Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP & Z Board Packet for August 23, 2006 City of Cape Canaveral PLANNING & ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL ANNEX 111 POLK AVENUE AUGUST 23, 2006 7:30 P.M. Call to Order Roll Call NEW BUSINESS 2. Discussion Re: Storage of Liquefied Petroleum Products. OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURN Pursuant to Section 286.1015, F.S., the City hereby advises the public that: If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Planning and Zoning Board with respect to any matter rendered at this meeting, that person will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose that person may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or admission into evidence of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law. This meeting may include the attendance of one or more members of the Cape Canaveral City Council, Board of Adjustment, Code Enforcement and/or Community Appearance Board who mayor may not participate in Board discussions held at this public meeting. Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the City Clerk's office at 868-1221, 48 hours in advance of the meeting. 105 Polk Avenue . Post Office Box 326 . Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1220 . SUNCOM: 982-1220 · FAX: (321) 868-1248 www.myflorida.com/cape · e-mail: ccapecanaveral@cfl.rr.com PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES JUL Y 12, 2006 A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on July 12, 2006, at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Board Chairperson Bea McNeely called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The Secretary called the roll. All persons giving testimony were sworn in by Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney. MEMBERS PRESENT Bea McNeely Chairperson Lamar Russell Vice Chairperson John Fredrickson Donald Dunn Harry Pearson John Johanson 1 st Alternate OTHERS PRESENT Susan Chapman Secretary Todd Peetz Assistant City Attorney Rocky Randels Mayor Robert Hoag Mayor Pro T em Todd Morley Building Official John Johanson declared a conflict of interest on the last two agenda items. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Approval of Meetinq Minutes: June 14.2006. Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by John Fredrickson, to approve the meeting minutes of June 14, 2006. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 2. Recommendation to the Board of Ad;ustment Re: Special Exception Reouest No. 06-05 to Allow Storaoe of Liquefied Petroleum Products in the M-1 Zoning District. Sections 11 & 14. Township 24 South. Ranoe 37 East, Parcels 15 & 271 \ 8817 N. Atlantic Avenue - Crai E. Smith Desi nated A ent for Coastal Terminals, LLC, Petitioner. Chairperson McNeely read the agenda item for the record. Todd Peetz, City Planner, advised that the applicant withdrew the request from the agenda. Chairperson McNeely voiced her opinion that the property owners should be re-notified. Brief discussion followed. Motion by John Fredrickson, seconded by Donald Dunn, to require the applicant to re- notify the property owners. Discussion followed. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, advised that she needed to research whether the Board has a legal authority to require the applicant to re-notify the property owners. Motion by Donald Dunn, seconded by Lamar Russell, to withdraw the motion. By consensus, the Board members agreed. Discussion followed. Todd Peetz, City Planner, explained the notification process. ! I \I) I I I Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes July 12, 2006 Page 2 Lamar Russell questioned if the applicant gave a good reason to postpone the request. He voiced his opinion that it may be a tactic played by the applicant to confuse the residents. City staff advised that there was no reason received by the applicant. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, advised that technically a motion to postpone is not required. She advised that she will research the notification requirement and report back to staff. Discussion continued. Mark Morris, resident of Solana Lakes, advised that over half of the Solana Lakes residents are not in the area this time of year. He advised that the proposed expansion was within 150 feet of his front door. He advised that only owners within 300 feet received notification. Todd Morley, Building Official, advised that the notification requirement is 500 feet. Discussion followed. Todd Peetz, City Planner, advised that the names and addresses were provided by the Brevard County Property Appraiser's office. The Board members reviewed the submitted map of properties and verified that the map included all property owners within 500 feet. Discussion continued. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, advised that the City can only make the applicant pay what the code requires, unless the applicant voluntarily agrees. She verified that the public has the right to speak at any public meeting. Discussion continued regarding the notification process and requirements. The Honorable Mayor Randels advised that the City staff notified over 100 people that this agenda item was withdrawn from the agenda. Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by Donald Dunn, that item #2 be removed from the agenda; and the applicant be required to re-apply and re-notify all the adjacent property owners, including all owners of common properties. Discussion followed. By consensus, the Board agreed that the motion be withdrawn. Discussion followed. Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by Harry Pearson, to place a discussion item on the next agenda on how to proceed on the legal points of notification and re-application for this item. Discussion followed. Todd Morley, Building Official, advised that he spoke with Craig Smith last Friday and he said that he is willing to re-notify the property owners. A citizen voiced his opinion that if the applicant did not follow protocol, then he should be required to start the process over. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. After all the other agenda items were heard and acted on Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, advised that additional information was provided to her by staff and she had the opportunity to research the notification requirements. Since it was 10:00, by consensus, the Board members agreed to extend the meeting time until 10:15. