Commissioners acts as a quasi-judicial body when it hears requests for rezoning 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 rezoned, 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 rezoning 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. Good evening and welcome to the May 1st planning and zoning meeting for the board of county commissioners. We have a quorum. I'll call the meeting to order. We have an invocation this evening by Pastor Jeremy Coppock of Faith Baptist Church. You're recognized and thank you for coming. Thank you. It's a privilege to be here. Let's pray together, please. Dear Heavenly Father, I thank you so much that you've called us together tonight. We know your name is holy and still we come before you because of Jesus Christ, your son. I thank you for sending him to be my savior. Father, will you please oversee this meeting tonight? I thank you for these men and women who have come to do your work. I pray, Lord, that you would fill them with courage that they might represent your character to do your work. Please help them to have wisdom, to exercise mercy, to be a blessing. I pray, Lord, that you would help them to be a blessing to this county and we thank you for it and again for the privilege that you've given us to be here together. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen. Thank you very much. Commissioner Altman for the pledge. Please face the flag. Pledge allegiance to the honor of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Commissioners, we have minutes to approve for March 3rd workshop meeting. Is there a motion? We have two approves. We have a motion by Commissioner Delaney. We have a second by Commissioner Altman. Clerk will call the roll. Commissioner Delaney? Yes. Vice Chair Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Atkinson? Yes. Commissioner Altman? Yes. Chairman Fountner? Yes. We'll show that approved. 5-0. Thank you for that, Commissioners. We have consent agenda tonight. We have three items on consent. Now, I have a couple cards, but just assuming that we're not taking anything off consent, you don't feel like you need to speak. Okay. Is there a motion for? Move to approve. Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Delaney. We have a second by Commissioner Goodson. Clerk will call the roll. Commissioner Delaney? Yes. Vice Chair Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Atkinson? Yes. Commissioner Altman? Yes. Chairman Fountner? Yes. We'll show that also approved. Thank you, everybody, for that. We don't have any G-item comment cards, I don't think. Right? Okay. We're going to go to H-1 and Kim Rzenka. I'm going to just read it into the record. Okay. Yes, sir. H-1 is for Casabella Development, LLC, represented by Kim Rzenka, requesting a zoning classification change from BU1A to RU26, application number 24Z-00064, and District 4. Good evening, Chairman, members of the County Commission. My name is Kim Rzenka. I'm here on behalf of Casabella Development, LLC, and Joe DiPrima Construction. DiPrima Construction. I'm here to request a continuance until the July 17th meeting. They've been in engineering design, and they've got a couple of issues they need to resolve, so they've asked that I seek a continuance until July 17th. Okay, Commissioners, this is in my district. I'm fine with it. Is there a motion to continue to the July 17th? So moved. I think he got you there this time. Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Goodson. We have a second by Commissioner Delaney. Clerk will call the roll. Commissioner Delaney? Yes. Vice Chair Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Atkinson? Yes. Commissioner Altman? Yes. Chairman Feltner? Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you. And so we'll go to H2. H2, Wayne and Laura Brissett, represented by Kim Rzenka, request a zoning classification change from BU1 to BU2, application number 25Z-0005 in District 1. Good evening, Chairman Feltner, members of the County Commission. Kim Rzenka here on behalf of Wayne and Laura Brissett and the contract purchaser, Home Nation Cocoa, LLC. The purpose of this rezoning is to allow a mobile home sales facility to go on this 2.5 acres of vacant property. What I've given to you is the aerial map of the land proposed to be rezoning to BU2. If you look immediately to the east, just to the south of Lewis Drive, that little section there, that is the existing manufactured home, mobile home sales facility operated by the contract purchaser, Home Nation Cocoa, and they're leasing that property. Their goal is to move it over to this other property. It's a very low-impact use. You've got a commercial nursery to the north. You've got commercial to the south. You've got a church with a very large buffer to the east. And then you have this existing use that's the same. Talking to the purchaser, they have two to three people come in to the site a day. And these mobile homes, they stay there. They may come and go periodically, but they're not being sold from there. They're just display models. So it's a very low-intensity use. If this