08/05/2024
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH IDEAL GAS 512 Cross Rd, Cocoa, FL
Below is a good 9 page read for those who enjoy technical language.
sent email [email protected] and certified mail February 16, 2024
Attn: Cecil M. Richardson, Brevard County Attorney
Judge Fran Jamieson Way Bldg C
Viera, FL 32940
Regarding: ideal gas project 512 cross rd, cocoa, fl
During exhaustive efforts for a response from Brevard County on the ideal gas project no legal counsel was retained. This is to correct the fact around August 2023 a channel 6 news reporter falsely stated those protesting the project are looking into legal options. The ongoing disregard gives a strong appearance of impropriety. What is the Brevard County legal basis to not extend the common courtesy of an official response to previous credible concerns? The following questions some of which first submitted ten months ago is another opportunity for the county to engage for the sake of public health, safety and welfare and peace which are obligations pursuant to Brevard County law. Most recently repeated complaints were filed on ideal gas employees working without a business tax receipt. Showing up staying all day with a phone in the office. All ignored. Why do county laws not apply to ideal gas and Joann Fayne?
The ideal gas platting review by Tim Craven clearly included dense residences on two sides of the ideal gas project reported the “application indicates the intended use as retail” only and no mention of 60,000 gals of propane storage. If we hypothesis Craven had no knowledge he approved site work for 60,000 gals of propane storage on neighborhood streets. Then does development and platting ever need to know if an application indicating “retail” only, is an adult retail store in a neighborhood? Does development and platting ever need to know the intent of the “retail” being proposed in keeping public safety and to properly apply zoning laws?
Brevard Code Section 62-1543 IU-light industrial zoning classification makes clear activities are to take place within an enclosed building. One purpose is so fire sprinkler systems or other fire prevention systems can be installed. The ideal gas zoning review by Peter Martin approved for light industrial property 512 Cross Rd described the ideal gas project as “indoor/outdoor compressed gas storage area” when he knew by the major site plan bulk “storage tanks” are outdoor only. How did a zoning reviewer know to describe the proposed business use as “compressed gas” when only “retail” and “office” are indicated on the application and forms? Do zoning reviewers ever need to know the specific gas intended on a property in keeping public safety and to comply with zoning code law? What zoning codes did specialist Kristen Champion base her zoning approval for bulk hazardous chemical storage on neighborhood streets?
A fire review first by Michael Bloom then by Doug Carter required the submission of a fire safety analysis called NFPA 58 known for propane safety guidance. Since the engineer of record submitted application describes “retail” only and his site plan labeling “storage tanks” not propane tanks. How did the fire review know to require NFPA 58 for propane safety since propane was not applied for? If planning and development did know; why did it elect to not require the identify the principle use propane?
Since NFPA 58 propane safety guidance does not determine bulk propane tank separation distance to homes. How did 11 county agencies make a determination bulk propane storage is safe for operations on neighborhood streets? What was factored?
County spokesman Don Walker stated to channel 6 news 11 agencies approved the ideal gas project. When a very uncommon out of ordinary bulk fire and explosion hazard propane storage is not specified in any application process. How did 11 agencies know the specific use they were approving to ensure any code compliance? Were any agencies told the true intended use of propane off record before approving? If so why only off the record?
Brevard Code Section 62-2262 Fire and explosions hazards, makes clear the storage of flammable liquids producing flammable or explosive vapors is permitted on IU-1 heavy industrial zoning classification “only”. Propane or LPG liquefied petroleum gas is stored, transported and transferred as liquid. LPG produces flammable and explosive vapors inside all storage tanks and vapors are produced daily during every manual transfer, uncontrolled leaks and accidents. Why was a bulk stored hazardous liquid producing explosive vapors approved on light industrial zoning in violation of 62-2262?
Brevard Code Section 62-1102 Definitions of rules of construction makes clear the definition of heavy industry includes “petroleum products”. Why was an explosive petroleum use nationally accredited as heavy industry approved on light industrial classification property 512 Cross Rd in violation of 62-1102?
Since this project's above ground fire and explosion hazard having a half mile explosion hazard radius legally qualifies for light industry zoned property without doubts. Then can the county name another bulk quantity fire and explosion hazard ti approved on light industrial property zoning? Can the county name another neighborhood street it required posting two 3ft x 4ft hazardous chemical placards?
Brevard code law Section 62-1103 Interpretations; conflicting provisions, states: “The provisions of this article shall be held to be the minimum requirements adopted for the promotion of the general public health, safety and welfare of the people of the county. In the event of conflicting provisions, the more restrictive provisions of this article or any other regulations adopted by the county shall apply.” No matter what interpretation the county used. Why did county disobey “more restrictive provisions” of 62-1102 and 62-2262 and others in article 62 that “shall apply”?
