Hogan, if you would lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag 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, this is the Planning and Zoning Board slash local planning agency. It's an advisory board which makes recommendations to the county commissioners who will make the final decision on these items. Items on today's agenda will be heard by the county commission on May 1st, 2025. When a motion ends and any kind of a split vote, a roll call vote may be taken to ensure accuracy. As a reminder, each member who makes a motion or a second needs to turn their microphone on so that your voice is on the record. Speakers for public comment on agenda items will be given three minutes. At this time, if any board member has had any ex parte communication regarding any application, please disclose so now. All right, seeing that, I bring it back for a motion for the approval of the P&Z Minutes from March 17, 2025. So moved. Second. Got a motion by Logan, and who was the second from? I'm sorry. We're here in the peanut gallery. Help me with your name. I'm sorry, sir. Rob Brothers. All right, a second by Rob. All those in favor, say aye. I've known you like four years now. I know. I'm still learning here. Did we get that, staff? Okay. Ms. Kim, we're going to go with item H1, then we'll go board. We're going to go to item H4 for our second item. Item H1, please. Item H1, Casabella Development, LLC, being represented by Kim Rezenka. Request to change the zoning classification from BU1A to RU-2-6 under application number 24Z-00064, located in District 4. Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the Planning and Zoning Board. My name is Kim Rezenka. I am with the law firm of Lacey Rezenka in Melbourne, Florida. I'm here on behalf of Casabella Development, LLC, and the contract purchaser to Prima Construction Corp. I'm here today as Ron Levy with Casabella Development, Joe DiPrima, the president of DiPrima Construction, and DeMar Hahn, the vice president of DiPrima Construction, in case you have any questions for them regarding their proposed development. This is a request to rezone five acres from BU1A to RU-2-6 to allow the development of townhomes. I've provided you a nine-page document, most of which is already in your packet, but it's just easier to go through this and not have to try to find your page numbers on your agenda. The first page is the location. As you see, it's on Wickham Road. It is south of a large shopping plaza, north of Casabella Office Condo, west of Wickham Road, across from the post office, across from a three-story, 270-unit apartment complex. And then next to Casabella subdivision, further to the west. This is a parcel. It's page two. I just wanted to show you, that's the Casabella Office Condo. Many people think this property was part of that. It never was. Also, to let you know, there's a tiny little square that's undeveloped. Um, so one of the office pads is vacant. As you can see from page three, that's the Casabella Commercial LLC. I've also provided to you, um, two pages of the plat of Casabella subdivision. And that, it's hard to read, but it does indicate that this lot E is part of the development of Casabella subdivision, and it's up to the developer to do what he wishes with it. It was not intended necessarily for, uh, for commercial development or for housing. It is zoned commercial, though, um, but as you know, houses can go in there as well. Uh, so, in fact, we could do townhomes in BU1 with a mixed-use development, like we talked about at the Merritt Island project I did several months ago. Uh, but this is what they choose to do as townhomes. That has very specific definitions of what you can do with townhomes, the setbacks, the sizes, things like that. If we went with townhomes in a BU1, it's somewhat of a crapshoot as to what you would be getting. Here you'll know exactly what you're getting because the RE2-6 zoning category has definite, um, requirements. I want you to look at page five. You'll see that there is a 50-foot buffer between the single-family homes and what will be townhomes. And that is, uh, tract reserved, owned by the HOA, preserved by the HOA. As you look at the aerial, it has many trees within it. Also, there's going to be at least a 25-foot setback for the townhomes, and they intend to build a concrete wall, just to let you know. Uh, so, there will be a nice buffer there. You'll have, um, the buffers from the setbacks of the individual homes. We have the 50-foot buffer. Then you'll have another buffer. Then you'll have a wall. Then you'll have another subdivision buffer. Then you'll have a 25-foot setback to the townhomes. The townhomes are intended to be 27 by 75 feet. They're going to be two-story garages underneath. Uh, the intended sale price is somewhere around $600,000. And as I said, they'll have two-car garages. This, um, use of townhomes, of residential, single-family attached residential, is a less intense use of what could be on this property. If you look at page 8 and page 9, this is a, uh, traffic analysis statement done by L, by T, uh, sorry, traffic planning and design. And it shows that this will have substantially less trips than could be there if a shopping center was built. If a shopping center was built, it could be 163,350 square feet with a trip rate of 7,127 trips, whereas 30 townhomes will have 216 trips. So this has a much less intense use than could be if it was a shopping center. Also, um, page 9, it shows that the, um, daily volume of this segment of Wickham Road is below capacity. And per the staff report and per this, uh, trip generation report, this will not impact the maximum allowable value of the trips on Wickham Road. This, according to the staff report, is a mixed-use area. There are no concurrency issues, and this will not have a material violation of any comprehensive plan policies. Uh, with that, we would ask, you approve the rezoning from BU-1A to RU-2-6 on these five acres, and we're here to answer any questions. Okay, bringing that back to the board, we got any questions for Ms. Kim? You want to go public first? Not yet. Not yet? No. Okay. I have some questions. Okay, Mr. John. Um, whatever happened to affordable housing? This is a prime candidate for Live Local. It's got enough acreage. It has a lot of incentives attached to it, commercial property, and I'm the chairman of the