasible in this location. I think it's a great idea to build multifamily residential in the right place because we do have needs for housing in the right place. That is simply just not the case here. In particular with regard to
this property, it is currently vegetated with a mature tree canopy and natural ground cover. It provides infiltration infiltration into our groundwater. Right now, it absorbs water that lands on the surface of this property. And once it's
built up, that no longer applies. That water washes away. This property currently also conveys pre-existing historical natural flows. That's actually a legal term, so I won't bore you with the details. It just essentially allows for water that is on
the surface to flow, sheet flow, or whether it is through an actual river or creek. That is surface water movement. That surface water movement goes straight through this property. So, that's going to have to be diverted and accounted for. That ends up in public
storm water facilities, not private. In addition to that, this property sits within the FEMA flood zone X. As we've all seen, many of the community members have provided actual evidence, not just words, not just emotional experiences. They've provided evidence, even though
they don't have the burden to prove anything. The burden is on the developer here. They've shown that this area already floods through standard rainstorm events, not through heavy hurricane rain events. And that's something very important to consider here. As already explained, this
property is going to be elevated. We're in Florida. A difference of half an inch determines whether a property gets flooded. I've had to deal with a number of properties representing property owners all throughout central Florida especially, but all throughout the state
regarding their neighbor suddenly developing their property and they're getting flooded. The the property owner who didn't do any of the changes, now that person is stuck holding the bag. So, we want to prevent that and that's actually something I tend to offer a lot of times as as a land use attorney. I
try to help with those site plans before a property or before a client even purchases the property or considers purchasing the property because this may not be the right property for that. So, that's another aspect to consider. So, this area already prone to shallow
flooding and sheet flow and ponding now wants to build 222 units. That's eight buildings. It also includes uh parking areas and infrastructure. We also have drive aisles. So, it's not just parking. They have to drive through the property.
That's all paved as well. So, this increases the amount of impervious and impermeable surface area. A pool is also not pvious. Um a clubhouse that's being proposed is also not pvious. All the related amenities also not pvious. So,
this is what we start running into a lot of problems. The conversion increases runoff volume and peak discharge rates. It disrupts existing historical flow paths. It reduces the site current capacity to store flood waters. And then
on top of that, there's two acres over two acres of wetlands per the wetland delineation. That is what it states. The wetland delineation, no, it was not required to be done yet. Or so they said. It actually is per the comprehensive plan when you're considering the five factors. I'm happy
to to recap here toward the end of my discussion with you. If you have any follow-up questions, I'm happy to go into that as well. But what's particularly concerning here is usually during the reasonzoning phase, as I have seen in my experience, reszoning, usually when a site plan is
produced, it is required to understand what the proposed use is going to be, especially when it's a significant upzoning. We're going from AU to RU, sorry, RU230. That's a huge jump. That's not a minor jump to match what's already existing
abudding the property. That's a significant jump trying to keep up with what's going on in a different portion of the island, a different portion within the county. It's simply not within this specific area. So, this is going to require a higher level of scrutiny. That includes looking at all
of the factors within the comprehensive plan that this board has the authority to review, including requiring a review of wetland delineation and potential impacts to wetlands, to storm water, to surface flows and flooding.
