[music] [music] Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Hey, I feel >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. N. [music] baby.
Hey >> [music] >> Hello. [music] Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> 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 pull 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 five minutes to speak. Speakers may not pass their time to someone else in order to give that person more time to speak. Okay. Thank you. We'll start with a prayer like um I will give the prayers.
We don't have a minister here today. So um heavenly father we first thank you for giving us the wonderful honor and privilege to live in such a wonderful community to live in such a wonderful state and country. We ask for your
guidance so that we can make the decisions that meet your will and glory to preserve this wonderful wonderful creation that you have. We thank you for our constituents and those who have engaged in this process and our staff
that work so diligently for the good of Boulevard County. We pray this in your name. Amen. Okay. Uh Commissioner Felner will lead us in the pledge. >> Please join me in the pledgece to the flag of the United States of
America. to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay, I'd like to efficiently call the meeting to order and represent Felner has a motion.
>> Uh sir, I'll make a motion for Commissioner Goodson to participate by phone. >> Motion. >> I'll second that. >> Motion second for Representative Goodson to participate by phone. All in favor say yay. >> I >> carries unanimously. Thank you. Okay. Uh
first item on the agenda is F consent agenda. Um this entire consent agenda will be passed by one motion to include everything under section F. And there's one thing under section F F1. A resolution setting forth the findings
and conclusion of the Bvoulevard County Commission. Um I know the ST staff will have a comment on this. We do have one card for input. Uh the find this is a findings of fact for um for the denial of a request for a change of zoning classification from AU
with a BSP to RU215 and RU230 with the removal of BSP on property owned by merit Bitco SPV LLC. >> Okay. Is there um any discussion on this item? A motion.
>> Did you have a card? I thought you said >> Oh, yes, we do. We do have a card. Thank you. Um Richard Hefinger. >> Rick Hefinger, District 1, 2000 Juniper Drive. Um I thought there would be cake. Anybody else think there would be cake?
Um the what I wanted to say is I hope you all consent means you already said you're gonna go right nobody pulled the card so you're gonna agree to this fact finding effect right so this means that that thing that we're going to do on Merit Island is t well it's not tabled
it's you've denied their their zoning so it's not going to happen that that's true right am I looking at the wrong one I don't know >> well we're not in the question and answer we want >> no questions answered I mean I I'm here the one on Merit you guys did a finding effect and I think Morris is the one who
did that and you said hey I think one of the big reasons you're going to say no is that they were going to flood SR3 which is a state road but still the the comp plan or whatever says you can consider that and the finding of fact says that was true and I think the reason that it's a consent agenda and
the finding of fact founded is because of these people back here you all did good and I think it sets a great precedent that when people have these if they don't speak up they could have gotten railroaded. Whoever it was, I there was a couple of people that that were the lead on that. And I want to
just go on the record saying we need to do this more if you if you want to try to control your neighborhoods. So, I wanted to thank everybody. I think a lot of them are sitting back here and just go on record to say that. And that's all I'm not going to waste any more of your time except to thank the and and everybody needs to get involved. Thank you.
>> No waste of time. Thank you. Okay. Let's now bring this item toward the board. >> I'll make a motion to approve uh the consent. >> I'll second. Okay, it's a motion and second on the resolution setting forth the findings and conclusions on the consent item. I just want to thank
staff. They did a very thorough job and presented a very complete conclusive set of findings in our packet they delivered to us. Um and uh any other discussion? >> No sir. >> Okay. All in favor say yay.
>> Yay. >> Yay. >> Okay. Uh there's a a four uh 3-1 vote with Commissioner Goodson voting against. >> I believe he said yay. >> Did you say yay or nay? I'm sorry.
>> Commissioner Goodson, what did you say? >> Yay. >> Yay. Okay. Yay. So, um 40 unanimous in support of the findings of fact by the staff. Okay. We do have our at the beginning of every uh meeting. How many
do we have? >> Just one. >> Okay. At the beginning of every meeting, we do have a period of time we allow for public comment. And we have one public comment card. >> JC Chelsea Chelsea True. >> Did I get that right?
>> No. >> Well, correct me. >> Your first name is >> Chelsea. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> I thought the L was an I. That's why I said chase it because then I realized it's an L. Chelsea. True. I got that part right. >> All right. Good evening, commissioners.
My name is Chelsea TR and I'm a Mar Island resident. I'm here tonight regarding agenda item 26Z000029, the appeal of the planning and zoning manager's April 22nd interpretation regarding Merit Bidco's live local act proposal scheduled to be before the
board on July 21st. I want my position to be part of the public record. I respectfully ask the board to uphold the planning and zoning official interpretation. After reviewing both the appeal and staff report, I believe this case comes down to one simple question. What is the property zoned today? The
county code answers that question. Se section 62-1334 states that AU zoning classification is intended for agricultural pursuits and spacious single family residential development. It is not designated as a commercial or mixeduse zoning district. The applicant asks the board to look
beyond the zoning classification itself and instead focus on individual conditional or commercial type uses that may have existed within the district. But if the existence of a few conditional uses were enough to redefine an entire zoning district, then many agricultural and residential districts across Bvard County could potentially be
treated as commercial. I do not believe that is what the legislature has intended. A conditional use permit allows a specific use under certain circumstances. It does not reszone a property or transform agricultural residential zoning into commercial zoning. For this specific property, the
historical cup for a clinic and hospital should not be used to redefine the current zoning classification of the property. The question before the board is not whether the past use was once approved, but whether this property is currently located in an area zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed use
under the requirements of the live local act. The legislature created specific created specific eligibility requirements for live local projects. Supporting affordable housing does not require expanding those requirements beyond what was written. The county can support affordable
housing while also maintaining the integrity of its adopted zoning framework. It's recently amended the live local act to clarify that farms and farm operations are not commercial uses for proposal of the act which further supports staff's interpretation. The staff report states zoning
classifications are defined by their overall purpose and character rather than by the existence of individual uses within the classification. For those reasons, I respectfully ask the board to uphold staff's interpretation and apply both the county code and the live local act according to their plain language.
So that was the first path, but I also have a question if I may. Um the question is for the county attorney's office. Several weeks ago, I requested clarification regarding the lobbying provisions in the county's contract with Mr. Steve Christopholey and how those provisions are interpreted and enforced
and have yet to receive a response. Um, does the county interpret the contract as prohibiting lobbying activities on behalf of private clients before BVard County during the term of the agreement? And if so, who is in charge of determining compliance? >> I thank you for your presentation and
thank you for your question. I I would like for you to give us both in writing, especially the question, so the county attorney can evaluate that in detail. >> Okay. >> And if there was any additional information that he or we need for a response, that gives us time to do so.