were in BU1, it would have to have a mobile home park attached to it. That's why it's able to be in existence on the west side of U.S. 1. According to the staff report, this is a commercial corridor. This use does not indicate that it would impact any levels of service. There would be performance standards and site plan criteria for buffering stormwater, all those type of issues that come up during site plan. Again, the staff report says there's no material violations of any comprehensive plan policies by this request, and this does not encroach upon an existing residential area. So there were concerns at planning and zoning regarding flooding. But again, that's because of an FDOT drainage easement, which if you turn on the backside of that picture, you'll see the platte of Brook Hill, which is immediately to the south and east. And you can see the drainage easement, which is controlled by FDOT. And this property, subject to the rezoning, does not even attach to that as it hits at the corner. But again, as you know, once stormwater is put on a vacant piece of property, it should help any drainage. There were also issues raised about crime, which was a little confusing, because this will be a fence facility. So with that, the Home Nation COCO representative, Nick Dottoria, is here if you'd like to ask any questions. Otherwise, we'd ask that you approve the rezoning from BU1 to BU2. Okay. Are there questions for the applicant? You can go ahead. Okay. Commissioner Goodson? Can you tell me, ma'am, because your map is kind of limited, the trailer park or the trailers you speak of across the street on the west side of US-1, are they, they're not mobile homes, they're travel trailers, or is the, what is that? The homes along Lewis Drive, I believe some of those are manufactured homes. If you're looking to where the existing site is, that is just a manufactured home sales, but to the south of that is a mobile home park. So I don't know if that answers your question. No, it doesn't. Okay. I don't know what you mean by travel trailers. Well, travel trailers would be something you could either drive, pull behind a truck, as far as a mobile home. The business that's moving from the west side to the east side, are they in the mobile home business or are they in the travel trailer business? They're in the manufactured homes, mobile home business. And how far south is that from Canaveral Groves Boulevard? I do not know that answer. How far south is it from the elementary school? From Fair Glen? Yes. Probably about half a mile. Okay. All right. That's all. Commissioner Delaney. Thank you. When we had met, we had spoken about possibly a BDP for the usage for the BU-1 with the allowable to extend, I'm sorry, to go to BU-2, but have a BDP for just mobile home sales? Yes. But also allow for the BU-1 uses as well? Yes, ma'am. And that is acceptable. Okay. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Is there discussion on the item? Commissioner Delaney, it's your district. What would you like to do? I would like to move to approve with the BDP condition that I just spoke about. Okay. If you could help me with that, Billy. Maybe we can just say it for now. Clear, Mr. Chair. Thanks. We're clear on that. Okay. All right. So we have a motion by Commissioner Delaney to approve with a BDP. Is there a second? Second. Okay. We have a second by Commissioner Altman. Clerk will call the roll. Commissioner Delaney? Yes. Vice Chair Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Atkinson? Yes. Commissioner Altman? Yes. Chairman Feltner? Yes. Commissioner that approved 5-0. Thank you. Very much. Okay. We'll go to H3. H3. Troy Holdings, LLC, requests a change in zoning classification from BU-1A to BU-2 with removal of a BDP and a new BDP applied. Application 25Z-00001 in District 2. Thank you. Cole Oliver for the Applicantory Holdings, LLC. This is a repeat from a 2023 hearing that we had before the board where we requested a BDP with the same use as being requested tonight. That BDP was approved by the board. And then it was subsequently not recorded because then the landowner at the time sold the property and the new property owner wasn't sure exactly what they were going to do with it. Since the new property owner wants to move forward with that previous approved BDP and because it had timed out on when it could be recorded, we're here before you guys again. It is a BUT use, but the zoning would restrict it to only BU-1A uses and that one solitary use in the BU-2 category. So there's no other concerns of other BU-2 uses coming in there. In addition, and some sensitivity to the neighbors, to our south, the code requires a six-foot wall. And we proposed an eight-foot wall. And then the site plan that it's currently in and the engineers here to talk about it if needed or requested actually pulls back further away from the property line, the proposed buildings. So, you know, with that, we're here to answer any questions that you all might have. Okay. We do have a few cards, but before we go to those, questions for the applicant, sir? No questions? Are there any