Now, the developers team, they did mention, okay, a 100 foot buffer, that's a great that's a great 100 foot buffer. That was not originally part of the plan. They did it because this community stood up and spoke up for themselves and said, "We don't want this being built right at top our houses." And so a 100
foot buffer was offered. However, that 100 foot buffer, I assume that's where the storm water is going to go. We don't know. Site plan doesn't say. It doesn't show anything about where that storm water will go, how it's going to be managed. So, I'm going to get a little bit legal
on you, a little lawyerly. I'm going to reference here land development code, the storm water management criteria. Chapter 62 and it's a bit long. We have to drill down a bit. So it's chapter 62 article 10 division 6 exhibit A section 1.1. This section specifically mandates
two things that are applicable here on this project. One is that no site alteration shall adversely affect the existing surface water flow pattern and two that post-development runoff shall not be greater than pre-development runoff. These are all things that must be considered as part of the
application. Now, I'll touch on what the difference is between um reszoning stage versus site planning stage and permitting stage. They are two different things, but one does not necessarily um prohibit the other from
being considered. site planning work is more specific and more detailed, but there still must be a preliminary information provided during the resoning stage. And there's not been enough preliminary information provided to even make that decision in order to match all
the requirements of those five factors. And I could drill down into those a little bit without getting too into the weeds. These are technical matters, not just for the later site plan and permitting approval stages, which I also want to remind everyone, the reason we have these public hearings is because once
you get to site plan and once you get to permitting, they're rarely put in the spotlight. These are not held with public hearings. Some resonings, or sorry, should I say, some um site plans require public hearings. This one wouldn't. So, how on earth can we hold them
accountable once we're out of the sun sunshine? Once we are back in the dark of just being one-on-one dealing with one individual who's making decisions and yet we have no idea as the public what's going on and you as a board would
not know what's going on either. The surface water element of the um comprehensive plan policy 3.1 requires retention of runoff with no increase in discharge for the 25-year 24-hour storm. Just going to rattle off some stuff so
you have it on the record. Policy 4.5 prohibits impacts to adjacent properties and receiving waters and floodprone areas. Objective four requires maintaining natural drainage features and flood storage. The conservation element of the comprehensive plan policy
4.2 requires no net change in flood water rate and volume across the storm events. It encourages minimizing imperous and preserving flood storage. Policy 5.5 directs incorporation of wetlands into water management systems.
So this is where I wanted to pause for a moment. Again, we have no storm water management plan provided. We have no idea what this in this project is going to entail. We understand that there are over two acres of wetlands and the site plan already intends to build on top of
portions of those wetlands without any reference to what the mitigation will entail. There's no compensation area for pre-existing flood zone which must be calculated. I won't get too technical into that. We'll we'll leave that for later. And then of course the storm water ponds. So all of that must be
accounted for within the administrative or conservation element policy. More importantly, administrative policy 7 of the comprehensive plan prohibits uses that cause or substantially aggravate any substantial substantial
drainage problem on surrounding properties. So let's just pause there. We've already heard about all the flooding here. I'm not saying this developer is causing it. Even if they did everything perfectly, they're still contributing to it. The reason they're contributing is because there's already
a problem here. And we have to take into account the existing conditions of this specific area. And this all brings me back to what the five factors are. And I'll rattle them off for you here as well, just as a reminder. But in particular that what
this applies to is part of factor five in your land development code for 62-1151C the five factors as to whether or not a resoning can be approved. And it's the consideration of the public health safety and welfare. That's the reasoning
stage. That's not a permitting stage. That's not a site plan stage. That's now in the here and now. And there's just way too many questions. So just as a quick recap regarding what those five requirements or five factors are,
I will refer them to you here in just a moment. Okay, five factors that you must consider and this means that the developer here, the applicant has to prove all of these items to you today or should I say tonight. Um the first is
the character of the surrounding land uses. We have heard quite a bit about the character of this community. this immediate area. Not the character of all of Bvard County, not the character of what's happening south of 528, not the character of what's happening in Vieira, the character of what's happening right
here in the immediate vicinity just south of the 528 in Sykes Cove community and beyond, slightly beyond, right there at Courtney and in Pioneer. Second is changes in conditions since the current zoning was assigned. Okay,
the current zoning is AU. The current zoning is NC. It is not REZ5. That's a potential future land use designation. And we want to remind you of that because a potential future land use designation of RES 15 in the 1980s
was very different than what we're experiencing today. Not only that, that also takes into account that other laws have come into effect since then. Other changes have happened in the surrounding community since then. There have been other developments that have occurred since then. Just today there was an
