I've used a modified version of Coleman's 8-year rotation (from New Organic Grower) for five seasons, and I can't honestly say I've noticed benefits. What I mean is, it makes sense to rotate crops, but it's hard (at least, for me in my size garden) to actually say, "Oh, this did better, or that wasn't overrun by pests, because of the rotation." I'd have to do little experiments, like growing a few tomatoes in the same spot for a few years, trying two rotations side by side, and so forth, to actually compare results. Meanwhile, I rotate on faith, and everything seems to be doing well!
One thing I notice in your rotation is that you have the tomatoes and potatoes only two years apart. By the rules of thumb, you want to separate that plant family as far as possible, so in an 8-year, you could have them four years apart.
Also, IF peas/beans contribute significant nitrogen that carries over to the next season, then you may want to have them before the brassicas, which are definitely heavy feeders. (I say "if" because in theory they're supposed to, but how they're planted, when they're harvested, how the residue is incorporated and so forth, I'm sure determines the nitrogen contribution, it's not an automatic thing, like, "plant peas, get useful nitrogen carryover." I'm still trying to find answers for this.)
I'll do more reading on rotation this winter, and post back with anything that seems useful and practical.
Mike (Plan Be) recently posted about the thinking behind his own 7-year rotation.
BTW, Amanda, if you're going for 8 years, why not just use or adapt Coleman's, he's already done the R&D and years of field testing?! ;)