Brevard Code Section 62-1544 Heavy industrial IU-1 and 62-1543 light industrial IU and 62-1540 Industrial uses permitted with conditions and conditional uses all make clear industry uses are “controlled by” code sections 62-2251 through 62-2271. Therefore, making section 62-2262 fire and explosion hazards a controlling code section for this project. Why did the county approve the ideal gas project a fire and explosion heavy industry use hazardous chemical on light industrial zoning in violation of Section 62-1544, 62-1543, 62-1540 and 62-1102?
Jeff Ball of planning and development told channel 6 news the ideal gas project did not require a CUP-conditional use permit which subjects an applicant to section 62-1301 Review of use ROU, but then stated in a different email “The chart (62-1540) identifies “industry” as permitted with conditions Pc in the IU zoning classification”. The chart Ball referred to makes clear no “heavy industry” “use” may be Pc on IU-light industrial classification property and all heavy industry uses always require a conditional use permit CUP. Why did Ball not inform channel 6 news he had claimed the project is Pc?
The engineer of record and application details did not identify propane. Yet, Jeff Ball emailed “a propane distribution facility would be considered the same use as a “gas distribution facility””. In section 62-1102 under “industry means”. Ball's use of quotations “a gas distribution facility” is not in code, but “2212-natural gas distribution above ground facilities” is. Why did Ball exclude the word “natural” and change the code language from natural gas distribution to only “gas distribution” when the business operation is propane? When the EOR did not apply for propane How did Ball know it?
“2212-Natural gas distribution above ground facilities”, the true language in 62-1102 Ball eluded to in Brevard code, are facilities having federal and state regulations indisputably “considered” to be a public utility. Numerous times county code states land uses must comply with federal and state regulation and all other regulations and laws when there are. A natural gas (utility) distribution facility is never approved in a neighborhood and none exist with that proximity. Removing the word “natural” from natural gas in the code to consider propane a same use does not negate the truth both are petroleum fire and explosion heavy use hazards. Why did county approve bulk propane on neighborhood streets if it believes propane is the same use as natural gas utility that's regulatory authorities never allow in neighborhoods?
Industry facility uses differ. A natural gas utility is distributed by underground pipeline and never bulk stored. Propane cannot be distributed or bulk stored underground. Natural gas is never pumped by hose to trucks or tanks like propane. Very large compressor stations housed inside very large buildings deliver natural gas. Propane is delivered by trucks. Bulk propane is above ground unlike natural gas and gasoline filling stations. Propane contains more BTUs than natural gas so propane burns hotter and explosions radiate farther. Gasoline is safe venting to the atmosphere, but when propane escapes its container workers are trained to evacuate first, then call 911 later. Why did Ball state (above grnd) propane is considered the same use as “industry means” 2212-natural gas above ground facility when natural gas is always delivered underground?
Anyone can know outdoor bulk propane is a fire and explosion hazard. Why did engineer of record, county engineers, P&D, zoning, platting, 512 Cross Rd property owner, and applicant ideal gas never identify propane storage as the proposed use?
There are no other fire and explosion hazards within miles of Cross Rd or on light industrial zoning. The business at 510 Cross Rd., Aero Paradise is specialized indoor aviation truck repair having very light truck traffic on Cross Rd. Recently purchased, truck traffic increased to about one truck delivery/week. The aviation trucks are only trailered in and emptied of fuel before transported. There is no on site bulk flammable or explosive storage in violation of light industrial zoning at 510 Cross Rd. Diesel storage on Cidco Rd is not an explosion hazard and if an accidental spill would never reach residential. Railroad tankers on Cidco contain food product, not explosive chemicals. The SpaceX facility on Cidco Rd one mile from Cross Rd on City of Cocoa zoning does not store nor process bulk quantities of any explosion hazardous chemical. Why has some county employees and ideal gas associates seemingly in collusion falsely claimed all these hazards exist on or near Cross Rd?
Accident caused uncontrolled bulk propane fires cannot be extinguished using water or foam suppression. The fire flow requirements by Brevard County fire marshall and a new hydrant is all but useless proven by documented propane disasters. These facts are made evident in a collection of real life propane disasters at the youtube channel titled , plus other credible sources. Fire marshall Doug Carter emailed a resident he “will make sure it's safe”. Fire fighters will never arrive at an uncontrolled bulk propane fire until after the accident. What fire suppression system did Brevard County require the ideal gas project to construct to “make sure” 60,000 gallons or even 30,000 gallons of bulk propane storage is safe as is required for indoor light industrial zoning in close proximity to thinly sided wood structured mobile homes? A human activated emergency shut off switch does not guarantee safety if it can't be activated in an uncontrolled accident or a terrorist initiated bulk quantities fire.