approval for a reasonzoning to RU 15 and RU30. So that needs to be taken into consideration. There's cumulative effects that occur whenever there's changes occurring on this island. But you know what? The changes to this neighborhood haven't occurred. This is
continuing to be a lowdensity residential neighborhood of single family homes, not multifamily. And that's a distinction that I think the the development team needs to recognize. We're not comparing residential to commercial. We're not comparing
residential to industrial. It's residential to residential, but what kinds of residential? Those are still two different uses. The fourth factor is impacts of traffic, water, sewer, and other public facilities. You've already heard this,
so I won't belabor it. The fourth, I'm sorry, that was the third. The fourth is compatibility with the adopted land use plans. That's a comprehensive plan. So the comprehensive plan is what is supposed to be considered as one of the five factors referenced in the land development code. We consider everything
that's in the comprehensive plan here and now tonight. We don't wait until some other point in time in the future when the developer finally gets around to coming up with a storm water plan. We don't wait until the developer finally comes up with a plan to maybe mitigate
for wetlands. We don't come up with a plan later on how this is going to impact our storm water. Sorry, not storm water. Well, storm water as well, but our sewer, our water, our impacts to our school. It's not just that, it's traffic as well. And this is a dangerous
intersection that's already been documented. And then, of course, the fifth factor is the appropriateness of the reasonzoning for public health, safety, and welfare. And that's already been discussed here extensively as well. So what we come down to is recognizing
as well that the burden of proof is on the applicant, the developer. And you've heard that as well. I just want to really drill that home because they have to prove by substantial and competent evidence that they are not causing harm and that they're meeting all of these requirements of the five factors and
drilling down through all the requirements of the comprehensive plan. not just the land use element, all of the elements and that's specifically required per the comprehensive plan and the land development code. So wanting to make sure that you just to
kind of follow up and make sure you've heard everything before you. You heard today a couple different things. One is these five factors that I just spoke to you about, right? Um these are add there's additional binding criteria in addition to the five factors. That's the comprehensive plan. There's also the
burden of proof that the applicant, not the community, needs to show this substantial competent evidence. In fact, if you were to look at this as say a trial, um a criminal trial, not to say that they're reading criminals, I'm just saying if this were a criminal trial, the defendant all need all they need to show is reasonable doubt. There is loads
there's loads of reasonable doubt presented here to you today as was presented at the lower levels with the um planning and zoning board. You also heard about the developers likely argument and well maybe you may not have heard this um at the arguments laid at the planning made at the
planning and zoning board. I'll slow myself down. Um again coming back to the infrastructure is a site plan issue that's directly contradicted by section 62-1151C and by section 62-602B
that was already referenced by some of our community members here today. also comprehensive plan policies three through six and the capital improvements element. All of this requires you as the board to evaluate these impacts at the reszoning phase here and now tonight,
not some future date where it'll be done in the dark because it'll no longer be in your hands. It'll be a decision made by desk review individuals and not those who are physically on the ground like everyone in this community who came to speak tonight. You also heard that the developer's own
roadway capacity analysis proved that Courtney Parkway sorry that Courtney is already at 88% capacity. You have these documents. They were already produced to you even though this traffic impact study was done over three different studies. They had to keep going back and correcting things. That's a bit
concerning that they had to keep going back and correcting things. Having been at DOT for many years and working with many developers myself, we regularly have to do traffic impact analyses at this stage, not later. And those traffic analyses don't just look at a 24-hour
over the course of two days during a time when school wasn't necessarily in session. It looks at peak rates, peak traffic time, and how long it takes during the peak when the congestion is most significant. Again, it's already been raised that this community will
bring in the typical 8 to5 kind of uh families that are leaving to work generally in mass, arriving from work generally in mass at the same time that school is arriving and leaving in mass all at the same time at a roadway that has no more capacity available to it.
While that may not be our community's fault, it may not be the developer's fault. That is a factor they should have considered before considering this property, before wanting to go through this resoning process and see, hey, is this even a possibility given the constraints of the existing roadway, the
constraints of the utilities and infrastructure, the constraints of the school right here, so on and so forth. Those are all factors they should have considered and failed to do so. And I understand they did spend a lot of time trying to find a way to make this square. What is it? Round peg fit in a
square hole or is a square peg fit in a round hole. I always mess those up. The point is they're trying to make something fit here that does not belong. And it's really upsetting to the community because they're already dealing with the day in and day out frustrations of the over congestion that over congestion that has happened here.