>> We we've responded to any records request and we'll continue to do so. With regard to the comments made about an item that's going to be on your next agenda, I have to advise the board not to consider those. Miss True, you're going to have to submit those in writing before that's going to be noticed. It's a quasi judicial item. You have to make
those comments if you're going to make them verbally. You have to do it at the proper meeting or you have to submit them in writing so they're part of the record. What you said tonight is not and cannot be made part of the record for that. The the other party isn't here. They don't have a fair opportunity to address them. This is sort of argument
by ambush. Just so you understand that this isn't the appropriate forum for that. >> I understand that it's not on the agenda. The only reason I did bring it up is I just got a notice today and I won't be in town. So, I figured if I do an email, >> submit them in writing and it'll be part of the record. >> Okay, great. >> Good. Okay. Thank you. Both of those in
writing would be helpful. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, what I'd like to do is bring a couple items up because there's a lot of people here I know for H5 and H6 and due to a something that's taking place, we're we're not allowed to
hear those or we would not be able to hear and deliberate and vote on these items. So out of respect of those who have been here who who are here now so they're not seeing through a long meeting I'd like the staff to kind of fill them in what what's happened and
what posture we now are in. >> So Mr. Mr. Chair and for folks in the audience if you're here for item H5 which was Defender Homes Airway Heights LLC requesting a small scale comprehensive plan amendment to change the future land use designation from res 4 to res 6 and the companion item
Defender Homes requesting a zoning classification change from RR1 to RU26. Uh that was what was applied for that was what was advertised as of yesterday. those uh requests have been formally supplanted by a request for reszoning
only to zoning RU11. Uh that application is going to have to be reviewed by staff. Staff will do an analysis of it and prepare written comments. Uh that will come back to the planning and zoning board at the August 17th meeting of the planning and zoning
board and to the board of county commissioners meeting on September 3. Uh but because the request tonight is not one that was properly advertised and isn't before the board, there's no action the board can take on those items tonight. So, thank you for coming out. Uh sorry that it's short notice, but
again that the formal application was just received yesterday. So, planning uh what was submitted previously. So, uh those dates August 17th PNZ and September 3 board of county commissioners that September 3 will be the same time and place.
So, it would put us in a bad posture if we heard an item that really wasn't properly reviewed. We're not allowed to do that. I want to thank everyone for being here. Uh, and I know we're not taking action on this tonight, but I do want to disclose I I met with a group of homeowners from the Turtle Mound Lake
Washington area, as well as I met with the representative uh for the applicant as well um just today. So, um, we will not be hearing either one of these, but looking forward to seeing you at the hearing, the next hearings that we we
do. >> August 17th, planning and zoning in this room at 3 p.m. on August 17th. It's still at 3 p.m. Is that Sorry, it's been a while since I got to PNZ. Couldn't remember if it was 2 or 3. And then September 3 at 5:00 pm right here. >> I'm glad you asked that question. We
have an issue with the September 3 meeting. We may not have a quorum and I know I know that we've talked to the county administrator about that. All right. So, we we will keep you informed of dates certainly by the planning and zoning meeting on August
17th. We'll know more information about when the board will hear it, but I'm I'm understanding now that there there may not be a September 3 board meeting, which would push this to the board meeting in October, but we'll have more information for you as that approaches. So, just stay tuned. And I apologize, but I'm in mediation
all day on August 17th. >> So, I won't be able to attend on August 17th. >> So, you're going to request a different planning and zoning meeting date. September planning and zoning. And >> it >> all right. Well, forget what I said about the dates. It It looks like we'll probably be on a September planning and zoning and October Board of County
Commissioners meeting schedule. But folks, if I may, those will be advertised. There'll be courtesy notices like the ones prior to this meeting. Uh the site will have a sign on it. And I'm sure through your neighborhood you you'll stay informed, but it it sounds like we're much more likely to be
September planning and zoning and and October Board of County Commissioners meeting for the >> which works out. We have a problem on the September 3rd meeting. Anyway, I just want to say we have a very strict set of guidelines and rules that are set
forth in in state law as well as in case law. So we want to make sure that when we make a decision it meets all those criteria that's in the best interest of the public and the applicant. So those items do we need a formal action the table or withdrawal or
>> there's no board action required tonight because uh because you could not take action on the application that was advertised and is on your agenda. So no no action of the board required this evening. >> Thank you for your diligence and understanding.
Thank you. >> We'll we'll give everyone time to exit before we >> freed up some room for you. [laughter] >> Thank you guys. That's >> nice birthday
party or you don't get your thing. So our next >> Yeah. So she keep going and going once they get to the USA.
>> Okay, we're good. all the quiet up. Anyway, >> like to call the meeting back to order. The other item is item um H3 uh Sunshine State Wildlife Conservation.
I'd request that we continue that that particular hearing. It's a It's a a project zoning in the south part of the county. It's a relatively intense use. It's um in a very very rural area. It's something I would like to have a little more time to review and and meet with
the applicant and some of the affected parties. >> I don't know if we have a card or not. >> H3. We have two cards. >> Two cards on H3. >> Is the applicant here for H3?
>> Yeah. Ralph Brown. and len our what I'm asking is that we we table this or continue this to the next meeting and that date would be August >> no that's >> and we're not sure
>> August 6th >> September 3rd or September 10th >> Thursday August 6th would be the next next uh board of county commissioner zoning meeting if you want to table it to the >> the Thursday August 6th I don't think it's
got to continue. We got to continue. It's not optimal for us. >> Okay. Well, this maybe we should follow the agenda. You're number three anyway. So, let's let's u uh H1 Turtle Mountain Ventures.
>> Okay. I'm going to read H1 and H2 in together as their companions. H1 Turtlemound Ventures LLC. Kim Rzena representing are requesting small-scale comprehensive plan amendment 26S1 to change the future land use designation from public res one and res 2 directive
to community commercial with 26 SS00001 in district 2. And Turtlemound Ventures LLC requesting a zoning change from GML Institutional to TR1. Oh, and TR1 to RV Park 26Z000000007.
Uh, good evening, chairman, members of the county commission. My name is Kim Rosena with Lacy Rosena here on behalf of Turtle Mound LLC, Turnound Ventures LLC, uh, regarding the change of future land use and to
resoning. Um, you all have in your packet an overall map of the area. I've just have a larger version for you that might be useful as we go through this. This is property that was owned by the
school board and it has now been sold to my client uh quite a bit ago. It's got future lane use and zoning that really is not appropriate for anything that a private party would do. Um, you could have a waste facility there, but again, it has
to be a government entity or a a related entity. Uh, this is on State Road 3. It's approximately 5 miles north of State Road 528, and we are seeking community commercial and a reszoning to recreational vehicle park. As you can see, this is at the end of the
commercial corridor. Uh if you go further north, you do have a church right next door, but then you do have the uh borrow pit, spacew walk Groves, and then you have Blue Origin going further south. Going south, that vacant lot that been cleared, that was to be a
Dollar General store. So this is part of the commercial corridor, part of the commercial corridor study of Merit Island back from 2006. what I provided to the PNZ board. It's in your packet. I think it's
the packet was so large. I apologize. And uh so it was hard to find exactly in page 1317. Uh that is the future lane use map. I did provide that at PNZ just to show you the commercial corridor, the future land
use, the NCC leading all the way up to this public future land use map. Should you agree to change this community commercial, it has to be changed to something. My client can't use it for anything. There's a change of circumstances here because it was
surplus by the school board and it can't be used for anything. So, if it were to be changed, the commercial corridor would continue to the north on the west side of State Road 3. On the back side of what I submitted to
PNZ was the zoning map. It's just a larger version of what is in your packet and it does show the BU1 and BU2 leading up to this property. So, this is a continuation of the commercial corridor on State Road 3.
The change uh to community commercial future land use is required to allow the development of the RV park that's sought by my client. My client has developed one of these RV parks in the state of Washington. There's photographs in your packet of what that RV park looks like.
This is intended to be a luxury RV park to support the tourist industry. It would be a tourist driven type uh amenity in the area. It would also be subject to tourist tax of 5% uh which could also be useful to the area.
Uh this is required to change the future land use to do an RV park. It could be a residential designation. He would like to do up to 10 units to the acre. However, we do not believe that. We're willing to cap that at seven units to the acre or six if you think that's more appropriate. And so, uh, that's what
they think they can get about 180 units on this site with the appropriate buffers. >> Yes, ma'am. >> So, I'm looking at my map that I have. I have this big yellow thing, but on yours, it looks different.