If the emergency shutoff is activated that means an uncontrolled accidental leak occurred. With other light industry and neighborhood street traffic accessing the project with cigarette smokers and fire works providing sources of ignition. How is the leaked propane suppressed? All safety plans factor a worse case scenario. Meaning all 60,000gals escaped containers. The elderly, disabled and parents of a half dozen children including special needs children on abutting streets want to know what protects them from a catastrophe? What if this occurs after hours and non one engages the shut off?
The EPA-Environmental Protection Agency's “Risk Management Program (RMP) Guidance for Propane Storage Facilities” says bulk tank quantities of stored propane side by side are considered the same process. The explosion hazard end point for the approved ideal gas project is one half mile. Why did Brevard County and the professional engineer elect to not inform or meet with over 1,000 residents and workers within the EPA determined ½ mile hazard zone? And to not conduct any study for public health, safety and welfare?
Is it Brevard county's position the EPA RMP risk management program's unaudited “retail” exemption given to propane distributors applies to the ideal gas bulk propane facility located on neighborhood streets? If so, then does the county believe bulk stored propane proposed just as close to a school should be RMP exempt?
The current ideal gas bulk propane storage in St. Augustine, FL sits on over 30 acres owned by ideal gas and its parent companies in a sparse industrial park. An ideal gas owner Michael Siegel stated the 1.5 acre Cross Rd property on neighborhood streets is “a perfect fit”. Did 11 Brevard agencies elect to not require ideal gas to notice the public in a half mile explosion hazard zone and approve the project because all determined the Cross Rd neighborhood street is a perfect fit for bulk quantities of propane?
The current Brevard County Attorney was Melbourne city attorney in 2020 and experienced the same type bulk propane distributor Sam's Gas application for land use. The application process ended when neighbors protested the project would be too close to homes. Did attorney Cecil M. Richardson, now Brevard county attorney advise Melbourne city of quasi judicial issues for Sam's Gas?
The Sam's Gas project separation distance to homes was two to three times farther than the ideal gas project is to homes. The ideal gas planning and zoning administrative process (twice) listed private residential Vanguard Estates zoning as “road” and Missile View Trailer Park residences as light industry, not residences. When Cross Rd residences are two to three times closer than the Sam's Gas proposed project was to residences; why did Brevard not seek public concerns as would be precedent for explosion hazards?
Why did multiple county records and agency reviewers such as engineering, zoning, platting, fire, building, and others elect to not identify the true nature of residential surrounding Cross Rd? Why have inspectors Nick Dees, John Connelly and others driven by close proximity homes and not alerted the county of false project descriptions? Should construction by phasing be used to conceal hazardous chemicals? Why was a study conducted to preserve the life of gopher tortoise', but none to preserve human life?
In 2015 when serving on Titusville City council Rita Pritchett voted to approve a CUP conditional use permit for a LNG (liquefied natural gas) project on a property classification M2 designated by Titusville for heavy industry uses not intended to be near residential. Beginning 2017 Pritchett became Brevard County district 1 commissioner. It's certain county commissioners are well informed of new land development in their districts. Especially one of such unusual occurrence bulk propane on neighborhood streets. When Pritchett knew a bulk storage petroleum applicant on 60 acres of heavy industry zoning requires a CUP. Why did she then support an even more volatile outdoor fire and explosion hazardous petroleum chemical use bulk propane storage on 1.5 acre light classification zoning at 512 Cross Rd without a CUP?
The Titusville LNG heavy use project was proposed on heavy industry zoned property with no homes within a 1/4 mile and approximately 10x farther to homes than the ideal gas project on Cross Rd is to homes. Approximately, 200 residences are within a quarter mile of the ideal gas project and many within 200 to 300 feet. Anyone can know this is why 512 correctly existed for light industrial uses for decades. Why did Pritchett not represent citizens with a motion to notify residences of a more volatile hazardous chemical 10x closer to Cross Rd homes than her approval for an LNG project with no homes within a ¼ mile? Or not motion to contact the disabled close to a dangerous hazard? Or not instruct the applicant and its experts to make contact as she participated with the LNG project? How is Pritchett acquainted with 512 property owner Joann Fayne? Should property owners like Fayne identify a hazardous chemical use on their land?
After the ideal gas construction began in April 2023 and after initiating contact to Rita Pritchett. She emailed she was having a meeting to hear public concerns. When replying to know when and where? She did not respond. No resident was invited. Why didn't Pritchett respond with a time and place of a public meeting she stated she would schedule? Why was this not scheduled at first application in 2020?
Did Brevard Board of Commissioners vote to approve the heavy industry use of bulk storage propane on Cross Rd?