And there wasn't even development with their own neighborhood with their own within their own existing area. All that's happened is services have been provided finally. Oh, they get a you know we get a Starbucks. Great. We would love Starbucks. This isn't providing service and that's something really
important to consider here. This project is already at very high capacity. It will this project will consume 25% of the remaining capacity. This is based on their traffic studies. Um so that brings us up to 93%. That does not even account for an already
approved development that's coming into play. The traffic counts didn't account for them because they're not there yet. But once this place, this project has its entitlements in hand, it's too late. You can't turn them down, then it's too late. The new development will already having been will have already been
built. And now we have no more space to move our cars, to move our people, to move people to the space center for all the great jobs that are happening out there and the great jobs that happen all throughout this island in this county. We've touched as well on the schools.
You've heard that the school concurrency determination, it's just a preliminary expressly nonbinding analysis. It doesn't say anything about what future work is going to be here, what the future capacity needs are going to be. It does not take into account the other
developments that were slated for approval. None of that was taken into account because it just goes based off of right here, right now, what do we know? And there's still so much in the air that has not been answered. Again, with the burden of proof being to answer those questions by the development team,
they just can't answer it. This is not the right place. That's why you also heard about impacts to infrastructure. You heard about the portable water, the sewer capacity for sanitary sewer.
You've heard about the neighborhood character. Unmistakably, it's single family residential all throughout here. An assisted living facility that's brand new right next door does not change the character of the neighborhood. In fact, its way in and out is primarily directly
on Courtney. Its secondary access point is not something that's used on the regular basis by these individuals who are um living in the facility. As already stated, these are people who are not going to work 8 to5 or outside hours. These are not people who are congesting the roadway. What's being
proposed here will congest the roadway and will continue to tax this community further. The density, as you've already heard as well, is a ceiling, not an entitlement. Policy 1.1 expressly allows this board to limit that density. And
so, I want you to be very clear. And not only does the policy require it, it has been codified in your land development code as well. Wetlands, we've already discussed, you've already heard no net losses allowed here and yet they're losing wetlands. How are we going to balance that interest? That hasn't been
answered. It could at least be a few options that are being presented and yet none have been presented at all. It's just been swept under the rug and ignore what's going on. Quality of life and property value is something really important. And I think you may also want to look at you've
heard about administrative policy 3 that requires evaluation of impacts to the enjoyment, safety, and quality of life in existing neighborhoods. This is part of the five factors once you drill down within the comprehensive plan. You have
to understand what factor 3 looks into. We look right there specifically at the impacts to the enjoyment, safety, and quality of life in existing neighborhoods. So, we don't want to turn our back on those who are already here
to benefit someone in the future who then in turn will also end up struggling because they can't even get out of their homes. It's it's going to be a challenge all across the board. It's not speculative. It's reasonable doubt. They have to prove by substantial
competent evidence and they've ignored the DOT public records as already stated by other um commenters here today about how many vehicles are actually on this roadway. One study, one day for 24-hour period that doesn't really cover it. DOT has quite a lot of
studies they can review to really understand better what's going on here. So, at a minimum, I want you to also recognize I mentioned the less intense classification. Section 62, and here's the the citation for for the record. Section 62-1151H
specifically allows this board as well as a planning and zoning board as well as planning staff to require a lower level of density. It doesn't require an RU 215, RU230.
This whole area is RU1. RU1 and AU. This is a major shift and a major change to what's going on here. And you have the authority, one to deny them outright because they've already failed to meet all of the requirements. All these five factors that I've listed, they have deficiencies in every single one. But on
top of that, they have failed to answer a lot of the public's questions about how they can do a less a less dense option. What they have answered in the public um sorry, in the planning and zoning board hearings is well, it's just
not financially feasible for us to do lower density. It's not financially feasible for who for for the developer who then leaves and walks away and doesn't have to deal with the problem. and the community does. The residents who move into these apartments have to deal with it, too.