>> It's just because I couldn't I didn't do the map properly. If you do the what they have in your packet is correct. >> Okay. All right. >> So, it is it's 28 acres. It's just when I printed on the map from the property praises website, it did not
show at all. >> Okay. It just looked like the red box was different. So, >> it is. It's too small. It's >> okay. That's from your packet. That's the zoning map that exists. >> Yeah. Okay. Thanks. >> Uh the RV park is a commercial use. It's not a residential use. It allows
recreational vehicles, tents, park trailers, and cabin use. There's no intent to do tents or cabin use. The maximum intensity of the park is 10 sites per acre. Minimum site size is 2,000 square ft. The code also requires 10% to be used for common use area for
recreational activities. He intends to have a park and a clubhouse. He'll have a small general store and a washer and dryer area for the park. The accessory uses allowed are laundry, playgrounds, picnic areas, swimming pools, ball and game courts, and a manager's residency. Will also have a tennis court or pickle
ball court. Uh it will be a high-end luxury RV. It will have a clubhouse, as I said, uh play courts and laundry facilities. At least 2.85 acres will be dedicated to recreational area. My client has said this will be like a Hilton. It'll be a higher end. It'll
cost more and you'll have, you know, half million to a million dollar RVs that will come to that site. This will have sewer at this site as well. The county code limits the length of occupancy to no more than 180 consecutive days. The RV parks are not
considered a permanent residence. Uh the comprehensive plan definition of recreational vehicle park activities intended to serve the needs of tourists and seasonal residents and provide lodging for visitors with recreational vehicles, travel trailers, and camping equipment as well as supportive activities such as bathing facility and
recreational areas. activities located in commercial community commercial land use designations. As I said, this will be used by visitors to the space coast. Launches space tourism. Uh per the county staff report, this property is in a transitional area.
It's not residential. You mostly have old uh trailer park uh mobile home manufactured homes to the north of this area. There are no identified concurrency issues. North Courtney Parkway will operate at 47.67% six 7% of the maximum
average vehicle daily utilization. It will not generate school children as the park is a commercial use. The staff report as I said states it's traditional and there's commercial activity in this area. Uh the coastal high hazard flood plane and storm water will be addressed
at site plan stage. This is merely zoning. Also too, I wanted to reference the comp plan policy 2.8 8 that does say recreational vehicles shall be located in areas which serve the needs of tourists and seasonal visitors to
Bvoulevard County. The location of RV parks shall have access to internet interstate exchanges via arterial and principal collector transportation corridors of the property shall be located on a major multi-county transportation corridor. So we do meet that criteria as to where we are
located. Um with that um the need for the change is because nothing can be done with this property and uh my client has a use for it that fits in with the needs of the community with space tourism. Uh if there's conditions such as buffering uh
access there there are two median cuts already on North Courtney. Uh there's no intent to come off North Tropical Trail. So if there are conditions to impose uh that would be um reasonable. Uh, but we would ask that you approve the future land use to community
commercial and that the RV park be approved uh specifically up to a number of units. 10 is what has been requested, but we would go to seven or six, but that needs to be part of the
order. Uh, the order the motion if you do agree to approve a recreational vehicle park, it has to state up to a number according to the agenda, the staff report. So with that, um, I also have Jake Wise with CEG, the engineer of record. He can answer any questions. There's been no topo. There's been no
elevations. Uh, this is just a reszoning and comp plan change to allow use that would be uh, very, very well utilized in this area. Any questions? >> You have any more? Yes, >> I do have another question. How long
will the each um, RV be able to stay? >> They can stay up to 180 days, but that's not the intent. These are going to be highends. They're going to come for a week or two. >> They're going to go watch a launch. They're going to go to >> different areas. So, >> okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I think I also need to um announce
that I did meet with the applicants representative >> prior to >> to the meeting. Uh Commissioner Goodson. >> Yeah. I need to disclose that I had a discussion this morning with Kim Rosen regarding this item. >> Okay.
Okay. Good. I I just thought the same. Thank you. Um, >> we do have cards. >> I gave them to you. >> This is H1 and two. >> H1 and two. >> H1 and two.
We're looking for the cards. Here they are. >> Oh, there they are. Mixed in the paperwork. Okay. Uh, first item card is Mr. Blesser. Bless B R H N.
>> Pardon me. >> B. >> Oh, that's Busen. Oh, I know that name. Brian. Hi, Brian. >> Members of the board. Apologize for my writing. >> That's okay. >> My name is Brian.
>> Apologize for my reading. >> Uh my name is Brian Busen. Uh I am here as a representative of the uh Dementa Trust which is 165 acres about
300 ft away from this property. Um the trust would like to say that there are are they they do not like this zoning.
Um, the family just spent four years working very diligently with the county going getting a set of plans approved for 164 lots on 165 acres. Those lots
are 1 half acre minimum, but as you can see from the numbers, only one unit per acre was allowed. This property is immediately to the west
on North Tropical Trail and it just doesn't seem that this is compatible zoning. uh in this area. Okay. Any questions?
Thank you, Brian. Thank you, Jake Weise. >> Questions? >> Here for questions if we have any questions. Okay. Um, Jack Kersian bomb. >> Good evening. My name is Jack
Kersinbomb. Um, when Ron Deina passed away, this property went from his ownership into a family trust. Uh my brother Malcolm and I and Ron's widow are the trustees of the trust.
Uh as Mr. Bustin said, the family and I have been working for almost 5 years on developing the 160 acres that Mr. Budson mentioned just 300 ft to the west of this property. We have planned, we've
designed, we've permitted, we've met with staff, we've met with staff, we've uh this is a terribly, terribly difficult area to plan and design for. We all know what the flooding is like up there. Our project is designed to assist
and change the demographics and the uh hydraology of that area. It is a difficult area to plan. Um there's an old song you might remember, must have been the right place, must have been the wrong time. Uh this is the wrong place
and the wrong time for this type of project. It could be a great project, but this isn't the place for it. It's just not compatible. There's no binding development plan. There's no binding site plan. It seems a little, it could
be 10 acres, but we might agree to six. Um, this is the type of project that needs uh a little bit more uh discipline to it, a little bit more planning to it, and as I said, it could
be the right project, just not this time at this particular place. and and uh we're very happy um to answer any questions that you might have, but we literally have been working with staff for 5 years on transportation, on
traffic, on utilities, on drainage. And uh we have a pretty good sense of what this property, this whole area needs and we would strongly object uh to this reszoning and this plan. Happy to answer any questions if you have them.
>> Okay. Do we have any questions? Oh, I do have one question. Okay. What did the planning and zoning board >> recommend with regards to this plan? >> I think they rem recommended denial and I'd like someone to say that. But thank
you, >> Mr. Chair. The planning and zoning board heard the request and voted 10 to1 to recommend an on April 20th. [clears throat] >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Rose, I'll let you do the last name here. >> Plumber.