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney explained that the notification to the property owners is a courtesy notice by code, and the City can not require the applicant to re-notify the owners. She further explained that the applicant can willingly re-notify the property owners and pay for the legal advertisement. Susan Chapman, Board Secretary, advised that in an effort to notify the property owners of the applicant's request, notices were placed in the City Hall lobby, City Hall Annex, on the City web-site, and a legal ad posted in the newspaper, that was published this meeting date, advising the public that this item was withdrawn from the agenda by the applicant and rescheduled for August 9th. Discussion followed. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, requested that the Board agree to allow staff to continue encouraging the applicant to re-notify the property owners and hear the request on August 9th. cD Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes July 12, 2006 Page 3 Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by Donald Dunn, to withdraw the previous motion and remove the discussion item from the next meeting agenda. Vote on the motion carried by a (4) to (1) majority vote, with members voting as follows: Donald Dunn, for; John Fredrickson, against; Bea McNeely, for; Harry Pearson, for; and Lamar Russell, for. 3. Recommendation to the Board of Adiustment Re: Special Exception Request No. 06-04 to Allow Outside Storaqe of Recreational Vehicles. Trailers and Trailerable Items in the C-2 Zoninq District. Section 15. Township 24 South. Ranqe 37 East. West Portion of Parcel 760. (200 W. Central Boulevard) - Ahmad and Abulqhasem Nasaipour. Petitioners. Todd Peetz, City Planner, advised that this agenda item was postponed at the last meeting, for additional information. He described the property location, and verified that the additiorial iriformation requested by the Board was received. He read the checklist for the record. The Board members reviewed the submitted landscape and screening plan. Chairperson McNeely commented that some of the existing outside storage facilities in the city were unlovely. She requested the applicant provide a list of how many plants would be planted, what kind of plants, and how many. John Fredrickson questioned if the city planned to install sidewalks along the property. The Honorable Mayor Randels responded that the area was not part of the planned sidewalks. He commented that the boat storage facility would not be placed in the setback anyhow. Vice Chairperson Russell pointed out that outside storage facilities have buffering requirements all the way around the area (on all sides). Todd Peetz, City Planner, read the buffering requirements for the record, and noted that the fence along the road right of way could riot exceed 4 f1. in height. Mr. Nasajpour, the Petitioner, commented that there is a need for boat storage. He advised that a 6 ft. high chain link fence will be installed on the east side, and a 4 f1. high chain link fence on the road frontage and along the sides that are within the 25 f1. setback; and two drive thru gates would also be installed. The Board members reviewed and discussed the placement of the two proposed gates. Mr. Botts, the potential lessee, outlined from a resubmitted drawing, the various areas where Oak and Palm Trees would be planted; the lighting plan; placement of the gates and fencing; number of parking spaces and how they would be marked; and access points. He verified that there would be 54 or 55 parking spaces, no on site maintenance, and no fish cleaning. Discussion followed. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, verified that there is sufficient representation of the property area for this request. \j) Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes July 12, 2006 Page 4 Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by Harry Pearson, to recommend approval of the Special Exception Request No. 06-04 to the Board of Adjustment, with the following conditions: . Security fence on all sides. . Screening on all sides composed of greenery on the outside of the fence. . All boats shall be on licensed movable trailers. . Lighting shall meet all code requirements. . All parking places shall be designated with lasting markers. . The number of parking spaces is limited to 54 and must meet all code requirements. . Maintenance and repair is prohibited. Discussion followed. By consensus, the Board members agreed to all the recommended conditions. Discussion followed. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. Vice Chairperson Russell reiterated the conditions to the applicant, and explained that if any of the conditions are violated the special exception may be revoked. 4. Recommendation to City Council Re: Site Plan Approval for an Office Building and Mini-Storaqe Buildinq, 400 Imperial Blvd - Arthur Berqer. Applicant. . TQd.~LEe_e.tz, CLty Planner, gave an overview of the profl0sed site plaIT; He advisecHhat staff reviewed the site plan and recommended approval. The Board members reviewed the site plan and landscape plan. Arthur Berger, Applicant, advised that he will meet all code requirements. Discussion was held regarding the types of trees selected and the city code requirements. Discussion was held regarding stormwater retention and run off. Arthur Berger advised that the property owner has agreed to work with the city on stormwater improvements along the Canaveral River which abuts the property. He noted that the site plan approval included a future building footprint. He advised that the property owner is aware that he will need to come in with a new site plan for the future building and site. Motion by Donald Dunn, seconded by Harry Pearson, to recommend approval of the site plan. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. G) Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes July 12, 2006 Page 5 5. Recommendation to City Council Re: Final Replat of Vii/agio Townhomes - ReDlat of Lots 1 , 2 and 3. Block 1. Avon by the Sea Subdivision - M'ashinaton Avenue) - Ron Wallen. Applicant. Todd Peetz, City Planner, advised that the project was previously named Casa Bonita. He gave an overview of the final replat, and noted that the project was almost completed. He advised that staff had reviewed the final replat and had no comments. David Welsch, property owner, answered the Board members various questions. Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by Donald Dunn, to recommend approval of the final replat. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 6. Recommendation to City Council Re: Preliminary Replat of Laws Townhomes. _ Lot 5. Block 69. Avon by the Sea. (Lincoln Avenue) - James E. Moraan. Applicant. Todd Peetz, City Planner, gave an overview of the preliminary replat. He advised that Todd Morley, Building Official, spoke with the applicant about the project prior to the moratorium, and since the project is considered a work in progress, the applicant can go forward with the project without being effected by the moratorium. He noted that the property has been utilized as residential. Discussion was held regarding the comment from the Public Works Director regarding easements. Todd Peetz verified that all the easements are shown on the preliminary replat. Motion by Lamar Russell, seconded by John Fredrickson, to recommend approval of the preliminary replat. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 10:12 p.m. Bea McNeely, Chairperson Susan L. Chapman, Secretary @ Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 8/23/06 AGENDA Heading Discussion Item 2 No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Discussion - Special Exception for storage ofliquefied petroleum products DEPT./DMSION: Building Department Requested Action: Discuss the storage of liquefied petroleum products which is listed as a Special Exception in the M-I District. Summary Explanation & Background: Due to recent concerns regarding the requested Special Exception of a petroleum storage facility, City Council has requested the Planning & Zoning Board to discuss the requirements of a Special Exception for petroleum storage facilities. This may require further evaluation and consideration. Exhibits Attached: A) Section 110-354 - Special exceptions permissible by Board of Adjustments. City Planner's Office Department \0 DIVISION 6. M-l LIGHT INDUSTRlAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT D... Page 1 of6 DIVISION 6. M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT* *Cross references: Sign regulations in the M-1light industrial and research and development district, 9 94-99. Sec. 110-351. Intent. The requirements for the M-1 light industrial and research and development district are intended to apply to an area located in close proximity to transportation facilities and which can serve light manufacturing, research and development, distribution and other industrial functions. Restrictions in this division are intended to minimize adverse influences of the industrial activities. All principal uses permitted in this zone shall be contained in an enclosed structure. All buildings in this district shallbe considered in the fire district, as per the definition in section 110-1, and built in conformance with the rules and regulations of fire districts. (Code 1981, 9638.01) Sec. 110-352. Principal uses and structures. In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, the following uses and structures are permitted, provided any use or group of uses that are developed, either separately or, if developed as a unit with certain site improvements, shared in common, meet requirements of article IX of this chapter: (1) General offices, studios, clinics, laboratories, data processing and similar uses. (2) Engineering, laboratory, scientific and research instrumentation and associated uses. (3) Manufacturing of: a. Instruments for controlling, measuring and indicating physical characteristics. b. Optical instruments and lenses. c. Surgical, medical and dental instruments and supplies. d. Ophthalmic goods. e. Watches, clocks, clockwork-operated devices and parts. f. Photographic equipment and supplies. g. Jewelry, silverware, plated ware. h. Musical instruments and parts. i. Toys, amusements, sporting and athletic goods. j. Radio, TV, phonograph and electronics instruments and parts. k. Pens, pencils and other office and artist materials. cY http://library3.municode.comlmcc/Doc View /1264 2/1 /252/2 70/27 6 8/16/2006 DIVISION 6. M-l LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT D... Page 2 of6 I. Costume jewelry, costume novelties, buttons and notions. m. Other similar uses. (4) Ministorage and storage garages. (5) Paint and body shops. (6) Motor vehicle repair shops. (7) Adult entertainment establishments and sexually oriented businesses, providing it complies with the following provisions: a. Definitions. Where applicable, words or phrases used in this subsection (7) shall be defined according to chapter 10, article IV of the Cape Canaveral City Code. b. Prohibited locations. Notwithstanding any other provision of the zoning ordinance of the city, no person shall cause or permit the establishment of an adult entertainment establishment or sexually oriented business within 1,000 feet of another such establishment or within 1,000 feet of any pre-existing religious institution, public park, public library, or any residentially zoned district (including, but not limited to, R-1, R-2, R-3) or area designated residential on the city's comprehensive plan future land use map. No personshall cause or permit the establishment of an adult entertainment establishment or sexually oriented business within 2,500 feet of an educational institution. No person shall cause or permit the establishment of a public park, public library, residential land use, or religious institution within 1,000 feet, or an educational institution within 2,500 feet, of an existing adult entertainment establishment or sexually oriented business. This provision shall also apply to adult entertainment establishments, sexually oriented businesses, religious institutions, public parks, public libraries, educational institutions and areas zoned or designated on a Comprehensive Plan for residential use that lie outside of the city. c. Permissible locations. Notwithstanding any other provisions of the zoning ordinance of the city, except those contained in subparagraph b., prohibited locations, above, adult entertainment establishments and sexually oriented businesses shall only be allowed in the M-1 zoning district. d. Measurement of distance. The distance between any two adult entertainment establishments or sexually oriented businesses shall be measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures, from