So, that's something really important I want to raise to your attention because if they are to get a reasoning, RU1-1, RU1-5, RU1-11, my goodness, there's so many RU1 options they could have chosen from, but they chose instead RU2
increasing from single family, lowdensity residential to highly concentrated multifamily. That's going to hurt not just the community living here in the here and now, but the community who's supposed to be moving into these very buildings. How's that
going to be a luxury being stuck in your apartment because you can't make a turn onto your road? So, in my last two minutes, I just wanted to drive home a few last items. Let's see. There's so much. I'm trying not to bog you down
because there is just so much to pick at here and it's not being nitpicky. It's just there's so many holes and so many holes in what has been presented to you by the development team that has this community has been asking for months on end. What six months it was and yet
they've not been answered. There have been attempts and I understand the effort there. There were factors that maybe they hadn't considered because they didn't know. If you're not from this area, you may not know the kinds of factors that you need to consider. So, I understand why they didn't. We're not blaming y'all. But we also need to
recognize that when we're looking at our comprehensive plan. We look at whether the proposed use would significantly diminish the enjoyment, safety, or quality of life in existing neighborhoods. We look at whether it would cause a material reduction in the
value of abuing lands. They were previously told in the planning and zoning commission, this community was told, "Well, you haven't been able to prove that your property value would go down." That's not their burden. The burden is on the developer, the applicant to show that property values
would actually go up. >> The proposed use the last the last of these uh factors within factors. I know it's kind of hard and kind of difficult. I wouldn't say difficult. It's kind of um you have to be a particular drill down kind of person when it comes
to reading the laws of the county and the requirements of the comprehensive code and the Florida statutes and there are so many in this community who've done exactly that. So it can make your life easier because you have so much on your plates to have to consider and they've done the work for you when the developers have failed to do that
themselves. The proposed use must be consistent not just with the emerging pattern but the existing pattern. And in Florida, if I could finish, I just have two more minutes. I can finish this thought. Um, in Florida, we are treating
our zoning like first in time, first in right. That's the reality everywhere. Just because there were developments approved nearby within the last three years doesn't mean that we automatically have to approve every other development similarly to that. The reason it's a race when we're doing development in
this state and anywhere for that matter is because at some point you just run out of room. You run out of capacity. We're on an island and we just can't take anymore. Thank you. >> Thank you. Five minute break. Five minute break. Okay, we're going five minute break.
Yes. Before we we'll take a fivem minute break before rebuttal. That's been requested by a number of been requested by a number of people. Thank you. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. today.
Yeah. Heat. Yeah, I know. Okay. Um I want to ask the board if it's okay. I think um she had some time left over. We'd give her um 10 minutes in rebuttal.
We'll add that to 10 minutes for your uh thank you, Chairman Alman, members of the board. Uh Mr. Goodson, you still with us? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Great. >> So, uh I uh I'm not really sure what to
do with that last argument by Miss Oakler. Um, in my opinion, she's misdated the law, both state and uh local. >> I I am from Bvard County. I've been doing this land use for 25 years, not criminal defense or anything else or
FDOT work. And so, we have looked at the code. The developer did look at all the code and it has followed the law. This county nor does state law require a site plan at the resoning stage. It doesn't require storm water calculations. It doesn't require storm water treatment
calculations. It doesn't require the Clean Water Act or the St. John's uh treatment rules to be complied with at this stage. Also, your primary responsibility is to follow the law, not to listen to
petitions, not to look at red shirts. And the law is very clear that the objections of a large number of residents to the affected neighborhood area are not a sound basis for the denial of a permit. The quasi judicial function of the board of is to uh
exercise on the basis of the fact seduced. Numerous objections of adjoining properties may not properly be given even a cumulative effect. Um other law flowers baking company versus city of Melbourne. Objections of local residents to the conditional use
to the use requested are not on fears of traffic do not constitute such substantial competent evidence. And that's what you've heard. As I've mentioned, a lot of fears here. There's been one traffic engineer presented to you. The three different versions of the studies were based upon difference of
opinions between traffic staff and our expert traffic engineer. There's one traffic engineer here. They did look at the Pioneer Road. They did look at standard reasons the way trips are distributed. No one here has given any competent substantial evidence in
opposition and your county staff has accepted that that analysis. Should you have questions of the traffic engineer based upon what you heard, he's available to do that. I presented you a packet of information that was presented to PNZ and was left out of your packet.