questions for the applicant? No? Okay. We'll come back to you then. Thank you. We're going to go to the other cards then. Mike McGraw. My name is Mike McGraw. My residence is 60 North Tropical Way. I am directly to the south of this property. I've lived there for 23 years now. This is my third time here in regards to the same property and a lack of development every time we've come. The first time it was a car wash, which never developed. We were here for a storage building facility the last time in 23. Nothing's happened. We're very concerned, the residents, that back up to this proposed storage area is that it is going to be what it says it's going to be and that we don't end up with an auto repair shop back there or a body shop. I don't want a storage facility that becomes businesses that want to run businesses out of their storage units. This is a residence. This is not an industrial area. The only thing that would make it slightly industrial is the 7-Eleven that's at the corner of Cone and Cordy. There's a daycare center that is directly next to the back of the first building. I don't have a lot of aggressive attitude toward this development. I really don't. But I want to make sure that there's some guardians put up there for the residents. The noise factor, as I said. If we're going to agree on a BDP that says we're going to put a storage unit there, and the storage units that are proposed seem to be almost identical, except for a parking variation on the south boundary. So I'm good with that. Okay? But the 8-foot wall on the south boundary that Mayor suggested, the Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency, is, I think, a good idea. And I keep hearing the word wall. I want to make sure it's a wall and not one of these 8-foot PVC fences that when we get a cat, too, it ends up in my backyard or on my roof or on my pool enclosure. Regardless, we can't do the weather. But these are my concerns. These are the concerns of the other three residents that back directly up to this area. I want to make sure that there's some form of security back there. We've had homeless encampments set themselves up and on that property in the past. The prior owner of the property kept it maintained, kept it mowed every month or so, and it was fairly decent. I want to make sure that until they do that, this new guy has planted corn grass, is what I call it. It's like a 4-foot tall grass on the property. So these are just concerns. I understand a man has a right to buy property. A woman has a right to buy property and establish a business there. But it should be like and kind to the neighborhood. It should not be anything above and beyond that. So those are the items that I really wanted to discuss. The wall was discussed. We don't have people living on the premises. People aren't running businesses on the premises. And that there be security cameras. And those cameras could be monitored by the owner remotely. I'm not asking for a security guard on the property. But there is a canal that's directly behind there. And it looks like they're going to have retention ponds built in between there. So we had water issues in the past. But that might have been corrected by the county. I'm not sure. We haven't had a good rain yet. That's all I have to say. Thank you for listening. The one thing I did have a question. Pardon me. I question what the actual material for this is going to be. Is this going to be a barn structure with metal siding? We call it in my business our panel or whatever. Or is it going to be an actual concrete block structure? Is it going to be stucco? What is the appearance going to be? I'm going to see it every morning. I'm going to see it every morning. And I don't mind seeing that versus the 7-Eleven. Like I said, I'm not disagreeing with anything here major. But that they keep the property looking at least decent. And I don't think a metal structure is something that's cheap. We'll see if we can get these concerns addressed. But I think Commissioner Goodson had a question for you. Yes, sir. Have you, with all your concerns, which are not two, I think there were seven you had, have you spoke to the owners about your concerns? I've not spoken to the owners. I did extend myself out to the attorney who just spoke, Cole. And we had a very fruitful conversation. He can't tell the owner what to do there. When I'm asking what kind of structures are you going to be putting there, what kind of regulations are you going to make? Are you going to make it that people can't work on their cars, they can't work on their boats, they can't work on their RVs? Because this is going to be, you were discussing earlier, the campers. Okay? These are travel trailers, campers, RVs, AC class, whatever you want to call them, and boats. So, you're going to have some light maintenance. I understand that, you know. You want to work on the awning on your RV or something. But I don't want power tools running all Saturday and Sunday and into 12 o'clock, 1 o'clock in the morning, because that's when they have time available to restore their 67 Chevy. Okay. We'll