the closest exterior structural wall of each such establishment. The distance between any adult entertainment establishment or sexually oriented business and any residentially zoned or designated land, religious institution, public park, public library or educational institution shall be measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures, from the closest exterior structural wall of the adult entertainment establishment or sexually oriented business to the nearest boundary of the area zoned or designated on the comprehensive plan for residential use, or nearest property boundary of any religious institution, public library, public park or educational institution. e. Reserved. f. Variance. Upon written application duly filed with the city, the city council, may grant a variance, with or without conditions and additional safeguards, to the distance requirements of subparagraph b. above if it finds: 1. That the proposed use will not be contrary to the public interest, detrimental to the public welfare, or injunous to nearby properties, an@ http://libra:ry3.municode.com/rncc/DocView/12642/1/252/2 70/276 8/1612006 DIVISION 6. M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT D... Page 3 of6 that the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance will be observed; 2. That all applicable provisions of this subsection and the city sexually oriented business and adult entertainment establishment code will be observed; 3. That the proposed use will not be contrary to any adopted land use plan; 4 That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, building or proposed business which are not generally applicable to other lands, buildings, or adult entertainment or sexually oriented businesses. 5. That the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the subject land and building for the intended purpose; and 6. That the variance does not confer upon the applicant any special privilege. (8) Vocational schools and colleges. (9) Fireworks sales facilities subject to the following distance requirements: a. They shall be at least 1,000 feet from any pre-existing fireworks sales facilities; b. They shall be at least 1,000 feet from any pre-existing residential use or property designated residential on the city's comprehensive plan future land use map and/or official zoning map; c. The distance shall be measured as the shortest linear distance between the property line of the proposed fireworks sales facility and any pre-existing fireworks sales facilities or any pre-existing residential use or property designated residential on the city's comprehensive plan future land use map and/or official zoning map. (Code 1981, S 638.03; Ord. No. 1-96, S 1,1-30-96; Ord. No. 17-96, S 4,10-1-96; Ord. No. 5-99, S 1, 9- 7-99; Ord. No. 02-2004, S 2,3-2-04; Ord. No. 08-2004, S 2, 5-4-04; Ord. No. 13-2004, S 4, 7-20-04) Sec. 110-353. Accessory uses and structures. In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, accessory uses and structures shall be permitted as follows: (1) Retail sales of products manufactured upon the premises. (2) Customary accessory uses of one or more of the principal uses, clearly incidental and subordinate to the principal use, in keeping with the light industrial and research and development character of the district. (Code 1981, S 638.05) Sec. 110-354. Special exceptions permissible by board of adjustment. (a) In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, after public notice and hearing, the board of adjustment may permit special exceptions which are compatible to permitted uses and which are able to meet the minimum requirements and performance c9 http://Iibrary3.municode.com/mcclDocView /12642/1/252/270/276 8/16/2006 DIVISION 6. M-l LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT D... Page 4 of6 standards as set forth in this zoning district. (b) The board of adjustment may adjust setbacks and provisions of section 110-566 as deemed necessary and appropriate in granting a special exception. (c) Special exceptions may be granted for the following: (1) Outside storage, as provided in section 110-566. (2) Freight handling facilities; transportation terminals. (3) Temporary security faciiities, subject to annual review. (4) Service stations, subject to the provisions designated in division 5 of this article for the C-1 district. (5) Veterinary hospitals and clinics, subject to the provisions designated in division 5 of this article for the C-1 district. *' (6) Storage of liquefied petroleum products, provided that all such uses comply with the . ; standards set out in the National Fire Protection Association, Fire Prevention Code. . Above ground storage of liquefied petroleum products in excess of 3,000 gallons shall be in an established fire district. (7) Recycling activities for the collection of nonhazardous materials, provided that all storage of such materials shall be in approved structures, containers or trailers. (8) Radio and TV studios. (9) Shopping centers, provided the shopping center is on a minimum ten-acre plot and has a minimum of 75,000 square feet of interior space under the roof. All shopping centers shall be built in conformance with the criteria for the classification of shopping centers as set forth in the building code adopted in section 82-31. (10) Public utility equipment; uses and rights-of-way essential to serve the neighborhood in which it is located. (11) Reserved. (12) Permanent security living facilities, subject to an annual review and the following: a. Maximum size not to exceed 800 square feet. b. Security personnel only; no children allowed. c. Facility to be used exclusively for security purposes. (13) Restaurants. (14) Public buildings. (15) Telecommunications towers, subject to the provisions of section 110-482. (16) Conveyor systems for purposes of moving aggregate and other materials, subject to the following: a. Conveyor systems must be connected and adjacent to Port Canaveral. b. Conveyor systems crossing the setback must be constructed in a north-south direction, perpendicular to Port Canaveral. c. Conveyor systems must be completely enclosed where located within a setback. d. Conveyor systems shall not exceed 30 feet in height, where located within a setba ck. G9 http://library3.municode.eom/mee/DoeView/12642/ 1/252/270/276 8/16/2006 DIVISION 6. M-l LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT D... Page 5 of6 e. Conveyor