It deals with the concurrency evaluation procedures that has been discussed a couple of times today and it is clear when you look at this that it does not require concurrency at the zoning stage. I have the package
right in front of you too, Mr. Alman. So the preliminary evaluation is for a zoning action. It does not require storm water or wetlands or anything else. That has been misstated. This was provided to PNZ to
show that there was only a requirement for site plans to look at the 88% traffic capacity that was in the memo that I provided to you. Per the definitions in the county comp plan, deficiency is the measure of impact of a
development proposal which will qualitatively exceed the existing established minimum acceptable level of service for a public facility or service. This development does not exceed the level of service on Courtney Parkway. Section 62602B.
Only a preliminary evaluation is to be completed to show the availabilities of services and facilities for a zoning application. there's a non-defic only if there's a non-deficiency and the code provision is wait section 62205F
is for a vesting of road capacity the proposed trips generated do not increase level of service um I also want to other statements made by Miss Oakler um this developer doesn't walk away they manage it um she made
many references to facts that were not in the record as she's so fond of saying um this doesn't the decreasing in value the requirement of your codes says it requires an MAI appraisal not that it's anyone's um not that it's their burden
of proof uh the traffic study was done with two 24-hour cycles and believe it or not 24 hours does include peak hours so and school was in session
It wasn't done on a Sunday. >> Um the day >> I'm going to pause here. >> Um we just heard what two hours of testimony. Never once did the the applicant or
their council interrupt anyone. They respectfully listen to your comments. I'd ask you to provide them the same respect and allow them to present their uh because we stop the time every time
she's interrupted. So, it's only going to we're not going to allow this to take away from her right of rebuttal. So, it just ex it just makes the evening go longer. But, please just offer the respect for the for the applicant. >> Thank you.
Uh, as to the contention that this is a dangerous intersection, that is an opinion. The traffic study does not say it's a dangerous intersection. Your staff does not say it's a dangerous intersection. Again, these are unsubstantiated opinions that have no
factual basis. They're anecdotal, sure, but they're fears and they're catastrophizing and there's nothing in the record to support what they're saying because they don't have an expert traffic engineer here. We have spoken oh school school
concurrency that's in the record. Um the staff report says there's no issue with school concurrency. And if you look at the report in the year 20 2029 2030 there's 217 extra elementary seats of
capacity at Lewis Carroll. So that is not an issue. Also sewer is not an issue. There's a letter in your packet from Victoria Beniz. She's with Bvard County Utility Services said that she misspoke at PNZ and wants
to correct her statement that Sykes Creek plant does have capacity. I do want to talk about Myra and uh Myra's report as I said they denied it based on too much density in the area, no facts, no reasons to support that and
that additional information would be needed. Myra staff on the other hand thinks this is a great idea is needed and this is the right place for it. We have spoken to Bvard County Sheriff's Office and it has advised that the issue
with Lewis Carol is that most students are driven and the parents arrive long before pickup time and park in the right of way of Lewis Carroll. They've tried to enforce it. The people just ride around the block. Um, the school district is adding a lane to the dropoff lane for the next school year and BCSO
believes it will be beneficial. We have offered to assist in any way, including adding an additional loop to the back of Lewis Carol because there's three acres of non-used land at the east side of Lewis Carroll. This property has never been developed, which is an indication that the current
allowed commercial uses or any a uses is not appropriate. It's been vacant. There's a need for housing. The property must be reszoned so it can be utilized. AU is not appropriate in a commercial mixeduse area as your staff report has said is more of a holding car category
for the property. This is not good for raising and grazing of animals. According to planning manager Gileiam, because of the BSP on the property, it wouldn't be able to be used for residential. There are options for this property. the medical office hospital which is a huge
traffic generator. AC is looking for a place for a freestanding ER in central Bard County. Parish has indicated in interest to compete with Health First. They've even looked at the Old Cape Canaveral Hospital. If this is denied, they have no option but to do something
because the property can't be used for anything other than medical office and that's not going to happen. It hasn't happened since 1986. Uh we do intend to appeal the county planning manager's opinion of live local act because this is approved for a
commercial use does not say commercial zoning in the live local act. Mr. Alman knows the exact intent of the live local act because he was in the state house when this was adopted. It is to stop this kind of
failure to properly prove zoning for residential uses when this is appropriate for zoning for residential uses. There's been a lot made about the air commercial. The area is residential.