Affordable Housing Council. So I've got to try and entice the owner to think a little differently. You're only going to put, uh, how many units? We've asked for 30. Right. Um, although the concept plan that's shown you is 20. There is a wetland there. There's no wetland survey yet, so we're not certain if that can be impacted if it's actual. But they will avoid the wetland because it's going to now be residential. If it was commercial, they could impact the wetland. But by going residential, they won't be able to. So, uh, my client isn't in the affordable housing business. Um... He is or isn't? Is not. Is not. And, uh, he's actually, um, he owned the five houses just to the, uh, the five lots. He owns a lot. He owned all five lots just to the, to the west of this parcel. One has been sold, but, uh, De Prima Construction owns those. And if you know what's at Casabella, those homes now are anywhere from $800,000 to $2 million homes in that subdivision. Uh, true, affordable housing could go in commercial, but that's not what the client is asking for. That's not what the owner wanted, nor the contract purchaser. Well, I would be remiss if I didn't ask you. Understood. Okay. Shane. Are you good, Mr. John? So far. We have any other questions from the board to the applicant? All right. And I'm going to hold on one second, Ms. Rosenko. I'm going to take it out to the audience. Is there anyone in the audience want to speak for or against this item? All right. Seeing that, I bring it back to the board. Make a motion to pass. I'll second that motion. Okay. I got you now, Mr. Robb. All right. Ms. Erica, motion to approve and a second by Robb. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Opposed. We had one opposed. That motion, that passed. So item H-4, please. Item H-4, Wayne and Laura Bassett, being represented by Kim Rosenko, request a change in zoning classification from BU-1 to BU-2 under application number 25Z-00005, located in District 1. Good evening, Chairman and members of the Planning and Zoning Board. My name is Kim Rosenko with the law firm of Lacey Rosenko in Melbourne, Florida. I'm here on behalf of the owners, Wayne and Laura Bassett, and the contract purchaser, Home Nation Cocoa, LLC. Representing Home Nation Cocoa, LLC is Nick DeTore, in case you have any questions about the proposed use. The request is to change the zoning on almost two and a half acres from BU-1 to BU-2, and the intent is to have mobile home sales. They currently are operating the site across the street, mobile home sales, and they intend to move this over here. This is a vacant lot. There's a commercial nursery to the north. There's a church to the east, mixed-use office to the south, and again, mobile home sales and offices to the west, and then just to the south of that is the Missile View trailer park. This is a permitted use with conditions in BU-2. According to the staff report, this is a commercial corridor. This does not indicate any use that would impact the levels of service. The staff report indicates there will be performance standards that will have to be abided by. That will come at the site plan stage and at the actual operational stage. Those performance standards are dust, smoke, odor, lighting, vibration, radiation, waste disposal, water quality, water consumption, signs, access, and noise, to name a few. But those are all site plan issues that will be addressed, and those are dealing with the lighting has to stay on the property and things like that. Also, staff indicates there's no material violations of any comprehensive plan policies from this request, and that just does not encroach into any existing residential areas. With that, I would ask that you approve the request for rezoning from BU-1 to BU-2. Okay, one second, Ms. Brzenka. Is there anyone in the audience want to speak for or against this item? Okay, ma'am, if you could come up, and when you get to the podium, if you could get the microphone as close as possible, state your name and address for the record. I'm Sandra Kennedy. I'm an attorney. My address is 3711 Warwick Drive, Cocoa, Florida. My notice states that I was being given notice because my home is within 500 feet of this project, and the notice doesn't state what was just said. They're requesting, on my notice, a change from BU-1 general retail commercial with a binding development plan to BU-1 general retail commercial without a binding development plan. So I'm here already not having the information that I should have to have proper notice and opportunity to object to construction being conducted basically in my backyard. So some of the issues that are very, very important in our area are that we're on a flood plain. There's an aquifer, and the water charges and then pours out down the ridge from the US-1 elevation down to the Indian River Lagoon. It floods Indian River Drive, which is our only way in and out of the neighborhood. So when you concrete over large areas or do anything that impacts the aquifer, you increase the flooding. The development restrictions that I'm aware of, which haven't been furnished to any of us, are a need for a vegetation barrier and a concrete wall. Again, there's a lot of clearing that has been going on. Some of it has been occurring without permits. And this has dramatically increased the sound in the area just in the last few years since I've moved into this neighborhood. So the wall and the vegetation, anything that protects sound is very important. Also, crime. We don't want people just walking right through and then entering the residential neighborhood from the back of this building or this construction. And homeless people who are already on the other side of US-1 just camped out hiding next to the railroad tracks. And there has been evidence that they have crossed over. We don't need that increased. And we also have flooding so bad that the water runs 24-7 through our storm drains, rain or shine. It cannot rain for six months. And that water still floods because that is the impact of the aquifer and the flooding in the area. Also, when there's a hurricane, water runs down my driveway for like two weeks. The last couple of years, it just flows, flows, flows for two weeks. I'm not a public easement for the county to absorb their water. And I've heard it ran for three to six months during Hurricane Irma, I believe it was. So we don't need less development restrictions. We need more in this area. We need to protect this environmentally sensitive area and restrict the amount of the land that gets concreted over. Okay. All right. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Does anyone else want to speak for or against this item? Sir, if you want to come up and get as close as you can to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. I'm Paul Tucker. I'm at 208 Newark Drive. I live directly next to Sandra. I just want to reiterate what she said. We're on a 25-foot DOT easement in the rear of our lawn, which has turned into a highway for people that want to get from US 1 to the river. Unfortunately, the people that are traveling down that highway are not exactly the people you want in your backyard. They're trapped between our subdivision and a church, and we would like to address the water concerns. Any development going on in that area needs to be very sensitive. We do have 24-hour-a-day water running through the DOT easement behind us. The system within the subdivision, I mean, it runs 24-7. I've lived there for seven years, and I've never walked over an inlet that didn't have water running. We live on a coquina ridge. Sandra's house was brought down level in order to be in compliance with the rest of the neighborhood. So that coquina ridge is probably six foot above her grade, and it's constantly running water after a huge storm like a tornado hurricane. So I would like you to address the water concerns, and we need some type of a buffer wall or something that blocks that DOT easement. All right. Excellent. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else want to speak for or against this? Sir, if you could come on up. Same thing. If you'd state your name and address for the record. How you doing? I'm James Stoker. I live at 3711 Warwick Drive, Cocoa, Florida. And so as has already been discussed, I just want to reiterate that this property abuts a residential lot. That's my property. And so the natural resource department requirements, right? We've heard about a buffer, all those protections, right, to make sure that the residential property maintains its residential nature and character, right, and you're not fully exposed to any kind of commercial development. And I want to make sure that that's accounted for in this plan. And then just to echo what's been discussed about the flooding, there are significant water issues in this area. And so any plan that goes forward has to thoroughly assess and make sure that those things don't impact all the properties that are downstream. It is a significant elevation drop, and the water does run right down under our property and all the other properties down beneath us. So that has to be taken into account into any plan that goes forward for this particular lot. I think that's all I've got. All right. Well, thank you, sir. Thank you. Can we get clarification from the notice card on the funding development plan that wasn't mentioned when the lady was? Well, that's going to have to be handled with staff, sir. This is just, we're just planning and zoning here. So, anyone else in the audience want to speak for or against this item? Ms. Kim, if you could come back up. Go ahead, Ms. Trina. So, staff looked into the issue. We do see that the notice went out to say BU1 with a BDP and request BU1 without a BDP. That is incorrect. There is no BDP on this property. And the request is BU2. Thank you. You're welcome. BU2 power. Again, Kim Rizanka on behalf of the Brissettes and the contract purchaser. There was a special use permit on that site, according to the staff report, that was revoked back in 1973. But that's a non-issue at this point. I was unaware of the BDP, so I was waiting for clarification as well. Regarding the flooding, as you all know, development standards will require that they retain all their water, probably will retain more than all their own water, as you know, and that would be a site plan issue. Same with the bufferings. If it's next to residential, they're going to have to have, I think, a Class A buffer, whatever is going to be required. That will be done in a site plan. And regarding blocking the easement, that is the property to the south that's adjacent to that easement. Perhaps when a wall goes up, that will help some of it, because it will, at least people might think that is blocking that easement. But that's nothing that we can take care of. We're not even adjacent, this property, to that easement. So with that, we understand the issues. We know this is a Kena Ridge. We know there are water issues. And they will address that at site plan. And with that, we would ask you to approve this zoning request to be you, too. All right. Mr. Henry. Kim, do we know who the engineer record's going to be? Rick Kern. Oh, yeah? Okay. No. Yeah, I don't know. Sorry, Rick Kern was the last one. Okay. I apologize. If you hold on, just to, MBB Engineering, Bruce Moyer. We're working on a project relatively close by that we've had major discussion. 0.66 miles to the south, I checked this morning. Okay. Yes, sir. We're not going to hash that again. No, sir. Well, now. It's coming. It likely will come back. That's, I had rumors to that. They'll probably be able to handle, the design-wise, they can probably handle most of that water that's generated from this site. But isn't, that water comes further away than... I suspect some of that water's coming from the other side. Yeah. Because I know that's the way the drainage pattern is. And there's a lot of pipes there. There's a lot of easements there. We've tried to vacate some. They won't let us vacate them because they say they're going to have to redo the drainage to the river. But as we've listened to the people, it's been amazing how much they've got a big issue. It's just not this. I don't know about this period of subdivision, but I know the other one, that was like a 1960s subdivision, the Parkchester one. I know that was an old subdivision. Yeah. Older. In the 60s, we didn't care about water. It would take care of itself. Yeah. That's all I had. Chairman? Mr. Jones. Tell me, how many mobile home units are they planning to put on this property? It's going to be a sales facility. I don't know. It's going to be similar to what's across the street because that's what they have now. So if you look at the aerial from