Brevard County spokesman Don Walker stated to WKMG channel 6 news “planning and development (Jeff Ball) and fire safety (Doug Carter) looked into residents concerns and found the project supporting documents are code compliant”. How are documents code compliant when for one county twice recorded a false zoning classification to the south of the project to be “road” and to the east to be industry, when they both are residential?
CCEI the ideal gas hired PE professional engineer's major site plan did not identify the project's proposed use bulk storage of fire and explosion hazardous chemical propane in front page fire notes or general notes. The NPGA National Propane and Gas Association instructors teach a safety analysis includes population data and homes to be submitted by engineers. Why did county engineers and fire marshall determine the ideal gas engineer didn't need to identify propane and not submit population data?
On a phone call with fire marshall Doug Carter, Robert Cunningham specifically stated “the county is not addressing our concerns”. When spokesman Don Walker said fire safety looked into residents concerns. What effort did Carter make to seek all residents concerns? Did he visit residents? What's the list and what were the answers?
Additionally, when did Brevard County fire department conduct or participate in 30,000 gallon uncontrolled bulk storage propane fire training when there is no such training? It's publicized one Texas University conducts small controlled non explosion non life threatening propane fire training where manual valves can be shutoff to extinguish fires under controlled conditions. Fact, uncontrolled bulk propane accident fires cannot be extinguished. Fact, tank relieve valves can increase the risk of explosion. Fact, for these reasons fire fighters keep a safe distance waiting for bulk propane storage to burn empty or blow up, whichever comes first. When did Carter address the concern (as claimed by Walker) that an uncontrolled bulk storage propane fire cannot be extinguished and county fire fighters will stay at a safe distance waiting for propane quantities to burn out or explode, B.L.E.V.E.? Where in county code is this code compliant and safe next to thinly sided wood structured mobile homes?
When did Doug Carter address and Brevard County study, Cross Rd area neighborhoods concerns that mobile homes inside ¼ mile and inside 250ft are thinly sided wood structures susceptible to a fire from bulk quantities of an explosive hazardous chemical that fire fighters cannot extinguish? Insurance concerns? Property market concerns? Degenerative life impacts? A 2014 LNG plant explosion noted at the 2015 Titusville LNG project public meeting described a metal tank piece rocketed 900ft. Propane explosions radiate farther than LNG due to LNG's low temperature almost 300 degrees below zero. A propane blast is closer to a detonation occurring near the speed of sound creating a shock wave as evident in video of the 2008 Toronto propane B.L.E.V.E.
The Florida state office licensing propane distributors requires a $1 million dollar insurance policy. Since bulk propane distribution is never approved on neighborhood streets until Brevard did it. When did Brevard county address the public concern the ideal gas insurance coverage is insufficient for hundreds of homes in an EPA half mile explosion hazard zone? It's notable, this is difficult for the county to address when residences were concealed from the planning and development administrative approval process.
With an established industry precedent of locating the heavy industry use propane in industrial park settings and Brevard's own code laws restricting heavy use propane to IU-1 heavy industry “only”. Why did Doug Carter and Terry Talbert approve bulk propane storage “tank site plan” when driving on neighborhood streets to get to it?
The county approved the ideal gas major site plan for a “NEW OFFICE BLDG”. Then county approved the engineer's revision for a change in sqft and to a “MODULAR OFFICE BUILDING”, but no revision of “NEW” construction. Why did the county allow ideal gas to set up a 17 year old commercial trailer on compacted dirt foundation when the adjacent subdivision and trailer park mobile homes are concrete foundations?
Brevard County Code Enforcement investigates zoning violation complaints. Why did CE not investigate two credible zoning complaints submitted on the ideal gas project? Why did CE not refer credible complaints to appropriate agencies when it was appropriate and only saved complaints?
All ideal gas requested records from its 2020 proposal to May 2023 were provided via email link, free! A subsequent request for all remaining records is invoiced at $77.00. These development/construction records names are listed online and could be made viewable online easily for public view, but are not. Additionally, when email records are requested the cost increases to almost $1,500.00. Will the county provide these emails for free to alleviate any appearance of impropriety by the county on the ideal gas project?
The ideal gas project proposed to add a maximum four employees to the Brevard County work force where there is no indication to relocate to Brevard. What economic benefit was determined by the county, to out way the bulk chemical fire and explosion hazard to p***c health, safety and welfare and peace of over 1000 residents in an EPA determined worse case scenario ½ mile explosion zone and more in an evacuation zone?
Why did the Brevard County attorney refuse a response to the signature petition dated October 2023? Will Brevard officials site just 1 code for principle land use compliance?
Reply required,
See attached signatures