The area that's residential is here and here. This property has four sides. That's one and a half sides. This area is commercial. There is no residential on Courtney as stated north of Skyline to State Road
528. So single family residential does not belong in this site. And that again is shown by the future land use, not a potential future land use map, but a real land use map that says this is residential 15 and neighborhood commercial.
This is very much akin to the Snyder lawsuit. Mr. Alman, I know you're very um involved with that. You were on this commission when Snyder versus Bvard County went to the fifth district court of fifth district court of appeal. Um that opinion from the fist district court of appeal says in Florida the
greater value of land is its potential use value, not its intrinsic value. This is especially true of vacant land. In a society which recognizes the right of a private citizen to own property, the citizen owner has the right to make use of the privately owned property as a
citizen owner desires, subject only to the limitations that private property cannot be used in a manner that encroaches upon the rights of other citizens. This is a self-contained private use apartment complex that to go out of this property if you're going
north, you're going on to Courtney. You're not going through their neighborhood. That makes absolutely no sense. And this was evaluated in the traffic study which apparently no one read. So we would ask that you approve this resoning. We have met the burden of proof. We have met the comp plan and
specifically the private property rights uh element of the comp plan. Thank you. >> Q. Thank you. Okay. That was our last speaker. We will bring the uh request now to the board. Are there any
questions? our comments from the board. >> Okay. >> Chair. >> Yes. >> I'd like to make a motion that there's going to be no discussion. >> I'd like to make a motion. If there's going to be no discussion,
I That motion dies for like a second. >> I haven't even made it. Chair. >> Oh, I think you said if there was >> Oh, I thought you said for no discussion. I couldn't understand. I misunderstood you. Okay.
>> No, that's fine. >> Okay. All right. You would like to make a motion. Okay. You're welcome to make a motion. >> Okay. Okay. I'd like to make a motion to deny the development because it's not compatible with the area. And I'd like to instruct staff to do a findings of
fact. >> Okay. Is there >> Is there a second to that motion? >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Second by Commission. >> Okay. Okay, there's a motion and a second for denial of the applicant and
staff to um state a finding. In fact, >> I'd like to recognize staff to >> They'll bring it back, right? >> They bring it back. >> So, under the uh board policies, when the board indicates an intent uh to take a zoning action and directs the county attorney's office to prepare a finding
of sta fact, we work with staff and do that and we'll bring it back to the board at a future zoning meeting. But, you make the decision on your action tonight with the findings of fact to come back at the next meeting. >> So, we will um vote on the motion to deny. Staff will uh take um the issue,
have a finding of fact that uh gives us time to review and then vote into at a future meeting. >> You you make your you take the zoning action tonight and then bring back the findings of fact for consideration approval at a future meeting.
>> Future meeting. Okay, great. Uh, I any questions? I do have a question. Is that meeting where we either accept or deny the finding of fact or I assume we have the ability to amend with is that a public meeting? Is that advertised? >> Yes.
>> It's not It's not advertised as a public hearing like this one. It's at a public meeting of the board of county commissioners. >> Please let our attorney let him. >> You It's at a public meeting, but it's not a public hearing. >> Right. Right. Like I said, >> but it's at a public meeting.
>> It's usually on the consent agenda. >> Okay. >> But it's a it's a future commission meeting, >> right? Yes. Yes. Right. And it's t they're typically on consent, >> but we could talk about it, too. I mean, we could remove a consent. >> Absolutely. 100%.