see if those items can be addressed before this. You smile. Do you have a 67 Chevy? No. Or a 57 Chevy? I had a 67 something at one time. So, I do have old cars. He is a car guy. Yeah. That's all I do is go to car events. Okay. Are there any other questions for the neighbor here? Okay. Sir, we're going to go to your other neighbors. Thank you. Okay. Steve Dutzack. Dutzack. Can I say that? I see your name for the record there, sir. I might not have said it before. Good afternoon or evening or whatever it is. My name is Steve Dutzack. I live at 310 Riverside Avenue in Merritt Island. Lived there for more than 30 years. Raised my family there. I am a widower. I have two children. My late wife worked for the county as a county librarian. She worked in several places, including the legal one in Titusville, all the way up here to Melbourne, too. My two daughters went to school in Brevard County for K-12. The, matter of fact, right at that elementary school, right near where this plot of land is. My oldest, Stephanie, or Steffi, she graduated at the University of Florida School of Medicine. She's a surgeon. She lives in Denver, one of the big towns. My youngest, who is here, Margaret or Maggie, she graduated with a master's in electrical engineering from UCF and followed in my footsteps and works now at NASA like I did. The, uh, just a simple country boy, uh, got a PhD in high energy physics, but I don't understand any of this stuff that I've been reading. So I came here basically to see what's going on and what, what the, what is going to happen and whatever. Maggie bought the house when it was zoned as a residential. It was quiet. The only thing has been mentioned that is, I would consider commercial, is on the north east corner is a 7-Eleven. Now, why they put a 7-Eleven there, I don't know, because right across the street is another convenience store with a gas pump. So those two are in only that one corner. If you go south on that street alongside Courtney, you get to a child school center where the little kiddies, and then there's a hair salon, and that's the extent of the commercial. I was not that impressed when I read the articles written, because the impression I got was, there's all kinds of commercial development, and this would fit right in. Courtney, I'm sure you've all gone up and down Courtney. That's a major street. It's a perfect buffer, because across the street from this place, the first row of facilities, facilities, there's a church, there's a doctor's office, and then there's this other convenience store. All of the commercial garages and repair shops and all that stuff are past that farther on east. The street she lives on, there are 24 houses in this U. The sign says, no outlet. Go in off of Courtney, you go around, you come out the other side on Courtney. There's no other way to go. If you look at an aerial, all the houses around there, all the way toward the west, all the way south, those are all houses. They're not any kind of commercial. Now, I have no problem with putting up things that would blend in or fit in this with it. My question is that I had, and this is probably personal, I sat through one of these zoning things when the car wash was attempted, when the storage unit was attempted, and the commission made a point that, you know, they couldn't understand why, since within a very small distance, there were four car washes already. There's half a dozen storage units around there. So, you know, there was another ulterior motive to my way of thinking. And it came out when I found out that when they, what the reason they wanted a car wash was that would increase the level of what that facility would be zoned as. Now, what puzzled me is why, when they didn't do it, they wasn't sent back to the original zone. And my final comment was, at the last meeting, my daughter asked the commission, if this RV and boat storage facility is not built, will this revert back to the original zone? We'll see if we can get that answer. No answer. We'll see if that comes up on this item. Okay. Thank you, sir. I'm finished. Thank you for listening. And you mentioned your daughter. I think Maggie's next. I have a card. I'm Maggie Ducek. I'm 70 North Tropical Way. I am the one that went to Tropical Elementary School. And he kind of said the same thing. But that is my concern. And even when I was listening to some other things, they were talking about going from BU1 to BU2. My concern with this whole thing is that it's going from BU1A to a B2 classification. And even in the BDP, it says, or other BU1 uses. To me, that's a huge step. I know what they're doing. I love the extra setback. I have to say they've been listening. I love the improvements from even what they submitted two years ago. It's very better for, as he says, seeing it every day or listening or whatever. But that is my huge concern. I'm an engineer. I don't deal in grays. So if this gets passed, they do this. It's great. And then, well, we can't do it for one reason or another or the egress or something. There's not an issue. Yeah, we tried, but let's see what other