>> Plumber. >> Plumber. >> Hello again. My name is Rose Plameumber. I am here representing the North Merit Island Homeowners Association, uh, PO Box 542372, Merit Island. um based on our review and
even our previous objection that has not changed that um we would um speak in opposition to the requested smallcale comprehensive plan amendment. I'm going to basically repeat what I said before. The um I believe the
planning and zoning recommended denial, the North Mode Island special district recommended denial. And so we're hoping that um we will stand in agreement on that. Once again, um there are already numerous RV parks in
Bvard County. Um this uh North Courtney Parkway, I believe it is not designated as a major multic county transportation corridor. I don't believe the applicant has re um has submitted enough
information to uh justify changing the land use designation. And approving this amendment would um open up the door for further land use changes down the road that are not in this community's long-term interest. And any amendment
must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. And for these reasons, um we respectfully recommend you deny this request. Thank you. >> Okay, thank you. Okay, those are all our cards that the applicant
then any questions and comment that we have. >> Thank you again, Kim Zanka on behalf of the applicant. >> I do have one question after you complete it. >> Okay. Uh first I would like to uh state that North Maryland Homeowner Association does have a policy that they
will not support anything more than one unit to the acre and most of their members are also on the North Bard's dependent special district board. So they would never support it either. Um I do want to again point out that only Miss Plameumber I believe um objected to
the change of the comp plan. I did not hear Mr. Boston or Mr. Kerschenbomb object to the comp plan. We have a public comp plan we can't do anything with. This is not in the small area study of North Merit Island. It was never residential one, at least not to
my knowledge. Uh and it was intended to be a school. So, um it is continuing the commercial corridor. So, we would indeed request that this be amended to community commercial. It is on a state road, a four-lane highway. It is
certainly a major highway. regarding the zoning. The property discussed by uh Mr. Bus and Mr. Kersian bomb is zoned EU2. It's this big property.
I always do this backwards. It's this big property right here. It's on to U2 and further our measurement shows 600 ft but regardless it's separated by McGrder Road and we have no intention to put any access onto McGrder Road. So all
commercial activities would be on the commercial corridor. Um regarding the and I will submit this to the record and it's in the public records of Bvard County. The uh subdivision discussed is called outback reserve subdivision. This
subdivision construction plans were approved on February 9th of 2024. It expires December of 2026. To my knowledge, they have not moved forward with this development for for whatever reason. I think sewer might have been one of them. But I do want to show this
to you because it does access. They're worried about what it looks like. That's what's been expressed in the past. They're worried about what an RBP park will look like to the people buying here. And so they are coming in.
[snorts] There's a road next to this development and next to that is all trailer parks. In fact, this is what you see when you first come in there. I'm sorry, manufactured homes. So, this is the
first house you see coming into the subdivision from the east. Coming down further, there's that. Coming down a little further, Mr. Clay's property
uh with a value of $31,000. So, the view doesn't matter when this is what they're seeing. Their [snorts] people will be coming off North Tropical Trail. The RV park will be coming off Courtney.
Um, there's been no evidence other than we don't like it. We don't want it. We don't think it's correct. This property has been vacant for a very long time. Before it was owned by the school board, it was owned by Frank Sullivan, Mr. Alman's father-in-law. It's been vacant a long time. It can't be used with the
zoning and future land use. It has um there's no site plan required. There's no engineering studies required. This is merely, excuse [clears throat] me, merely zoning. If you want to put conditions of no access on McGrder, we've already agreed to that. We don't intend to do that. We won't do that. Uh
trailers aren't big enough. The the the RVs would be too big to get on the road. It's a very small road. So, what we are agreeing to is to limit the number of units per acre to six or seven. We'd prefer seven just for flexibility, but again, we believe only 180 units can go on there. So we would ask that the
future land use be amended community commercial and that um that the community this character of this area is indeed a commercial corridor. This is a good use for this property. It's a commercial use and I'll support space tourism. Uh with that we can answer any
questions. >> Okay. I do have a question. um this uh RV park, are you limiting the type of vehicles, RV parks, campers that are would be parked in this?
>> They're they're going to be fifth wheels and buses. >> So, trailers and then what is called traditional >> I call them buses. RVs. >> RVs or motor homes. I call them motor homes. >> So, you will have fifth wheels and motor homes. >> Yes, sir. It It's intended to be a true
RV park. people come for a week or two. You might have a few seasonal, but it's intended to be a high-end luxury. It's not going to be down the road at KSC for $40 or Moose Lodge for $40 a night. >> So, your total number of RV spots you
particip anticipate to be what? >> 180, >> which is about 5.7 per acre. >> 5.7 per acre. Okay. So if the resoning is approved, there needs to be a number in there according to the addendum to the staff report and I confirmed that with Mr. Prasad today.
>> Okay. >> Any other questions? >> Okay. Okay. Those are cards, all of our questions. >> Morris, did you have something you wanted to add? I see you. >> I would say and attorney noted the staff addendum. I I do want to note that
pursuant to our code and particularly section 621255 establishment of zoning classifications in consistency with comprehensive plan um we've heard characterization of the RBP zoning classification as commercial that's a characterization what our code actually
says is that residential uses include single family detached single family attached multiple family recreational vehicle park and mobile home developments. Now recreational vehic ve vehicle depart uh vehicle park along with certain other residential uses are
permitted in community commercial but they are subject to comprehensive plan policy um 2.10 as noted in the addendum and this property it's significant because you have a substantial portion of this property that's located in the coastal
high hazard area and pursuant to policy 2.10 10 residential development which would include RBP in community commercial is strictly limited to the density of the closest residentially designated area on the future land use map on the same side of the street. So in this case, if you consider approving
the request to both the future land use amendment and the zoning amendment, you will need to make a statement that first of all, in the coastal high hazard area, the portion of the property there, it's going to be limited to one unit per acre because it's not eligible for a density
increase. The upland portion generally can be considered under policy 2.10 is consistent with res 2, which is two units per acre based on the applicable bonus. It is eligible for an additional increase in density if the board so decides it could reach a maximum
potential density in that upland portion of 10 RV spaces per acre. But the board is going to, as Mr. Rosena stated, the board would have to um make a decision to that. So, it's not just granting the land use and the zoning. You would also have to say to what extent you're going
to grant a bonus, if any, on the upland portion. And I respectfully would assert that we don't know for sure the coastal high hazard area or the flood zone because those are old maps and that is a site plan issue. We don't want to be limited.
If you want to limit it to uplands that's fine. Those uplands have not yet been determined. Um but again limiting it to 5.7 units the acre, six units to the acre. The staff is going to do their job and not let us build in the coastal high hazard area. So I'd ask that not be done at the zoning stage. Well, well, we
will we will say to what to what extent it's determined to be in the coastal high hazard area, the density cannot exceed one per acre. >> Yeah. And that's obviously acceptable. That makes sense. >> Okay. All right. Those are all our cards. U any questions, comments, or actions on
behalf of the board? >> I chair Yes. >> I'd like to make a motion to deny and direct staff to do a finding of fact.
>> Okay. There's a motion um for denial and directing staff to prepare a finding of fact. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay. There's a motion and a second for denial.
>> Can I clarify what's that for? >> Uh, good question. Um, which one would that be for? Let me see. We typically take up the comprehensive plan amendment first and that's first in order on the agenda. So, Commissioner Goodson, I assume that motion is applicable to the request for a future
land use map amendment. >> Correct. All right, fine. I'll second that. >> Okay, it's a motion and second. Any discussion? Those in favor of the motion signify by saying yay. >> Yay.
>> Opposed? Nay. Motion carries. Items complete. Now we have >> H2 needs a separate motion. >> We'll need a separate motion on H2. need you a sec a separate motion, but I would advise the board that you can't consider
approving it given that it would be inconsistent with the future land use map since you didn't approve that >> amendment. >> Also, as as a point of order, is there a funding effects necessary for a comp plan amendment? Will you be doing that? >> Typically, no. It's it's only for the reasoning. >> Okay.
>> But okay, >> but without the land use map amendment. >> Okay. So, H2 is moot. Well, I I think the board should still make a motion, but I'd admonish the board that the motion should be consistent with your prior action. >> Commissioner Goodson. Sir,
>> if I'd like to make a motion, >> I don't think we got that. Could you say it one more time, sir? >> Yes, I'd like to make a motion, sir. I direct staff to do finding a fact. Okay, I will second motion to deny on
H2. >> It's a motion to deny consistent with the um motion and action on H1. And there's a second. Uh any debate, discussion? All in favor say yay.