across the street and a little bit to the south. Isn't there one further south that also is, and they just kind of have a bunch of stacked around there? It looks pretty ugly. Right. Well, now they'll have a site plan, so they'll have to make it look nice. They'll have to abide by the site plan. They'll have to have travel lanes. They'll have to have distances to move them around. So I don't know exactly. They don't have a site plan yet or a concept plan yet. Okay. We don't review those anyway. But the ones that I've seen in the past usually just have gravel as their road surface rather than paved. Is there any, because of the flooding issues in that area, is there any chance that they would consider doing a permeable type of paving so that they would absorb some of the runoff that they're going to get? Yeah. I don't. Just to help themselves, too. I know enough to be dangerous about the engineering principles on this, but I know gravel is not considered to be pervious anymore. So if we're in an aquifer zone, I think we can only have 40 percent coverage. And I'm just spitballing this from things I've heard from staff in the past. So they're going to do whatever staff tells them to do. They're going to stop whatever flooding is going off their property. They'll, as I said, probably make it better because it's just now a flat level ground. So I'm sure they're going to do it right. Well, as was stated in that other property last month, that they're responsible. Those people were responsible for keeping their runoff on their own property. So this is going to be the same situation here. Yes, sir. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Anyone else have any questions for the applicant? I have a question for staff. All right. Ms. Ruth? Even when everything is done absolutely right and the runoff is whatever policy is followed with the planning and zoning to retain the water on the property, when that, if that could fail, what does that look like and how does it get corrected? That is not a question that I can answer at this time. Again, that is something that will happen during the site plan process, and there's engineering for that. And then Public Works Department would review the drainage plan to make sure it adheres to whatever regulations the county has for them to retain their water on property. Any other questions? Sir, we've already given you a shot. Sorry about that, but we're going to have to move on now. I'm going to need a motion. Sir, I'll make a motion to approve. Item H-4. I'll second it. Okay, we've got a motion by Anna, a second by Erica on item H-4. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passed unanimously. Okay, item H-2. Item H-2, Troy Holdings, LLC. Request a change in zoning classification from BU-1A with an existing BDP to BU-2 with removal of existing BDP with a new BDP applied under application number 25Z-00001, located in District 2. And you must be the applicant. Representative for the applicant, Jim Trauger of Trauger Consulting Engineers. I will keep it short and sweet. I have nothing to add but make myself available for any questions from the board or from the audience. Jim, we're going to need your address, too, for the record. 2210 Front Street, Melbourne, Florida, Suite 204. All right. A little bit to hear about what you're wanting to do. Yes, sir. So this, in a very similar format, came before this board and the commission back in 2023. The binding development plan tied to this never made its rounds to get all the required signatures. Property has been transferred to a new owner. We spoke with staff, and they recommended we just kind of do the dance all over again. So here we are. Same product. Actually, larger setbacks now. But, you know, it made my job easy with the draft version of the binding development plan. It's pretty similar to what staff has looked at before. We're just looking to just do it again and, you know. Well, are you wanting to add outside storage, too? Is that what you're saying? I don't believe there's outside tied to this. Okay. So BU1A to BU2. Correct. So the allowable uses will be just the indoor RV and boat storage for BU2 as well as the allowable uses in BU1. All right. Hold on right there, sir. Is there anyone in the audience want to speak for or against this item? Come back to us first. I'm going to ask them. No, we're good. You can stay put. I would just – no, come on. Come on back. I didn't know. I didn't know if they were lining up behind me. Nobody's wanting to speak, so we're – Yeah. I got a question first. Hold on one second, Mr. I'm sorry. Ma'am, what – Sorry, did you say for or against or just for? If you want to speak either for or against this project. Okay. Mr. Jim, if you could just take a side seat. Ma'am, if you could come up and state your name and address for the record. My name is Maggie Ducek. I live at 70 North Tropical Way. If you notice, that is the south abutment of this land that we're talking about. That is my fence, my backyard, my bedroom window looks right to where I think they're planning on putting not only the RV storage but to get in and out of the storage. So naturally, going from BU 1A and a year and a half ago when they changed it, they changed it from neighborhood community to commercial community, if I got that right. Sorry. So that kind of got away the buffer of residential neighborhood thing, and BU 2 scares me, I have to say. I've lived in that house over 20 years, been to Merritt Island 40 years. You can put anything there. I would not have bought this house 25 years ago if it was zoned BU 2 behind it. And then the other BU 1 uses is another concern for me because if this doesn't happen, then that just basically gives them a free bump from BU 1A to BU 1 without going back to the board. I don't know about you, but my quality of life, you got, I know everything's the noise, sound, verbiage, anything like that, but I don't see how you can have anything within 15, 20 feet, whatever the new setback is, with this degree that's not going to affect my quality of life. Like either outside on my porch or at my bedroom, people opening up bay doors, I don't know. I just, I know it was approved. I wasn't able. I was out of town. So I just wanted to give you my concerns. And I've been through this like in the 20 years. So I have a little pessimistic attitude when people put in BDPs and what