systems in the setbacks shall not be located within 750 feet from any other existing or approved conveyor system(s). This measurement shall be drawn as a straight line connecting the conveyor systems. (Code 1981,9638.07; Ord. No. 13-95,91,9-19-95; Ord. No. 1-96,93,1-30-97; Ord. No. 8-97, 9 1, 9- 2-97; Ord. No. 16-2005, S 2,10-4-05) Cross references: Adult entertainment, S 10-86 et seq. Sec. 110-355. Prohibited uses and structures. In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, the following uses and structures are prohibited: (1) All uses not specifically or provisionally permitted in this division and uses not in keeping with the light industrial and research and development character of the district. (2) Any use deemed objectionable by the standards established in section 110-466 et seq. (Code 1981,9638.09) Sec. 110-356. Area and dimensions. In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, the area and dimensions shall be as follows: (1) Minimum lot area shall be 10,000 square feet. (2) Minimum lot width shall be 75 feet. (3) Minimum lot depth shall be 100 feet. (4) Maximum lot coverage shall be 50 percent. (5) Minimum floor area shall be 300 square feet. (6) The maximum height of all buildings constructed within the M-1 zoning district shall be 45 feet. (Code 1981,9638.11; Ord. No. 18-96, S 2, 9-3-96) Sec. 110-357. Minimum setbacks. (a) In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, the minimum setbacks required shall be as follows: (1) Front, 25 feet. (See subsection (b) of this section.) (2) Side (interior lot line), 15 feet, except where industrial property abuts a residential district, in which case the minimum side interior lot shall be 25 feet. (3) Side (corner lot line), 25 feet. (4) Rear, 15 feet, except where industrial property abuts a residential district, in which case the minimum rear yard requirement shall be 25 feet. (5) Public or private street, 25 feet. C0 http://library3.municode.com/rncclDocView/12642/1/252/2 70/2 7 6 8/16/2006 DIVISIUN 6. M-I LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT D... Page 60f6 (b) See section 110-536 for special setbacks. (Code 1981, ~ 638.11) Sec. 110-358. Landscaping, screening and parking. In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, landscaping, screening and parking shall be as provided in article IX of this chapter. (Code 1981, ~ 638.13) Sec. 110-359. Performance standards. In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, performance standards shall be as provided in section 110-466 et seq. (Code 1981, ~ 638.15) Sec. 110-360. Parking and loading. In the M-1 light industrial and research and development district, offstreet parking shall be as provided in section 110-491 et seq. and offstreet loading shall be as provided in section 110-506 at seq. (Code 1981, ch. 638.17) Sees. 110-361--110-370. Reserved. ciJ http://1ibrary3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/12642/1I252/270/276 8/16/2006 Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 8/23/06 AGENDA Heading Proposed Ordinance Item 3 No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance for Nonconfonning Uses and Structures DEPT./DMSION: Building Department Requested Action: Review and recommend to City Council proposed ordinance to amend Chapter 110-191 through 110-201, zoning, ofthe nonconforming uses and structures. Summary Explanation & Background: Proposed ordinance is based on a joint workshop with the Planning and Zoning and City Council. The City Attorney has prepared the proposed changes to Chapter 110-191 through 110-201. These proposed changes reflect the discussion at the joint workshops. Exhibits Attached: A) Proposed Ordinance City Planner's Office Department @) J DRAYI' August 16, 2006 ORDINANCE NO. -2006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 110, ZONING, OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES; PROVIDING FOR INTENT; PROVIDING FOR CONTINUANCE AND REGULATION OFLA WFUL NON CONFORMITIES UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL PERMITS BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CONTINUANCE OF SOME NON CONFORMITIES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE TERl\1INA TED WHEN CIRCUMST ANCESDEMONSTRA TE THAT THE OVERALL COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC POLICY OBJECTIVES OF THE CITY WILL BE PROMOTED AND ENHANCED; I~ROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCORPORATION INTO THE CODE; SEVERABILITY; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City is granted the authority, under Section 2(b), Article VIII, of the State Constitution, to exercise any power for municipal purposes, except when expressly prohibited by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning and Zoning Board, as part of a comprehensive review of the City's Code of Ordinances, has reviewed Chapter 110, Article V, regarding nonconformities, and determined on March 7 and 21, 2006, that revisions are required to clarify this article; and WHEREAS, the City recognizes the interests of property owners in the continuation of otherwise lawful uses and stmctures prior to the adoption of the City Code or lawfully permitted under the City Code, but which would be prohibited, regulated or restricted under the terms of the current City Code or subsequent amendments thereto; and WHEREAS, the City desires a clear, concise and uniform regulation regarding the continuation of lawful nonconforming uses and stmctures unless otherwise more specifically regulated under the City Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, hereby finds this Ordinance to be in the best interests ofthe public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Cape Canaveral. City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. - -2006 Page I of 15 Q) <' "~;- DRAFT August 16, 2006 BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, as follows: Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are hereby fully incorporated herein by this reference as legislative findings and the intent and purpose of the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral. Section 2. Code Amendment. Chapter 110 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, is hereby amended as follows (underlined type indicates additions and !ltJ::ikC.Otlt type indicates deletions, while asterisks (* * *) indicate a deletion from this Ordinance of text existing in Chapter 110. It is intended that the