>> Yay. >> Nay. Carries unanimous. Okay. That moves us to H3. >> Item H3, Sunshine State Wildlife Conservation LLC and Bernard Egan and
Company. Ralph Brown representing request of conditional use permit for land alteration in AU zone and GU zone. 25 zoning action 25 Z0061 in district 5. >> Okay, we have two cards. Ralph Brown is
our first card. The applicant. >> Yes. My name is Ralph Brown. I work for a Blue Goose Survey and Design and we are the applicant for the Sunshine State Mine. I wanted to clarify that this is the third phase of the mine that we're in for. So, we've already permitted
about 540 acres of the mine with the county and with the water management district. and the mine's been in operation for about six years. So when you look at the CUP application number, you see that the project is 723 acres.
That's a combination of all three phases together. The only new thing we're in for is phase three, which is more like 187 acres. Um so the mine's been in operation for six years. is located off of Babcock Street
um just north of the C-54 canal. Um all access is off of Babcock through the driveway that was permitted back in phase one. So there's no new connections to roads. We're utilizing the existing infrastructure that was permitted six
years ago. Um, also the density we're I mean we're proposing three new mining cells which total about 78 acres but the project acreage is 186 acres. So we're really using about 40 ac 40% of the property
for actual construction of mining cells and the rest is preserved with trees or wetlands. Um, so I just think there was an impression that this was a new mine that maybe was 723 acres. I just want to clarify that really it's the third phase of a mine
that's been going on for six years. >> Okay. Um, our next card, Ed Lanar. Lychanal Ed Lanel Lanel. >> Is he here?
He is not here. Okay. All right. I do have some questions and I um you had mentioned that 180 40% of the property will be
excavated >> in the third phase. Yes. >> In the third phase. And the rest of the property will be preserved trees and preservation of wetlands. Does that mean you have no intentions of developing the rest of the property or would it be in
preserve? >> It may be developed in the future, but we have no wetland impacts and um have quite a few few trees on the property. All the stockpile of materials can be back in the previous phases that were already constructed. But no, I'm not committing to there won't be any future
development. >> So you're you're not making any representations of what density that may be. Do you have public potable water at this site? >> No. >> And no sewer. The other I noticed that this is in very very close proximity to
um t to the Sebastian State Preserve and and Goodwins. >> It's across >> Yeah. >> on the other side of Babcock. On the east side of Babcock is the buffer preserve property. Yes. >> Has there been any any um comments from
St. John's River Water Management District or the D on this. Maybe that's a staff question. Have they reviewed the impacts of the mining expansion to the north? >> I'm going to ask a staff from natural resources to come up if you don't mind. >> Okay.
>> We just to clarify, we do have our permits already from the water management district. They've already issued the permits for phase three, phase two, and phase one. >> They've issued those. >> Yes. If the question is have they received their um St. John's permit the the answer is yes.
>> I mean any any review or comments on behalf I mean they have permits. So I guess maybe one of the questions I have I know uh Gwen's preserve as well is is a is a waterfall very very critical and
strategic waterfell area and in the excavation and the depth and I see you have side wall profiles of the has any consideration been to support those or have a waterfall or is it strictly a very deep hole 40 foot depth which would
be very limited in terms of waterfall But any of the latoral zones, has there any been any effort to support some of the the needs down there? >> Well, we do have 5 to one slopes on the on the mine reclamation plan. So, you'll end up with vegetated slopes, some
wetland vegetation on the slopes. >> Will you be planning wetland vegetation in those slopes? >> That's not a not required at this time. We haven't proposed that. >> Okay. Um >> but we are preserving about 10 wetland
areas which would you know provide habitat. >> The 5 to1 slopes. Is that to the water line? Is that also below the water? >> Below the water line. >> And how how far from the water line does that go? How far does it reach into the lake? >> Just a second. I have that.
It goes five foot below the water line. So you have a normal water level and then this five to one slope goes five foot vertically down from that water line. >> So it's five to one from the water line. So >> So five to one from the top all the way
down 5 foot below what we expect to be the water level in the lake. >> How far from the shore is that 5 to one slope? >> So that would be at a 5 to1 slope that's going out um let me see what the elevations were again. Yeah,
>> we're going 10. It's almost 50 foot. >> 50 ft from That's good. >> I notice uh that the depth the water depth of these um of these um pits, lakes is is going to be 40 ft.
That's incredibly deep for Florida. Um, but I assume that was approved by by the water management district. And has the county environmental are the other lakes that deep? I in some areas >> standard depth. I mean,
um, you know, the purpose of our mine is to to mine general fill that's used for house pads and then also to mine rock which is goes down to 40 feet. the rocks used for road base, for roads, also for aggregates, you know, like 57 stone and
all that. There's a mine to the north of us. There's two mines to the north of us are also 40 feet or deeper. Um the mines that get beach sand actually go down to 80, 90, 100 foot deep. So 40 is a pretty standard uh depth for mines.
the um at that depth, is it your intention to use these for storm water retention? Are you able to use them for storm water retention? >> They could be used for storm water retention in the future. I mean, >> because I know there's been discussion about when you have a lake that deep and
you use surface water to flow into the the uh those lakes, you have a potential of contaminating the aquifer below. And I was just curious u but of course you would have to get St. John's and I assume county permitting for that.
>> Yeah. If we developed in the future we would >> for storm water. >> Yes. >> It would have to go through county review >> and water management district I think. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. The water management district recently uh changed their rules. So a
wet storm water pond by itself cannot be used to meet their criteria. So, if you were going to permit this in the future, you'd have to have basically a treatment pond upstream that then discharged into the wet pond. And the wet pond could be used for your flood storage, but
probably would not be used for the water quality part of it. >> Okay, that's good. >> Um, any endangered species on the site? >> No, we had a carara survey. Um, and of course we had a wetland study that was
done by a consultant and nothing was found. >> I noticed I'm very familiar with the area. It's a it's an amazing area. I'm familiar with also North Indian River County. Used to represent that area. I know the community and I know u 25% of
your trucks go south. Um, have you had any complaints from Indian River County residents? >> No. for for the increased truck in a relatively rural area, >> Felsmere. >> Yeah, they go through Felsmere. >> Yeah. >> A lot more tracks traffic to the north. There's a lot more develop in Bvard
County than there is in Indian River County. So, >> but you don't have haven't had any problems with complaints. I know I've spoken to some of the folks there about that. >> Uh it's intense, but uh you've done a good job here in your permit application. I've reviewed quite in
detail. >> Thank you. I'd love to have an opportunity to go out and look at it physically. I've driven by there numerous times, but I'd love to to have an opportunity to to see it firsthand. I know that material is very important. >> Okay. Uh any other questions?
Then uh I'd recommend approval. >> I'll second that. >> I motion move for approval. There's a second. Any discussion? All in favor say yay. Yay. >> Yay. >> Cares unanimously. Thank you for your diligence. >> Call me if you'd like to. >> Okay. I will definitely do that. Okay.