>> Just trying to make sure we get the procedure right. >> I I think we recently, Mr. Chair, sorry. I think we recently pulled a finding of fact off consent and discussed it and then passed it. Right. >> So that that's happen. >> I'm sorry. >> I I think Yeah, I think we just went
through went through that just >> Okay. All right. Great. Thank you. Okay. Uh is there any debate or comment on the motion? Uh seeing no debate, I'd call the question. All in favor say I. >> I. No. I
>> for the layman here. What is exactly going on? >> The public hearing is closed and the board's about to >> let's were trying to get the attorney to explain that and he was being interrupted by the office. So if you could allow him to speak without interrupting >> please let's a very good question. Okay.
>> The public hearing concluded and the matters with the board now to decide. There's a motion on the floor and now the board has discussion and they called a vote on the motion. So they're about to vote on the motion. So we're about to vote on the motion which is to deny. Uh we I I think we've concluded any
discussion. There will be a finding a fact that the staff will bring back. The finding effect is under what basis did we you know deny the the request. Very important process in this this this hearing and that will come back at a
future meeting. That meeting will be advertised to be on the agenda. It's not going to be like a public testimony type of meeting like you have here in the zoning, but it's something that we could discuss. Everybody got that? Okay, good. >> I um what? Maybe I could clarify
something. The the f Mr. Chair, if I could go ahead the finding of fact um issue that would be before the board of county commissioners would not change what what we're doing here tonight. So, the motion to deny is on the table. That's what we're going to vote for
right now. >> That Okay. And the finding of fact that that's simply what's the legal reasoning in why we did that. That's what that is. >> Okay. >> Right. >> All right. And we Okay, Mr. >> Got it. I'm glad you I'm glad you clarified. No, it doesn't change our
denial, but it takes all the data and the information and our law and the into effect and we formalize that. And >> that's exactly right. Okay. Um, I'm glad you clarified that, Commissioner.
>> And I'm not an attorney. >> I don't pretend. >> So, is there any debate on the motion? Any further debate? Okay. There's a motion and a second to deny the application. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. I.
>> Motion passes unanimously. Uh and we'll do we have a date certain when the funding effect will come up. >> Um I I cannot >> we don't know for right now but it will be advertised to be a part of the agenda. >> So
>> okay thank you. Oh, you're going to leave. >> We'll give everyone time to clear out. >> I was going to go down and tell him to give him a little piece of my mind. >> Who's that? >> The fact that it's not my fault. I don't know.
Where are you? Okay, we'll ask everyone Uh we're going to try to finish up here. We do have reports. Thank you. Thank you for being here and giving your input. Okay, we will move on to u we have no unfinished business, I don't believe. Uh we have u
no new business. We have um do we have any public comment cards for the second? We do not. Board reports. County manager. >> No report, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. County attorney. >> I have no report, Mr. Chair, no report
district one. Uh, no report. >> No reports to my chair. >> No report from district two. Report. Um, district three. >> Just very quickly, I wanted to thank um, pastors Amanda and Mark Miller um, from
the Victory in Christ Jesus Church today for their um, day of prayer. It was fantastic. So, I just wanted to make sure that they were acknowledged and that we all know today was a national day of prayer.
>> Thank you so much for that. Rob Felner, District 4. >> No report. And uh Commissioner Ason, I'm glad you brought that up. I was able to attend the ceremony at the Cape for the National Day of Prayer. It was it was awesome.
>> And um I'm already looking forward to next year. I'll try to make both next year. >> Did they do astronaut memorial? No, they actually did it in the um Neural Armstrong operation the ONC building. Uh the
operation is a checkout building which it was kind of cool because they did it right next to where they're building Orion, >> you know, right there in the ONC building. So, okay, I think that concludes our meeting. We will adjourn. Thank you.
The opinions expressed by any member of the public during any period of public comment do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the board of county commissioners of Bvard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, or the program sponsor and are solely those of the presenter. The board of county commissioners of Bvard County, Florida,
Space Coast Government Television, and the program sponsor hereby expressly disclaim any and all responsibility or liability for any defamatory or slanderous statements expressed by any member of the public during any such period. Number
five.