text in Chapter 110 denoted by the asterisks and set forth in this Ordinance shall remain lillchangedfrom the language existing prior to adoption of this Ordinance): CHAPTER 110. ZONING *** ARTICLE V. NONCONFORMITIES Sec. 110-191. Intent; rules of interpretation; buildin2 and fire codes; definitions. (a) Intent. This article is intended to permit the continuation of those lots, structures, uses, characteristics of use, or combinations thereof, which were lawful before thepassa2e of the City Code or which at one time had been lawfully permitted under the City Code, but which would be prohibited, re2Ulated or restricted under the terms of the current City Code or future amendments thereto. This article is desi2lled to provide standards and guidelines for the control and manaf!ement of nonconformin2 uses and non-complyin2 buildin2s and structures, especially in regulating changes in the use ofland or in the buildin2S or structures, includin2 quality, volume or intensity. location, ownership or tenancy, accessory and incidental uses, extension. enlargement. replacement, or any other change in characteristic. It is the intent of this article to pennit these nonconformities and non-compliances to continue until they are removed thromd1 discontinuance, abandonment or amortization, but not to encourage their continuation unless otherwise authorized under this article either expressly or by special permit. Such nonconforming uses and structures are declared by this article to be incompatible with penni tted uses in the zoning districts involved unless the City Council issues a specia I penl1it based upon evidence that special circumstances exist in accordance with the staIlcbrds set forth in this article. It is further the intent of this article that nonconfonl1ing uses and stmctures shall not be enlarged upon, expanded, increased or extended, nor be used as grounds for adding other stmctures or uses prohibited elsewhere in the same zoning district unless othenvise provided by special permit under this article. City ofCapt; Canaveral Ordinance No. -2006 Page 2 of IS ~ DRAFT August 16, 2006 Within the distliets est,lblished by this ehaptcl 01 subsequent all1e,ndnlcnt~ theI" e.xist 10t5, StlUCtUld, placement of StluctUICS, use,s ofland and stwctmc5 and Ch<,uActellstks of use ~hich 99e:IC liH~ful pliO! to enactment of the: oldinanee nom ~hieh this section is delivcd or amendment, but \C\ hieh V\ ould be prohibitcd, Icgulate,d 01 lestlietcd und,,! the. tew1S of this ehapt"l 01 subseqUGllt amendment. It is the: intent of this chapteI to PC!mit thcse nonconfOlnlities to cOlllinue, but 110t to encoUlage theil continuance,. StKh nOllconfounities ale Je,cIaled ineul1l1JatibL \C\ itL pCIlnittcd lots, 51::1 uctUlCS, placement of stluctl.1lGS, tISCS A11d chMactGl~sties of use-in applie,1blc dishicb. It is fulthel the intent of this chapte.l that noneollf01Il1ities shall1\ot-be-ns~d 'IS glOunds fOl adding, oth('1 stwetUlcs o! uscs plohibited cls(,>'Vhclc in the !,<l1l1e distIict. (b) Rule~s far inf!.:I.!zretation. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted as authorization for, or approval of: the continuation of any illegal use of a building, structure or land or illegal structure or building that was in violation of any ordinance in effect at the time of the passage of this article or any amendments thereto. The casual, intermittent, temporary or illegal use ofland, building or struchlfe or construction of an unlawful structure shall not be a basis to establish the existence of a nonconforming use or structure. A lawful building permit issued for any building or structure prior to the enactment of this article, the construction of which is in confonnity with approved site plans, if applicable, and building plans shall be deemed nonconforming under this article if the building or structure is built in full compliance with the City Code as it existed at the time of the issuance of the building permit. In the event there is a conf1ict with the provisions of this article and a specific amortization provision requirin g the removal or modification of a nonconforming structure or discontinuance of a nonconfollning use of land, the provision which requires the nonconfonnity to come into compliance with the current City Code the earliest shall apply. Any building'" ltich-is-madc llOliconfoi 111il1g by vii tLte of this ehaptc! shall be. allowed to he replaced, if i~troyed-;-ttJthe-$amc .<:tandalds that it ~as pIioI to the. adoption of thi~ chaptcr (Septemhcr-6;-+983-}--This-srraIl also include those; plOjccts which ale. yet to be ~hich,!pp+ic-atiou 1'01 site plan approval haS b(,ell111ad" fJl~O! to adoption oft11i5 chapteI ancHcrr-whicha-bttildillg pelmit was obtained bcfulC [ebluM, 28, 1984. Ifa rebui1ding;5 I tqui1Cd, aHcff01"t,:;hall be 111adc, vvhCI(' PlaeticdbIc, to confoll11 to the exi~6ng zoning 01 dinance-:- (c) Building ami fire cpds;,s. ?~~provision contained in this article, or elsewhere in the City Code, shall nullify, void, ilbrogate or supercede any requirement contained in a building or fire code that is duly enacted bv law. AlllloIKonfoHllillg lots of 1 eCOId as vf ScptcmbCl 6, 1983, sh,dl be "IlO\ved-to-bCLtScd--irrconstI ucting stwctule5 that hav(, been destIoy~d. The rebuilt stmeturc-wiHbe-rebtmta:rr10Se-aS Plactieabk to the original building and shall male cveI] c.ffult to e0I1[ol111 to thc-cxistillg Lonilrg oldinance. (d) Definition.]. As U5cd in this article, the following words shall have the meaning ascribed unless the context clearlv indicates otherwise: of C"pc Canaveral ()rc!in:lncc No -- -2006 Pape 3 of 15 0) , DRAFT August 16, 2006 ill Destroved or destruction shall mean damage by any means, except by vandalism or other crim inal or tortious act by someone other than the property owner, such that the cost to repair or reconstruct the structure exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the fair market value of the structure at the time of destruction, as established by the Brevard Countv Property Appraiser or by a licensed appraiser, whichever is greater. (2) Lot o(record shall mean a lot which is part of a subdivision recorded in the official record books of Brevard County, Florida, or a parcel of land described by metes and bounds legal description, the description of which has been recorded in the official record books of Brevard County, Florida, and complies with the subdivision of land regulations of the City. ill Noncon/imlljJJK_(2-r Noncon(ormity shall mean any lot, structure, use ofIand or structure, or characteristic of any use or structure which was lawful at the time of subdivision, construction, or commencement, as the case may be, which over time no longer complies with the City Code or other applicable law due to a subsequent change of the City Code or other law. Thi& chapter shall not be. constl Ll\:,d to allow ro1 the cdcnsioll 01 cnbrgemcnt of a noncorllo1Ul;ug lot 01 building but is meldy intwdcd to aHow-the-rebttilifing of stmctUlCS after the lCsult of a cata.s1iophc in as neal a silIlilar f,islric11aspracticdb1e:- (4) Stntctural !