Okay. We will now move to H4. >> Item H4, Underwoods Equipment Repair LLC. Kim Rosena representing requests a zoning classification change from BU2 with a BDP to BU2 with removal of the
BDP 26Z0000006. >> Good evening, chairman, members of the county commission. My name is Kim Rosen. I'm here on behalf of Underwoods Equipment Rental LLC. With me is the owner of the property, Jimmy Underwood. Uh this is on North Merit Island, north
of East Chrysafully Road. Uh that's from your packet just to show the area. Uh also in your packet is the zoning map. This is BU2. It's a commercial area, commercial corridor. BU2 on this property nearby
and uh BU 2 along the other side. Uh obviously a commercial corridor. This area along North Courtney Parkway does have commercial uses. I provided a packet to you
starting at page605. It shows the Ramsy's Automotive which is right here. It's a service repair. Then you have uh further commercial uses. You have Black Lawnspring on the other side. You have Mr. tall that just has a lot of storage stuff in his yard. Uh so this is
a commercial area at least on the commercial road and uh Mr. Underwood would like to move his mobile commercial repair business to this site. He's going to places and repairing them on mobile and also because he has extra land he'd like to
do outdoor storage of recreational vehicles and commercial vehicles. Uh uh this is uh again other than uh there is two two residential properties to the north but this would require buffering. There's a 50-ft buffer of two flag stems between this property and the
residential property to the east. There's going to be a cl buffer uh for this. There's going to be a opaque fence required by your code and it's going to have regular hours. It's not going to be loud. It's not going to be noisy. performance standards that will keep all the lights coming inside so it won't
bleed onto the residential property. The North Meridan Special Dependent District Board recommended approval so long as we replace it with a BDP. Planning and zoning recommended approval so long as we replace it with a BDP, limiting it to BU1 uses plus the uh use of commercial
and recreational storage and uh repair of commercial vehicles. The zoning history is somewhat unusual. This started out as light industrial in 1962. It went to BU1 administratively in 1973.
A BU2 was granted in 1997 with a BDP limited to many warehouses and to BU1 uses. This was removed in 2015. as to the many warehouses. This property is never developed ever
for whatever reasons. Uh the propertyy's not developed. When um Jimmy And purchased this in 2024, this didn't even show up in his title work. And if you look at it, it's because the legal description attached to the BDP doesn't reference this party, this property. So, we're asking that this be removed.
Willing to put another BDP. I've provided language to u Mr. Richardson and to uh Mr. uh Prasad uh basically that the use of the property shall be limited to parking, locating and storing of all
types of vehicles. That's from your county code. That's why that language sounds stilted. Including but not limited to recreational equipment, recreational vehicles and commercial vehicles and heavy equipment and to commercial and heavy equipment repair services as well as all BU1 uses. So, we
would ask that you approve the removal of the BDP and the uh the imposition of a new BDP with that limitation. >> Okay, great. Any questions? Okay, Rose Plumber.
Hello, Rose Plumber, North Merid Island Homeowners Association. Um given the language that Miss Rosena has identified for a new BDP with the BU1 uses, we would not be in objection to that. >> Okay, great. Thank you, James Underwood.
>> I'm just here to answer questions. >> Just here to answer questions. That's right. Your applicant. >> Uh okay, those are all our cards. What's the desire of the board? Chair, I make a motion that we accept
the new BP as long as it comes back and it's the same and everybody agrees to it. >> I'll second that. >> There's a second a motion in the second. Any debate? All in favor signify by saying yay. >> Yay. >> Oppos. Nay.
>> Carries unanimously. Thank you. Okay, we withdrew H5 and H4. So H7, Gunner Downs. Item H7, Gunner DS, Janet Tindle representing, requests the zoning classification change from GU to AU on
20 uh with zoning action 26 C 0000009 in district 1. Okay. By the way, I will be acknowledging disclosing that I did meet with Roseno on the last zoning item, too. That'll be a part of my disclosure.
[snorts] >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Oh, yeah. Gunner Downs uh doing the zoning change over there from what is it? General use to agricultural. Uh you have some agricultural pursuits I'm trying to go after. So
any questions you got? >> Okay. Any questions? Do we have any more cards? >> Yes, we do. Um >> Richard, >> question. >> No questions. Richard Hefinger.
Oh, >> don't don't worry. I'm a favor, dude. >> Rick Hefinger, District One, since this is District One. Um, the PNZ citizens group, I guess. No, planning and zoning. What do we call them? >> Planning zoning board. >> Yeah, the planning zoning board. Uh, they approved this unanimously. So, I
would like to uh request that you do that as well. Thank you. >> Thank Thank you. Allison St. Help me. Allison >> Stazzi. >> Good afternoon or good evening. Mine is Allison Sparza,
>> but the Italian way is Fratza. >> Fratza, but anyway, we'll go with Frazza or Alison. >> Not like Strasa. >> No problem. I just had a basic question because I noticed this on several items and this is the first one coming up. And I'm just curious why the county is committing staff resources and value resoning applications for property
owners who have passed due taxes by one or two years. And is that efficient use of our resources for people who aren't paying taxes that we're looking at reszoning? So that was just my question. It was a question I think I was going to ask on the total amount one, but I noticed
there was several this is the first one of several after this as well. So I know question I was just curious. I don't >> strict constitutional standards and state law how we address property taxes. Um but that's a legal question. Perhaps I should defer. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm
going to defer to our county attorney. >> We We are limited to certain narrow considerations in determining applications for land use uh development permits, including resoning requests and the status of currency on payments of property tax is not one of those
considerations. I would advise the board that as a as a matter of law, the board can't consider in determining whether or not to grant a reasonzoning request whether property taxes are paid on the property or not. Although I understand why. >> Yeah. Because we're using our we use the taxes for the infrastructure to actually
have these types of meetings. And if you're not paying the tax, then how are you how are you taking advantage of this? >> I certainly understand the the point, but we do have a under law limited number of criteria that we can consider and that's not one of them. We're not arguing the valacy the validity of your
point of view is what we have we have to follow laws and I know standards by which the the the legislature and the courts have inflicted on all property taxes are very strict and keeping everyone in their silos and that's definitely not our silo. Now you might
want to talk to your state rep about that maybe but that would not be something we would have anything. If I may also add that all of the applications [clears throat] tonight have paid application fees for yesterday paid application. >> Like I said with the shown there over
$15,000 past due. I know this this applicant is only it's like 700 I think when I looked it up but >> again so how long can you be delinquent on property taxes? I guess they eventually it just get sold off and people can buy it based on the tax >> I
>> three years and then there'll be a >> tax deed sale. So like our Turtle Mountain folks here can go one more year not paying taxes. Okay. >> Got it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, >> Kim. >> Billy, if if this is approved, this
actually fixes um a non-conforming lot situation. Is that correct? >> That's correct. The current lot is undersized and this would bring it into a zoning class that is consistent with this size. >> Okay. Thank you. I'd like to make a motion to approve the
change from GU to AU. >> There's a motion for approval. >> I'll second the second. Any discussion, debate? >> Hearing none. All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Opposed. >> Oppose. Nay. Carries unanimously. Thank
you. Okay. H8. >> I'm going to read H8 and H9 together. They're companions. Joshua Jaw and H8. Joshua Law and Jennifer Law request a smallcale comprehensive plan amendment to change the future land use from agriculture to residential 1 to 2.5 with
26 SS 00004 and H9 is Joshua Law and Jennifer Law requested zoning classification change from GU to AU with zoning action 26Z000013 all in district one.
Joshua and Jennifer Law. First card and I think we have an addition there. >> That's Evelyn. >> Evelyn and Tanner. >> Okay, good. Two additions. >> Two additions. >> I've never done this before. So Joshua Law, >> Jennifer Law, >> we're just changing it to agricultural
so we can long-term plan, build a house there, 10-year plan, but we want to be able to put our animals there, be able to fence it, get power put there, and we talked worked with the county 5 years ago, and the man I talked to said,
"Let's do this." He proposed this action so we could get power there without having a site plan and having to repermit and get a temp pole and repermit. And he said you only get three years for that. So we're moving forward with that. And we've also acquired more land around it to make it five acres,
but it's not there yet. We're still about an acre short. >> Okay. Okay. Great. Uh any questions? All right. We have a couple cards. We'll go to those. Actually, Richard Heel Finger sit down.