they do. So I just thank you for listening. All right. Thank you, ma'am. When did, when did you move in there? I bought it in 2001. And we had a thing with a car wash in 2005, six. I forgot. I missed that. And then this one. Okay. Thank you. Sir, if you'd like to come up and speak also, if you would, state your name and address for the record. My name is Michael McGraw. My address is 60 North Tropical Way. That's six zero. And I'm Maggie's neighbor also. So this is now the third time that we've addressed this property. We were going to be a car wash one day. And you guys passed that. And nothing happened. Then all of a sudden we want to put storage units there. That never happened. The owner sold the property after being upgraded in zoning. So I guess we increased the property value by doing so, which I think is unright. They didn't even show up to sign the upgrade. They sold the property immediately. Not immediately, but they did sell the property without any development. Now we have the prior owner's husband, who's an attorney, representing the new owners who are going to develop this property, supposedly. I'm very concerned that this is becoming a shell game. Let's make it do this. Let's make it do that. Let's get the property zoned as high as we can and increase the value of that property as much as we can before we decide to sell it again. Again, we have a lot of issues in the neighborhood with noise issues. We are fighting the airport and the two-fly training school nonstop. They have no regard for the neighborhood. And I'm not seeing a lot of regard for the neighborhood with these development plans. If we can get a binding development plan, and I was told by the attorney, and I do thank him that he did call me back after calling him. I did have his number because I kept it from the last meeting. But if we can get a binding development plan and at least see what this plan is, I haven't seen anything yet. The attorney said that there was some minor changes to the prior setup of the buildings, but it's our backyard. I've been there for 22 years also. Maggie and I were kind of moved in around the same time, a year later. But I just, I wonder when I'm going to be here next. What's the plan going to be next? What are we going to do with this property? And I think that's what you guys need to look at too. I mean, business is business. And I welcome that. I'm a businessman. I own my own business. Okay. But I abide by code and reg and roofing. You wouldn't believe the amount of code and reg we've got to deal with. So I just want you to look at the history of this property and to consider that when you make your recommendations. And I'd also like to know what is it going to be. That binding development plan is very important to Maggie and I. We want to know that it's not going to flip-flop. I heard the term, well, we'll just get it done to be you too with this development plan and then we'll do what we want when we get it done. I'm going to do what you want when we get it done after the board's approved it or made the recommendation for it. Please consider what we're going to go through. That's all I have. I hope I don't have to see you again in this regard. Lovely people, but three times you're out. Thank you, sir. I appreciate you. Anybody else want to speak for or against this item? Sir, if you could state your name and address for the record. Steve Ducek, 310 Riverside Avenue. Okay. Maggie is my daughter. She, a little history. She bought that house because it was two blocks from the elementary school. So I put up with the buses going back and forth during school year, trying to get into her driveway. It's a hue. So there's no other access into it except for this one tropical way. My concern is I would really like to know what is going to go there. The very first time I heard anybody doing anything back there, there is a 7-Eleven on the corner. We were told they were given an exemption to build that there. The rest of that on the other side is agriculture. There's horses there. I spent half my time going back there cleaning up beer cans, bottles, and stuff with people going back in the back. I helped her put up a privacy fence back there just so she doesn't have to worry. Then they came in and they said, we're going to put a car wash there. And I said, okay. Within a span of four miles, there are six car washes. I said, nobody's going to go there. Oh, it's going to work because it's going to be a 24-hour car wash. I said, are you going to have security? No. Okay. Fencing? No. So I said, okay. But we're going to have a binding development plan that was brought up by the board. So I said, great. So at least we've got something to rely on. Nothing happened. And so I happened to know some people that worked for the county, and I called them and I said, when are they going to start building the car wash? Oh, no. He's not going to build that because he can't afford it. Okay. So we waited and waited. And now we're going to put up a storage place for an RV and boats, which all you have to do is go down four or five blocks, and there's a whole bunch down there by the airport. Now, those are all commercial. So they want to change this site from what it is now, which you can put buildings, you can put offices, you can put all that stuff. But I can just see what, when I was told, two bays with the road down the middle for people to drive in with their RVs and their boats aiming right at my house. Now, to me, as a businessman, that doesn't make a lot of sense to put something you don't need. So I'm going back saying, like he said, what are they trying to do? Are they trying to get this thing to get a higher zoning so they can just say, well, we can't do that, but we'll do this, because you allowed it. I don't mind whatever, but I would like to see the building development, the BDP, written in such a way that if they don't do it, it reverts back to the original one, which when I asked at the last meeting, they said they couldn't tell me they could do that. So I don't know, honestly, what's going to happen. I just watched with her concern of what she's doing. And I'm getting too old for this, and I'm saying, you know, I'm just going to leave and you can have my house, which is away from all this trouble. And when neighbors start objecting, that's not a good sign. So thank you for your time. All right, sir. Thank