/)r{terials shall mean any part, material or assembly of a building or structure which affects the safety of such building or structure and/or which supports any dead or designed live load and the removal of which part, material or assembly could cause, or be expected to cause, all or any portion to collapse or fail. Sec. 110-192. Mobile home parks and single-family mobile home districts. (a) Mobile homc parks and single-family mobile home districts in existence on October 28,1975, shall be pennitted, provided the number of spaces shall not exceed those licensed or previously platted to such mobile home parks or districts on that date and provided further that such mobile home parks shall not exceed the limits of property also on that date under unity of title and shall be inlccordance with state law, (b) Removal and instalLllion of a mobile home unit shall be done only after a pennit is issued for this purpose by the building official. Sec. 110-193. Continuance of Nonconforming structures. The lawful use of a nonconforrning structure may be continued subject to the folIowinJ;!; provisions: Clty of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No, - -2006 Page40f 15 0) .J , DRAFT August 16, 2006 ill No such structure may be enlarged or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity; (Q} Any structure or portion thereof may be altered to decrease its nonconformity: if} Should such structure be destroyed, it shall not be repaired or reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of the City Code; and fill Should such structure be moved for any reason for any distance whatsoever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations of the zoning district in which it is located after it is moved. Whele a la~ful stmetwc c,{ists at the effective date of adoption 01 am,cudmellt of the oldinahGC Lam ~hich this sectiol) is-dcrivcd-that could not be built undel tlh5 ehaptc1 because of lcsftictions 011 alca, lot CO\>Cragc, kight, setback 01 OtllC1 chaIactelistics of the. ~t~ual11C 01 its location on the lot, such structwe m:\ybv continucd, so long as itlemains othel~isc lawfully ~ubjcct to the fvllo ~ i~lg. (1) Such stmcturc lllc'y llot be clllarged 01 altelcd ill a way ~l1ich increases its nonconf01mity, but aIly "trnctUle 01 pOltioll thelcof may be altclcd to dtcLc,Me its nonconful mi ty, (2) Should sllch 5tl uctllrcbcdestIoycd by <lIlJ mcans tv all extent ofmole than 50 pelCG1lt of its fail malket value ctt 11me of destlUction, it shall not be lCcollstmcted, except in confuIlllity with this chapter.- (3) Should such stlUcturc be moved for any rcason fOI any distance whatc\'Cl, it shall theleaftel COllfolm to the legnbtiol1s of the distlict in which it is located afrol it is mOved. (4) Whele it law rul d"dling stlUeture, located on a single lot of lecold, exis~ at the e[recti vC datc of adoption 0.1 ,1l11cndment of the ordinancc fiom which this section i.s dGlived that could not be built undel thi:; cllaptcI, such 5tJ uetUl c may be repaired, enl<ugcd, extended, rebuilt, l~GOl1stj lletcd 01 ~tl uctnr<1!1y ,tltel cd, pI ovidcd that sctback dilllcusioll5, maximum lot covclagc, build11!g setback-lines dud otbCl lcquilCl1lellt5 oftlle additionalstluctwe COllfol1u to the lcgulatioll$ for the district in ,,,hieh such lotls located. AllY additional constmction to an existing stJUetlllc that clluu,khcs OIl setback lequilclllcllts llluSt COufOHl1 to t1~c setback IcqullcmcIlts of the zouil1g disit ict. Ally legally established CllelOacrul1Cnt 011 setback requirements llliry be lcpai I ,"d~1"ebuilt, lee01l5tl ucted 01 5tl ucturally altel cd, but not c.nlatged 01 cxtended, plO, idcd th~encroachiljg lJ01tloll of the stwctme i5 an intcgIal part of the stmetule. Sec. 110-194. Continuance ofNolh'onforming uses ofland. City ofCap~ Canaveral Ordinance No, -2006 Page 5 of ] 5 @ , DRAFT August 16,2006 A nonconfonning use lawfullv existing at the time ofthe enactment of the City Code or any subsequent amendment thereto may be continued subject to the following provisions: ill No such nonconfonning use shall be enlarged or increased, nor extended to occupy a greater area ofland than was occupied at the adoption or subsequent amendment of the City Code; unless such use is changed to a use pennitted in the district in which such use is located: @ No such nonconforming use shall be moved in whole or in part to any other portion of the lot or parcel occupied by such use at the adoption or subsequent amendment of the City Code; if} No additional structures which do not confonn to the requirements of the City Code shall be erected in connection with such nonconfonning use ofland. In any zoning di~t!iet, at thc~cfLeti" c date of adoption 01 amendment of the oldillan<:,(. from wh~(.h this seetioll is dC1i.cd, whcle Lhvful us.., o[land exists that is made 110 10ngG1 pClmi55~ble unde1 th" old~llallcc f10111 which this section is dui \l cJ, as enactcd 01 amende.d, and w he1c such use in.ol.e.s no indi.idual ~tltlctU1e "';th ,l IcplaceIJ1ent cost exceeding $2,500.00, such use ma, be continued, 50 long as it le.maiu1> oth^Crn~jsc lawful, subje-ct to the follOwing. (1) No such noneollfolinmg use shall be cnlarged, increased 01 extended to ocetlpy " gte-atGI alea of Idnd than \'Y '\:loccnpicd at the.- efkcti \i c date. of adoption or amendment of the ordinancc fl Olli ~\i hieh this SCCttOli is dCl i ,cd, unless such use- is changed to a use pCInlitted in the distlict in whie.h sucbmc is locate.d. (2) No such llol1conf01L11w6~tlSC shall be rlio,ed in whole 01 in part to an} other portion of thc lot or p'11ccl oceupiedbysuch use at the effccti" date of adoption 01 amcndme.nt of the oldinal"c flom which tllis:;ection-1s dClived. (3) If any SLIch non'vllformins U15e onand cca15CS fOI an)' leMon fOI a pc!~od ofmon.. than 90 c0ll5ecuti, c d,iYS, any sul.