>> Okay, one's on eight and one's on nine. Okay, >> we're hearing eight, right? >> Well, they're companions. >> We're hearing them as a companion piece and usually we only grant one bite at the apple for related items. So, all your comments and the time allotted, Mr.
Hufflefinger, >> we go toward both. >> So, we're addressing both now. >> Yes. Well, well, they were addressed together when the planning board did it, too. So, um, my only concern is again, I'm here about D1, Richard Heelfinger, D1, 2000 Juniper Drive. Uh, we don't, we got an empty seat over there. So, I
thought I would come up here and speak because one of our D1 reps, I don't believe voted for this because she had some concerns and since I have some time, I will just read them into the record. Um she stated that there were wetlands impact and she had the report and they
said yes according to the code enforcement officer in this report that I have yes there was there was wetlands impact and she said according to the maps all but the teeny tiniest little corner is either considered in or national inventory wetlands of St. John's River and GU is one one home per
5 acres if I'm correct and that is the restriction when you're building within a wetland so reszoning to a 1.25 25 to build a home where the map shows all wetlands doesn't exactly allow to build a home either. Um she continued with saying her biggest
concern is that she was familiar with the area and down the road not that far the road and bridge routinely go out and fix where the entire road blows out due to drainage. So if we start compromising the one per five acre in a wetland to
125, all those folks that live downstream, which I believe would be administrative policy 7 that applies to this would be suffering due to the excess. By the time you develop all these lots out, everybody just next door is going to be underwater and their
roads aren't going to be drivable. This is my concern. She went on to say, "I'm talking about the reasonzoning in general because it's asking us asking to go to one to 125 and if we allow a home on half of the acres
that's required or we reszone it, giving the application the idea that he could build a home on 2.5 acres of wetland that is not buildable because you must have five." This has nothing to do with the code case. I'm asking about policy. There was there was a discussion earlier
about code. Um, she continued with, "I feel that multip I feel that might be valuable information to have because if we just unanimously vote to reszone this property, it still doesn't mean that this guy is going to get what he wants and he pays money to come up for us. I
just feel like this is valuable information so someone can plan their future and that's up to you all to make that decision." And then another uh one of the board members in said inquired that he had uh if he had put it back
together because I think he's played some zoning changes and combining acreage. I'm not sure. Um then somebody stated that uh Roots Point when it it's that many wetland typically the restriction is different.
It's not res 125. It's one per five acres. So that is policy. So my my point is this is a little confusing and district 1 had some valid reasons for saying they don't think this is a good idea. It says precedent and I would like to based on what I read here and we have
a D1 representative on the board for a reason. I would like to recommend that you do not do that. But I can continue to read this in but I think you you guys all read this. You you don't answer questions now, but if you read this, you know there's a D1 concern and I don't have D1 right there. So I think D1 would
vote no. And I would encourage you since this is a D1 issue to vote no. Thank you. >> Thank you for bringing that to our attention. Those are all our cards. Um now it comes before the board. Any questions, discussions? A motion? >> Make a motion to approve. >> There's a motion to approve. >> Second.
>> A second. Any debate. >> All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Carries unanimously. Thank you. >> We need a second one for nine. >> Do we need to have a second at >> on? Yes. Okay, we need a separate motion. I'll make a motion. I'm sorry,
that was on H8. >> That was on H8. >> All right. I'll make a motion to approve on H9. >> Second. >> Motion second on H9. Any debate? All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Opposed. Post. Nay. Carries unanimously. Thank you very much.
>> Okay. Uh H10. >> Okay. Item H10, the Prima Construction Corporation and Daniel Carson, Kim Rosenka representing requests zoning classification change from RU113 and RU210 to RU215 with zoning action 26Z000014
in district 5. >> Good evening, uh, Chairman Alman, members of the county commission. My name is >> that earlier. I want to disclose that before. Okay. >> U, I'm here on behalf of Depria Construction and Daniel Carson. This is a resoning request for all RU 215 and a
residential 15 zoning. The intent is to combine the two properties, tear down the house that's on the RU one, I think it's RU 1111, RU113 to tear that house down, combine the properties, build a condominium or town home development and
sell them to single family uh as single family fe simple. So this is all in residential 15. This is a multifamily area. There are some that are rented. There are some that are not rented. This is in your packet.
This is on 1.14 acres. Again, this future land use has been there since 1998 for res 15. It's consistent with the uses that are around it. It's consistent with the sizes that are around it. And um also with me are two representatives of Deprima Construction,
Evan McLuhan and Demar Han, who's the vice president of Depria Constructions. If you have any specific questions as to their intended use and intended building, >> thank you. Uh know the area well, been by the site. Um I would recommend approval. So I'll make a motion for approval. I'll second
>> motion and second. All in favor say yay. >> Oppos. Nay. Carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. >> Y >> Okay. Now, item H11. >> H11 was tabled. >> Oh, that was tabled. Okay, we are done. >> No, we've got H12.
>> We got Yes, we're done with the zoning. Item H12, approve ordinance amending chapter 62, Bvard County Code of Ordinances, Land Development Regulations, specifically amending section 62-102, Definitions and Rules of Construction,
and 62-305, Reasonable Accommodation Standards and Procedures, as well as creating a new section of BVAR County Code, section 62-305.1, entitled Certified Recovery Residences.
>> Okay. Do we have any cards? I don't. We did. We had one card. Yes. Uh Richard Heffelinger Heinger, District 1. Just wanted to put it into the record that the motion to recommend denial of H11 was made at the planning and zoning committee and it was
seconded and the motion was unanimously denied. That's all I'd like to say about that. H12. >> This was H12. Okay. All right. Um, any discussion?
I'm going to vote against this today and I'll tell you why. I've not had positive experience with um these types of things. Um there's been concerns by nearby neighbors and I've gone through quite a lot to put down um those
concerns or address them or had law enforcement come and and speak not just on this but um other types of um situations like this. So I won't be voting for it today. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um I'll say a few things. This is uh the result of um a state law change that we are bound to follow by state law. Ironically, under our present code, it really doesn't make a
difference because we don't disallow these type of facilities anyway. uh these facilities would have greater oversight than um an a home that may have a recovering person or an addict, I should say, an addict that is not seeking
recovery or supervision or meeting certain criterias. So, I feel comfortable with it and I would support it and I'll make that motion. >> I'll second it. >> Okay, there's a motion second. Uh any debate?
All those in favor signify by saying yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Opposed. >> Opposed. >> Name. >> Uh, passes 3 to1 with uh Commissioner Felner voting against. Okay. Now I think we're done. We go to unfinished
business. Okay. Uh, unfinished business. We have none. New business. None. Public comments. We do have the public comment. Do we have any? >> I don't have any public comment. >> No public comment card. So, we'll go to board reports. County Manager.
>> Good evening, board. Um earlier this evening, you all mentioned that there may be a potential um quorum issue for the September 3rd meeting. If the board so chose, we could probably move that meeting to September 10th. Um if you all
want to give us that direction, we'll be happy to make those amendments to our schedules and uh get that and get those advertisements out for those applications. that would be coming for you. So that would be the Thursday, September 10th meeting, which would be a planning and zoning meeting much like
the meeting we're having tonight. Then moving that to September 10th, which would be the following Thursday. >> That would help me. I appreciate the board considering that >> that date is fine for me. >> It's fine for me.