you. Anybody else want to speak for or against this, because I'm going to close public comment. All right. Public comment's been closed. Sir, if you want to come back up, and does anyone on the board have any questions for the applicant? Can you enlighten us a little bit on what you're willing to undertake on that site? Oh, yes, sir. So kind of was alluded to, there was some minor changes from the last time to this time. We're aware of the residential to the south of us. So the previous packet that came through and was approved had a 16-foot setback. The code requires 15 feet. There was 16 feet of setback from the buildings, the property line. Now we're proposing over 60 feet. So we're listening. You know, we're doing what we can. As well as a wall, buffers, all the bells and whistles that land development requires on our site plans as they go through. There was some discussion about traffic. This is one of, storage is one of the lowest traffic generators known to man. So hopefully that'll be a benefit from what else could be built on this property. And the last gentleman was exactly right. What happens, that's why we're here. The loop didn't get closed, so the zoning reverted back to B1A. If it doesn't happen this time, that's what will happen again. It's our client's intent to move forward with the development. That's why he's paying me to be here. But this is the first step. Maybe the other steps don't come back to this board. But there's other design professionals, before they get involved, you've got to have your zoning right, or they can't send anything in for your staff to review. So that's the step we are in the process right now. Can you do a BDP? Yes, we are doing a BDP. Absolutely. So I have a question, maybe for staff, I guess. But because none of the surrounding area is BU2, right, would this be considered inconsistent with the surrounding area? As you stated, there is no BU2 in this area, in the surrounding area. However, it would be up to the board to determine whether or not this is compatible and consistent with the character of the area. If I may, that BDP does list the only allowable use in BU2 is indoor, boat, and RV storage. Then the rest of the allowable uses are only BU1, which is around the area. Right. So it also states in the BDP, if I understand this correctly, that it's a developer, and then it's also the owner can only use it for such. And then I believe number six in the BDP says that no one else can change this. They can't buy it and flip it and do something different. So it can only be used for this. Let me look at my BDP here. That's a little out of my area of expertise. I'm not going to try. Yeah, but I mean, like, I think this is what people want to know. They want to know, is it going to, you know, are you going, what are we changing here? Right. So even if we were to go against what's consistent with the area, then we're in, the agreement shall be binding and shall inure that the benefit of successors or assigns to the practice and shall run with the subject property unless, I mean, so I think what they want to know is that this is it, and it's not going to change. Because the wording is a little confusing. If you look at number four, the developer slash owner shall limit it to the RV and boat storage as allowed in BU2 zoning district. But the developer can sell it, and it's rezoned. The binding development plan, it's my understanding the binding development plan runs with the property. If it's sold or transferred, it is. And again, the document that's part of this is a draft document. It's after, hopefully, we get your approval or recommendation for approval and approval from the commission. It then goes to your county attorney's office, and they mark it up. Yeah. Got it. And it goes back and forth. So this is the draft version. Okay. So, yeah. So then my only comment would be that it may be inconsistent with the surrounding area. We're introducing new zoning. Okay. Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. Mr. John. Staff, do you have a copy of the old BDP? We do not at this time. Okay. Because it wasn't in our pack either. So I have no idea other than the one paragraph at the bottom of our documents which stipulated part of it. I would like to review that before I make a decision on this. You would like to review the previous? The previous BDP. Approved BDP. That stands as it is now, correct? Because the one that we put together in, I guess, 2023? 2023, correct. There is no approved BDP. It never made it all. It reverted back. It wasn't signed. I understand that. But there was one from before that, correct? Okay. Am I right? No. I'm not sure. I'm trying to remember here because of the configuration of this. It's a strange configuration on the lot. I don't remember an early at the very beginning of a BDP. Hear that? Yeah, they're looking. Sorry. Say that one more time. Did you – I don't remember that this is – I'm trying to remember here from the early days. I don't remember an early BDP. So I actually have it here. It's having – this is the one that's active, right? Yeah. So the one that's currently active, it says it's granted – having granted BU-1A classification for restricted neighborhood retail commercial zoning will not construct or permit the construction and will not undertake or permit gasoline sales accessory to a convenience store or otherwise will not undertake or permit the sales of alcoholic beverages from the property. What's the date on that? What's the date on that? The date on this is 1990. Also, that BDP is only on the small sliver of the parcel 26. It's not on the bigger portion of parcel 8. Wasn't that put in there because of the existing 7-Eleven that's on that corner? They didn't want competition? Yes. Okay. Thought so. But like I said, it's only on a very small portion. No, I understand. It's the one that they would be using for an entrance to the site. Right up against the 7-Eleven. Right. It's not on the parcel 8. Yeah. What's the height going to be of this building? It's going to be single storage. Okay. But that could be 30 feet high. Oh, no. I mean, there'll be. You said you're doing boat storage. Right. Interior, right? So you're going to have to lift them up and put them in dry dock, essentially, right? Yeah. They won't be stacked. I mean, I've done quite a few of these down in the Mico area in North County. I've never seen one of those garage doors more than 12 feet tall. I think you get into a whole other world there. So they're individually set up? It's one building with multiple units in per building. So almost like public storage? Because normally these are usually open racks that they put boats in, and they can stack them. Oh. Or they could have an inside bay, and then they work inside the unit for the whole place. Sure. So these are going to be. Not just individual. Yeah. The intent here is if you personally own a boat or an RV, and you're in a HOA that doesn't allow you to park it in your yard, well, you come bring it here. It's on a licensed trailer. It's not taken off and put on a rack or anything. So essentially, it's a set of garages? That's sure. I mean, that's a comparison. Yes. Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. Mr. Logan. So everything will be indoors, or will anything be parked outdoors, outside of a garage? This is an indoor storage facility. And then I see that with the last BDP, and then looking at now, that it's only for, it seems like a much less invasive, that it's only RVs and boats that can be stored there. To me, that's not that much in and out. If someone's going to store their boats because they're not using it for the winter, that kind of deal. RVs, if they're not going out camping, that kind of deal. So you could have a gas, or not gas station, but say there was talks about car wash. We'll be rotating cars all throughout the day. This is kind of a, hey, let's go park it and leave it until we need it again. If there is going to be something there, commercial, retail, that kind of thing, I think this is kind of a less invasive, I mentioned the height of it and homes being around it. That's the only concern I would have. But if it's one of those where you pull it in, park it type deal, I don't see a problem with that. It's going to be less moving around. That's just my point of view on that aspect. Agreed. It's a very low trip generator. They're usually pretty quiet. Is it? I mean, how many of these garages are you going to have? I mean, I have it on my phone. I don't have an important call right now. Maybe I do. I'm not sure we need to help him. No, I don't want him. I don't want to help him. I want to know what the traffic is going to be because it's a residential neighborhood. And I don't think that it's appropriate in this area to have this thing. There's down the road on Cone Road, you have all the industrial sites, okay? Not major industrial sites. Sean, they've included a plan on it. It says there's 10 units with 10,000 square feet, each unit, not each unit, plus or minus, and then 8,000 plus or minus for another 10 units. There's only going to be 20 units per the plan they turned in. And then they also, the BDP has an eight-foot wall going along the south property line to protect the sound from that. Yes, there's actually less units than that was approved back in 23. I don't think I liked it in 23. But I don't remember. We're trying. I don't remember. Yeah. So, I'm against storage in the county strictly because we're not a storage county. We have more storage facilities here than the city of Houston does, which has 6 million people. And it always bothers me when people come here. It doesn't provide jobs for anybody. It doesn't help the neighborhood so much. And yet, we allow it to happen. And I always object to them because I don't think it's the right thing to do with the land, especially when we have a housing crisis. Understood. Jim, isn't it true that the way it's zoned right now, you can put a shopping center there? I believe the B1A allows for, yeah, that type of strip mall sort of thing. It is a funny site, though, because of the access to it. But, yes, you could put in something, a large trip generator, something noisier. Absolutely. Or it's actually zoned. You can put another daycare there. Or a daycare, something like that. Exactly. Let me assure you, this is the less of all the evils that that particular site can have. I would agree. And the whole, I mean, on one of these maps, it's all red. But also, it's all B1A, B1, B1, BU2, BU2. So I do think it does conform with that whole around that subdivision to the south. And I do think this is a less intrusive aspect that could go there. Can I ask a question just as a clarification point? I don't see anything on the BDP that would indicate as such. But just for clarification, there's no, is there power here? Like, people aren't hooking their RVs up and letting them run for the night? Like, trying to, there's no, like, there's a prohibition. You can't live there. You're not having, and again, with the garage doors, there's not, they're not going to get ready to out to, like, a landscape company. No one's coming in and parking their trailer at the end of the night and then leaving the next day for work. That's correct. There's, there's, that's not allowed by code. There's no dump station. There's, I don't see anything like that. Yes, there's no pump out. There is power in the units because, you know, you charge your batteries, that sort of thing for your RVs and boats. But, but yeah, the, the code is, is very strict that it is intended not to have someone live in these units or use them for a commercial purpose. Like you said, like somebody building surfboards or something, that's not allowed. Thank you. Would this be a 24-7 in and out or certain times? I believe they'd allow the access, you know, 24 hours, yeah. It looks like it's gated. So it'd have a keypad. It'd probably be controlled security-wise. Exactly. I don't see an office on site. So how does that work? Is it by tag or code or something that? Right. It would be like a key fob system. And then we have, you know, there'll be a small, it's required to put like a bathroom and then a little office. But everything's, you know, done online and with only 20 units. Okay. Yeah, it would be like a key fob or a keypad to get in and out of the facility. Thank you. Mr. Henry. I'm going to make a motion that we accept what was submitted today. Second. With the BDP? With the BDP, as illustrated. Second. Okay. We've got a motion by Henry, a second by Logan. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Opposed. Opposed. We have two opposed. All right. Thank you, sir. Item H3. Item H3, Buwana 2023, LLC, request a CUP for alcoholic beverages on-premises consumption, accessory to a bar and restaurant with an outdoor patio under application 24Z-00004, located in District 2. And this went before North Merritt Island, and they approved it unanimously. Okay. Ma'am, could you state your name and address for the record? Yes. My name is Monica Pritchard, and I am with Goldman, Monaghan, Thakar, and Bettine. And I represent Mr. Mahal Patel, who's in the audience, the manager of Buwani 2023, LLC. And you need the address for the firm? Please. Six-Wheeler Drive, Cocoa, Florida. And the zip code is escaping me. Sorry. Well, you're right there. Is there anyone in the audience want to speak for or against this item before we go forward? Okay, ma'am, if you could come up. If you could just step aside, please, there. Good afternoon. My name is Rose Plummer, and I'm here on behalf of the North Merritt Island Homeowners Association. Our address is PO Box 542-372, Merritt Island, Florida, 329-54-2372. Regarding the CUP for the King's Duck Bar and Grill, the North Merritt Island Homeowners Association has no objections. Thank you. Anyone else want to speak for or against this item? I think. All right. Seeing that, then I'm going to close that for public comment. Ma'am, if you could come back up. And probably this guy knows exactly where that place is. Yeah, everybody is really excited about the King's Duck Inn coming back. King's Duck Inn. Yeah, everybody is very excited. I'm guilty, too. I've been there. Yes. So, as you know, it was previously approved in 1971. Unfortunately, it was a COVID victim. It went out of business. And with it going out of business, the CUP expired. Right. And so, Mr. Patel has really put in a lot of work into the property, upgrading it, new fences, completely gutting the inside, making it, you know, beautiful again. And the community is excited. Everybody is ready for King's Duck Inn to come back. It's like a landmark there. Yes. I am excited. And he has a wonderful menu planned. He's intending to return it to its former glory. All right. Seeing that, I bring it back to the board. We got any questions for her, or do we have a motion? I'm going to make a motion only because I'm not going to get into detail. But that is one of our North Barrett Island historical sites. Yes. I understand now it's no longer King's Duck Inn. It's now King's Duck. Is that correct? I think he's intending. You dropped the end. Yeah. That's good. No more sleeping over. I'm going to recommend approval of the CUP. Second. We got a motion by Henry, a second by Logan. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passed unanimously. Good luck, sir. Okay. Item H5. Item H5 and H6 are companion applications. I'll read them in together, but they'll need separate recommendations. So Ryan and Sarah Lawhan request a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment 24S.01 to the future land use designation from Res 1 to 2 1⁄2 acres to Res 1 under application 24S.001, located in District 1. And item H6 is Ryan and Sarah Lawhan request a change in zoning classification from GU and SR with an existing BDP to RR1 with removal of existing BDP under application 25Z.002, located in District 1. Okay, sir, could you state your name and address for the record? Yes, sir. Ryan Lawhan, 155 South Court Avenue. And a little bit about what you're wanting to do. So as you heard, my name is Ryan Lawhan. My wife, Sarah Lawhan, is in the audience. We've been working very well to save up money to purchase this land and build our first home. We're here today going through the process and would like to get our zoning changed so we can continue with our dream of building our first home. We recently found out, and we've been blessed, that my wife is pregnant with our twin boys. She's just now at 19 weeks. In January, my wife and I attended the Homeowner's Association meeting for Veronica's State Subdivision to explain to them why we're needing to get a zoning change for our lot. The response from everybody was very positive, and they were excited because there was a lot to build on the sidewalk and now be 100% complete. We're very excited to build this home, and thank you for your time. All right, I'm going to take it to the audience. Is there anyone in the audience who want to speak for or against this item? That's really good news. Thank you. All right, I'm going to close it for public comment. I'll bring it back to the board. We got any questions for the applicant? I do, Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. John. The parcel to the east of you, on the appraisal district website, it shows no owner. I'm not familiar with that, just the lot that we have. Well, the lot that you have doesn't have access to the road. The lot we put in the center, that's what we're putting two together, that we're going to have a lot of access, and they complete the sidewalk on the side. Again, what I see, staff, you bail me out here. It looks like from the appraisal district, there were two previous parcels. The parcel number. They've been combined under one warranty deed now. Oh, it has? Correct. Because that's not showing up on the appraisal map. Yeah, that you have to talk about. Okay, that's why I'm asking the question. So they now own the entire parcel? Correct. Fine. Okay, I'm good. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Motion to approve. Second. Who did the second? Got a motion by Logan, a second by Anna, Anna, and that's item H5. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Item H5 passed unanimously. Thank you. I don't need a minute. Go away. You got H6. Okay. You're doing really good. Stay put. We don't want to excite your wife over here. Can we just make a motion on H6? He's turning red. Look at that. Aye. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve H6. Unless you need to read it into the right. She's going to need to read it in, correct? You did earlier. I read it in, but I'll read it in again if you'd like. No, we're good. Okay. So I'll make a motion to approve H6. I'll second it. Item H6 got a motion by John, a second by Erica. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Now you can get excited. Good luck with the county commissioner. Thanks. Okay, Mr. Henry, are we going to take a vote on see if we can get paid or not? All right. I've said enough today. I'll go with the 250 you said earlier. Okay. Meeting adjourned. Thank you.