BU1 without coming back to the board or zone to get it approved. So that is my big concern. But as I said, I do know that they have done some changes. And if they stick to them all, again, don't work in grays, I do approve of what they're trying to do. So, okay, thank you. Commissioner, did you want to ask something? Yes. Billy, do I understand correctly that the developer wants to – they didn't register their BDP in time. They're just asking to do it now. Is that correct? They're not changing anything with it, are they? That is correct. It's the same request that the board – effectively, it's the same request that the board previously approved. It was reverted because it wasn't recorded. Now, as far as what the owner might do with the land, right now it seems like the owner wants to store boats and trailers and motorhomes. Is that correct? That is correct. I understand he's willing to enter into a BDP to limit the BU2 uses to that one use. Okay. And if you – any owner that would have land would not really be – would not like it if you were draining oil on his land and changing motors on his land because of the influx of contaminating the soil, right? That seems to make sense to me, Commissioner. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. All right. Okay. That's – so right now we're doing nothing but registering the first original BDP that we voted on. It's effectively a repeat. Right. Okay. Do you agree? I agree it's a repeat, but it's my same condition that it's not – if they're not building what they say they're building, it's not going back to what it was because that's a BUNA. Okay. That's my – that's been my heartburn from the beginning about it. Can you comment to her comment, sir? If the BDP is recorded this time, it wouldn't revert if they didn't build something. It could remain vacant. They would, however, be limited to the terms of the new BDP, which is all BU1 uses but the one BU2 use of the outdoor storage. Which is an increase from the current BU1A. Well, would it be fair to say a storage facility, whether you're storing clothes or storing boats, is it a storage facility? Oh, you just turned it off. Yes. I agree with the storage, but I also know there's a big difference between what 1A allows and what 1A allows. Okay. That's what my – like I said, and I know that they've done concessions, so if they build this, I – I mean, it'll change the view, but I'm appreciative of what they are to do that. My concern, because I'm negative, is something happens, and now without having to go back through this whole thing, they can build whatever BU1 they want on it without the setbacks. One more? Yes, sir. Billy, it would be true during the site plan review, a lot of this stuff could get thought off, answered, or complained about, or changed. Is that correct? Absolutely. Are we invited to that? Billy, are they? I would think they – You know, generally, site planning is an administrative process. But if they had concerns, would they be notified that it's in for review? Generally, no. No? Have you asked the owners to keep you informed on that? No, I haven't. But would you keep them, Mr. Cole, informed on that? Yes, sir. The owner would be, I will agree. Okay. Is that okay? I mean, that would be a start, right? It is. I agree. It's better than we've had in the past, so thank you. Yes. Okay. All right. I don't have any further questions. Thank you, ma'am. Cole still has some rebuttal time. Go ahead, Commissioner. Is there a possibility of keeping the BU1A with the BDP of the BU2 usage for this? I don't – you know, BU2 – as far as I know, the board's never done that, because, you know, the BU2, it's kind of two classifications up, how you're putting it into use from. So – but I don't know of any – stopping the board from doing that. That sounds a little problematic. No. Yeah. I'm sorry, Commissioner. I think that the application is for the BU1 with the BU2 use of RV and boat storage with the BDP doing the limitations. So if the board was going to keep it at BU1A, then that would be – that would be a different – something different than what has been advertised, and that would be something you would have to take into consideration. So it would be a lesser – lesser request than what – than what has been advertised. Does it have to go back to planning and zoning? You don't have a recommendation from them with the BU1A. Right. Right. That's what I thought. And I do believe – And I do believe that the planning and zoning was good with the request. They were. Okay. We still have some rebuttal time left for the applicant. So, Cole, do you want to address some of these things maybe? Yeah. You know, a couple of them, again, addressing the neighbor's concerns to the south. We did work with the owner to try to back the buildings off more and increase the height of the wall. And in addition to the 8-foot wall, I believe the code requires a 20-foot landscape buffer after the wall as well, which, you know, of course, will meet all the, you know, county code requirements. I also – I'm not positive, but I believe that the code restricts businesses