>> Do we need a motion? >> Yes. >> Yes, that would be best, sir. Yeah. Because then we'll get the calendar change out afterwards. You want me make a motion that we're going to move our planning and zoning board meeting to September 10th? >> Yes.
>> From the 3rd to September 10th. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay, >> I'll second that. >> The motion and second to move our [snorts] planning and zoning board meeting which was scheduled or is scheduled for September 3rd to September 10th. >> Otherwise, no, no, nothing further, sir.
>> Okay. All in favor of motion say yay. >> Yeah. carries unanimously. Thank you. Okay. Is there anything else under county manager? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Thank you. County attorney. >> I have no report, Mr. Chair.
>> District one. We have none there. >> I'm sorry. You have no report. District. District three. >> Yes. Sorry. Um, so the um the homestead property tax referendum that's uh going
to be on the November ballot. I've been out in the community and I keep hearing people saying what if I wonder what what is what is the real deal? Asking me how it's going to affect the county. And I'm just wondering how the board might feel about directing
staff to to give us some actual facts about how it's going to affect our physical goings on for the next, you know, years. I mean, it's I just would like to have some facts by people who know what they're doing so when I go out in the
community, I can talk sensibly. I don't exactly know what it is you guys could put together to be fair, but I need to know more than I do. >> I think it's an excellent idea and I'll I'll take it a step further. I think we should hear from our constitutional officers
and maybe our city officials. I met with a former city uh manager just this morning and some of the things that are going to the cities are proposing are pretty pretty serious. Like some are even looking at consolidating services
and which may not be bad. Some want to to they want to subcontract with the sheriff and do away with their police department. So >> yeah, >> the impact is just immense and I think having our constitutional officers, our sheriff, our um in our cities that might
take a little time to get together, but >> right, >> but at least I think we owe it to the public. I I think I'm wondering too, Jim, is there anything else that because >> is there you know more about >> the impacts this is going to have. You know more about what I need to know. So when I go out in the community again I
can give them the facts. >> I what we can do is put a put together a few pages of a memo a little bit to show um I have some numbers here. You know, the property appraisers been really good to work with, gave us some numbers. Just for example, two when this takes effect and if it takes effect in 2029, we would
face about a $54 million reduction in our general fund at Valor Orum. So, we can give you some numbers on how they affect the MSTUs, give you an idea what could be a core service, what's not a core service, couple things like that we can move around. I mean, I can't and I've seen a presentation from Melbourne. I've read a little bit last night about
Palm Bay. I can't tell you exactly what the cities are doing, but I can tell you what the effects would be in the reduced property tax revenue. U we can talk a little bit about roll back and then we can talk about what funds can fund what. I mean, you know, we won't get down to the service level, but it gives you some
ideas of the fiscal impact. >> And I think Go ahead. I was your I was say I was at um uh Republican Women's Club down in Palm Bay and they started asking me questions and to be honest, if Dana Blickley hadn't been there, I >> I mean, she was very helpful. >> Yep. So
>> yeah and commissioners >> and I think also um not just the dollar amounts but actual services that would have to be cut and what choices for example people have to pay a pretty hefty fee if they call an ambulance. I was just having conversations with
constituent and I I potentially there'll be people >> who make a very life >> changing decision to not even call an amalless because those fees could go up or I've even talked to I mean you know it could affect uh decisions for respond
I mean this this pretty >> it it commissioners I will tell you it just I mean first of all you know ambulances out of general fund rough numbers we got from the property appraiser the fire rescue MSTU would go down by about $6 million. So we we're not at the point where we can give you service level impacts, but we can tell
you what service would be impacted. >> Okay. >> They give you some ideas there. Um and and Mr. If I can add, we're we're probably going to add a little bit of that information into the budget message next week when you give the budget's going to focus on this coming year, but we'll have some information there. And and like I gave you guys a heads up,
Florida today has asked some questions, so I'm expecting an article to come out, you know, about what some of the impacts would be, too. So you'll be seeing that coming out. >> Good enough. or do we have to do anything more formal or >> do we need to take action or just >> No, that's I just asking you I got the direction that you would like to see a
report back on what you know what the impacts could financial impacts could be and what the service impacts could be. >> It's a great idea and I think um one of the things we want to prevent is something like this passing and then constituents saying, "Well, why didn't we know this was going to happen?" We
want to be sure they have as much information so they know what they're voting for. [snorts] May I Mr. Chair, >> I there's there's a point though that you get to where you you can't campaign against the referendum. >> Exactly.
>> And I'm always very mindful of that. >> And so I don't know at what point you start expending resources. And so I I just caution I I've said this many times on this board um issues that have come before the voters. And so I I think
having facts that you have, you're talking with people out there in the community, I think I think that's great. I think producing something and starting to expend money on it now, you're >> you're you're getting into something different. I would just urge I just urge
that caution. That's all. >> Um >> we will uh be keenly aware of where those boundaries are. We've already had discussions about them and there's been guidance from our office and from uh other sources that we're looking to and we'll stick to the parameters of factual
information provided. We're not going to be doing any electioneering or campaigning. >> Okay, that's good. I think >> that's all I have. >> I information that's what we're looking for. >> Information. >> Yeah, we're allowed to answer questions and so that's what I'm hearing for you. If you have questions are what what are
the fiscal impacts? What could be some of the service? So that's what we'll be providing. We'll stick to the facts. >> Okay. And I think also would be other revenue options. I mean, I've had people say, "Oh, this could be really hard on the counties,
cities, but they have other revenue options." Is that true or is not true? And what would those be? Those are just simply content, not advocating for anything. But what are the facts? What are the issues? What >> what information we can get out there? Well, could I ask a technical question
of of the from the legislaturator's perspective during the the special uh for the implementing language? Can the legislature consider at that time other revenue possibilities for municipal governments?
>> I think so. Yeah, absolutely. >> I I mean >> I mean they they could they could they could do a lot of things. Absolutely. They have that ability. I was an intern in the legislature when they increased the sales tax by a penny and shared wow were things different then they went up
a penny and they gave half of it to the local governments u I don't don't that's going to happen again but but yes they have that ability and u and as a matter of fact the house when I was a member under market ruby we passed a a bill
getting rid of getting rid of all property taxes and uh I I got a little humored when they had headline historic. This is historic. Never been done. No, it was done not long ago. Completely did away with with property taxes, but it was 100% replaced
with another revenue source. And so they have that ability through the implementing implementing that's that's something that we could definitely include as we educate people what options are. Um anyway, sorry I didn't want to walk on your discussion.
>> Okay. Do you have anything else? Okay. All right. District four. >> No, I don't [snorts] have anything beyond that, sir. >> District five. Um, I have one thing and maybe kind of adds on to that. I would like I think and if the board concurs,
we should have our lobbyists lobby firm give a report to the board as far of our successes and failures and unmet needs as a as a result of the leg session. >> Oh, and I sorry, Mr. I apologize. I do have that actually. We just got it the
other yesterday or day before. So, I'll get that forwarded to you guys. I haven't made it through all my emails yet. Okay. >> But I saw it in the email stack. Yep. A report from Steve Chriso on the state. >> Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you. All right. Well, I think we're done. Thank you for your diligence.
Meeting adjourned. The opinions expressed [music] 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 [music] 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 [music] hereby expressly disclaim any and all responsibility or liability for any defamatory [music] or slanderous statements expressed by any member of the public during any such period.
>> [music] [music] >> Perfect. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. [music] >> [music] >> Heat.