from operating out of there. If not, that's something we could add to the business – or to the BDP to address that concern, where there would be no operating businesses out of there. So I hope we take away some of that concern. Again, we're here – you know, I have met with the neighbors, talked with them on the phone several times, and tried to work through this the best we can with us. And, you know, we believe the BU-1A is the same as the neighbor to the north, so I understand their concerns. So we're trying to kind of meet in the middle there. So we were hoping that with the increased wall height, the landscaping buffers, and the offer of not conducting, you know, an operating business out of there, that that could get us the approval tonight. So with that, I would take any, you know, questions that you all have. Commissioner Goodson. I would move for approval. Motion for approval. Do you – with the – Just as it is, the BDP – Can him continue to work with the residents and make them happy? Okay. The best you can. I can continue to work with them, so I'm not sure I can always make them happy, but we'll try our best. Right. I hear you. Okay. Could I make a friendly amendment to include no businesses operating out of the bays? I honestly don't see – it all sounds so good and so perfect, but if you know anything about a storage facility, are you going to be able to enforce that totally? Because what if a guy brings his lawnmowers there, puts them in storage, picks them up the next morning at 10 o'clock and leaves and cuts grass? Is he operating a business out of there? Can I – for clarification, obviously, there are a lot of these metal buildings where basically individual garage bays are operated, and I suppose your owner is not looking to do that. Otherwise, they would – they'd be going a different route here. And I think that's the concern of the neighbor. So is there – on this point, is there just simply some way that we can say that that's not going to happen? So the way I've seen it done in the past is that the business tax licenses aren't attached to the premises, and that's something that we're fine with. Now, if someone's coming and going throughout the day with stuff, I wouldn't consider that operating their business out of there. To your example, the landscaping, their business is in the people's yard. Now, they may have their equipment stored there, and they're leaving, but that's not where they're conducting their business, in my opinion. Right. So they're not operating a lift in there and impact wrenches and all that kind of stuff. Is that which – I think that's what you're looking for? Correct. Commissioner Goodson, is that – no? Okay. We had – okay, we have a motion for approval with the original BDP. We have a second – I'm sorry, a motion by Commissioner Goodson. We have a second by Commissioner Atkinson. Clerk will call the roll. Commissioner Delaney? Yes. Vice Chair Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Atkinson? Yes. Commissioner Altman? Yes. Chairman Feltner? Yes. And we'll show the item. Thank you. Okay. H-4. Mr. Chair, H-4 and H-5 are companion applications. I'll read them both into the record. We're requesting separate motions on each. Ryan and Sarah Lawhan request a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment 25S.01 to change the future land use map designation from Res 1 to 2.5 to Res 1, application number 25SS0001 in District 1. And H-5 is Ryan and Sarah Lawhan request a zoning classification change from GU and SR with the BDP to R-R-1 with the removal of the BDP, application 25Z-00002 in District 1. Sir, you're recognized. Ryan Lawhan, 155 South Court Avenue. And Sarah Lawhan, 155 South Court Avenue. Okay. Thank you for having us today. Like I said, my name is Ryan. That is my wife, Sarah Lawhan. She's currently pregnant with our two twin boys. We are now five months. We've been working hard, saving for years with the dream of buying property here in Brevard County. I was actually born and raised here, and we're ready to build our first home. We're excited to finally be in the process of making that dream happen. And today, we're asking for a zoning change so we can move forward with building our home. Back in January, we attended a Homeowners Association meeting with the Veronica State Subdivision to explain why this zoning change is necessary for our lot. Everyone was incredibly kind and supportive. They were especially excited that the neighborhood sidewalk would now be 100% complete during the building of the house. In front of you, you have the letters from the President, Vice President, Secretary of HOA supporting this zoning change. Thank you for your time and here for any questions. Okay. Questions for the applicant. We don't have any questions. I don't have other cards, just for the two of you. So, Commissioner Delaney? I would like to move to approve the future land use change from Res 1 2.5 to Res 1. Okay. So, on H-4, we have a motion by Commissioner Delaney. Is there a second? Second. Okay. We have a second by Commissioner Altman. Clerk will call the roll on H-4. Commissioner Delaney? Yes. Vice Chair Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Atkinson? Yes. Commissioner Altman? Yes. Chairman Felder? Yes. We'll show that. 5-0, and then I think we need a separate motion on H-5. Commissioner? I would like to move to approve the change from GU to SR with a BDP to R-R-1. Okay. With the removal of the BDP? Did I say that part? Yeah. I think we have that right with the removal of the BDP. Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Delaney. Is there a second? Second. We have a second by Commissioner Altman. Clerk will call the roll on H-5. Commissioner Delaney? Yes. Vice Chair Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Atkinson? Yes. Commissioner Altman? Yes. Chairman Feltner? Yes. And congratulations. Thank you. Congratulations. Good luck. Yes. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right. Great. Okay. Commissioners, H-6. For H-6, Bawani 2023 LLC requests a conditional use permit for alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption for COP in conjunction with a 3,719-square-foot bar with a restaurant and outdoor patio. Application number 25Z-00004, District 2. The King's Duck Inn. Yes. Returning to Merritt Island. This is exciting. Heck yes. Okay. All right. Don't screw this up. You don't, yeah, we're going to approve this. Mr. Murphy would be really mad at me. Okay. I'll make a motion for approval. All right. And you know what? I'm going to second this one because it's a wonderful place and I'm glad to see that you're bringing it back to life. Okay? So we have a motion by Commissioner Goodson. We have a second by Commissioner Feltner. Clerk will call the roll. Commissioner Delaney? Yes. Vice Chair Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Atkinson? Yes. Commissioner Altman? Yes. Chairman Feltner? Yes. I drove by there today and I look forward to stopping in for lunch sometime in the future, okay? Congratulations. When are you going to be up and running? We are going to be up and running as soon as possible. Mr. Patel, when's your anticipated opening date? May 15th. May 15th. Okay. We're still getting the back patio open. We have a minor site plan that we're doing for the back patio, but the menu is really impressive. We look forward to hosting it all there. How about the drinks? Now we can give it every one. All right. Very, very good. It's on Courtney. So North Merritt Island. So it's a staple of North Merritt Island for many, many years. Yes, sir. Okay. We do have item J1. So let's go to that. J1 is for a waiver request for a wall. They're requesting a waiver of requirements in Section 62-32H2H10 of the Brevard County Code, which requires a six-foot masonry wall and certain zoning classifications that are adjacent to residential zoning to allow for fencing and vegetation along the southern and western property lines. So the waiver request is before the board. Okay. Commissioner Delaney. If nobody has any concerns, I'd like to move to approve the waiver of the wall requirement for C&C Crane Works site plan. Okay. We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Delaney. Is there a second? Second. We have a second by Commissioner Altman. Clerk will call the roll. Commissioner Delaney. Yes. Vice Chair Goodson. Yes. Commissioner Atkinson. Yes. Commissioner Altman. Yes. Chairman Fenton. Yes. We'll show that. Passes 5-0. Thank you very much. We don't have, I think, any cards on the public comments. Commissioners, we're going to go in a board report here real quick. Um, Tad, do you want to say anything in board report? Uh, no board report. Sure. Okay. All right. Uh, Alex. Uh, no report. Anything for us tonight? Okay. Very good. Commissioner Delaney. I do have a short something. Um, today was a big day for, um, my office. We had a moving day. Um, so we are now out of Tom Statham Park and we've moved into the six-story building on the fourth floor. Um, and I just wanted to say a huge thank you to Skip from Facilities and his team. Um, they were incredible. And, um, Kevin from our IT and his team, they were also have been incredible. So I just wanted to say thank you so much to everybody, um, to help me make this campaign promise a reality. And, uh, thank you to the Parks Department for, um, joining with me to let Tom Statham Park go back to the public so that it'll be open for public use again. And, uh, more will come with that when, when it's ready to go. And hopefully everybody will line up to start renting it and using it again. So thank you so much, everybody. Okay. Great. Uh, Commissioner Altman. No record. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Goodson. No, nothing. Commissioner Atkinson. No record. Okay. Um, and I'm going to, uh, follow suit. I will say that I bet on 45 minutes. So I win with that. Thank you, everyone. 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 Brevard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, or the program sponsor and are solely those of the presenter. The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, and the program sponsor hereby expressly disclaim any and all responsibility.