~quent u~c of SLICh I,md 15haII confOrm to the sections spc.c.ified by th~5 dl<iptel L'l tile. distl ictinwh1-ch-such land is located. (4) No additional structnrcwhich docs liOt (,on[01111 to this chapter shall be elected in COIHhA.t;on \l\l itli such hOllconfonning use of lalld. Sec. 110-195. Nonconforming uses 0 tructures or of structures and premises in combination;. chaDl!e of use. If a lawf1J! use involving indi\iil.1J:i! stnlChIreS, or of stnlChIreS and premises in combination, exists at the adoption or subsequent 'l~Ildment of the City Code, that would not be allowed in the Cily uf Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. ,2006 Page 6 of 15 @ ) DRAFf August 16, 2006 zoning district under the terms of the City Code, the lawful use may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following provisiom: ill No existing structure devoted to a use not permitted by the City Code in the district in which it is located shall be enlarged, extended, constructed, reconstructed, moved or structurally altered, except in changin,g the use of the structure to a use permitted in the district in which it is located: {Q} Any nonconforming use may be extended throughout any parts of a building which were mani festly arranged or designed for such use at the time of adoption or amendment of this articlc but no such use shall be extended to occupy any land outside such building; if) Any structure, or structure and land in combination, in or on which a nonconforming use is superseded by a pernlitled use, shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the district in which such structure is located, and the nonconfonning use may not thereafter be resumed; and @ Where nonconforming~lse status applies to a structure and premises in combination, removal or destruction ofth; structure shall eliminate the nonconforming status of the land. If ala,,,, futusein v 01 v iug iudi\idudl stlUctUICS 01 of stlUctures and premises in combination, with a 1 (.placc!l1C1lt cost 0[$2,500.00 01 male pCl iudi vidual 5tl uetulc, exists at th" duai ve dat, of adoption 01 amendment of th" ordln,mcc flOll! v-.hieh this section is delived that ~ould Hot be allowed in tll" district under this dnpter;-thc lawfu1-t15C may be eOlltinued, 50 long as it remains otheH~i5e lawful, MI/;ject to the foHcnving:- (1) No existing 5tWCtLl1C devoted to a use not pC11l~tted by this chapter ill. the disttiet in wh;eh it is-tocatcd shall-bc-cnLngcd, eAtcndcd, eonsl1Lleted, 1 eeOl1st1uc.ted, !hoved 01 stlLletuutlty-attercd, except h-changing the use of the stlUctUlC to a use pelmitted in the district ill v\l,ieh it is Iveatect;- (2) Ally 110ltConfolluing use-may be extended th! oughout any parts of a building IN hic.h WC1C 1ll<111ifestty-,uli1llgcd onksigllcd for such use at tIle tim" of adoption 01 amGudmel1t of thc ordilLtnce-frOllt which thi';;e(;tion is dCli vcd, but no such use shall be extGlldcd to occup, auy Ialld outside such bujJding:- (3) Al Iy-stntCttll e 01 s!! Llehrre-and land in COl11binatioll, ill 01 011 which a noneOnfOllll.ing use is wpcrseded by a PCII1Iitted lIse, shall tllCleaftel eOldDllll to the regulatiolls fur the distJict in ~\hicl, such stlUcttTe-1S located, alld 1lo11confolllling use mal' not thc.lcaft"r be resullled. (4) \Vhcrra lIoncoll[Ol1uing-me of a stI uctu! C 01 sti uctUI c and pleJ:rlis(,s in combination is discontinued orab,mdol1"d+::rr $~i v e months 01 for 18 months dtuillg any three- City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. - -2006 Page 7 of 15 (~ , .) DRAFT August 16,2006 yeal peliod, except whell goveilUllCllt action impedes aeecss to the plemises, the, stwetu!e Ot stltleture and premises in combination shall not thClcaftel be used, except in eor..rolUlc'1nCe ~ith the legulations of the disttiet in ~h~eh it is located. (5) "Vhe! e nonconfolming usc status applies to a stI uetUl c and pI GllhSCS in conlbination, lClllO\!al 01 dcstwet;ol1 Oftl,C stJucture shall clill,inate the, nOllcollfoIHhuo ;:,tatus anhe land. The telm "dcstlUctioll," ro! the pU! pose of this subsection, meam damage, to all '-'A tent of mOle than 50 pClccnt of the fair market value at timc of destwction. (G) The following schedule shall be followed in twuinating nonconfOrming use of struCtUl es 01 of stlUetures dnd-prcmises, ex.eept fOl residential USGS, such telIni:nal;on pG,~od shall eOlllulcnce August 4, J 9Tl~ TADLI: INSET. +tIne Assessod Valuation Allowance ofImplo v enlCllts Teuuinatioll in Years $ 1,000.00 $ 2, 199-:-9f}-' -?- 2,500.00 4,999A}0- .w- 5,000.00 9,999,00 :W- 10,000.00 24,999.00- W- 25,000.00 19,J}99AJO- 40- 50,000.00 over ,w... (7) Any-nc,,, or additiold-u$c ,\ hieh is llOnCOltlOlllling shall not bc pCl1l:tlttcd. WfBJ Notwithstanding subparagraphs (a) through (d) of this section ffl, the board of adjustment may grant a change of use (used in conjunction with a nonconforming structure and premises) from one nonconforming use to another nonconforming use which is equally or more restrictive, equally or less intensive, and equally or more compatible with the surrounding area. A petition fo~changc shdIl be SUblllittcd to the building official and shall conla;1i 0, L,c subjcct to the fullo" ing, ill bn applieation for_:J change of use shall be submitted to the building official and shall include the Lollowing: a. The property owner's name and address, a recorded deed indicating City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No, -- -2006 Page 8 of 15 @ <,' DRAFT August 16, 2006 ownership and the legal description of the property. b. An affidavit executed before a notary public under penalty of peIjury attesting to the existing use and the date the use was established. c. A sealed, as-built surveyor a scaled drawing of the site along with a notarized affidavit that the drawing is true and correct. Such survey shall show the dimensions, height, number of units and square footage of all structures, setback of all structures, and distances between structures. d. An application fee as established by the city council to be set forth in appendix B to the zoning code. e. Clear and convincing evidence that demonstrates that the proposed nonconforming use (used in conjunction with a nonconforming structure and premises) is as equally or more restrictive, equally or less intensive, and equally or more compatible with the surrounding area than the present nonconforming use. ill The due process and notice provisions set forth in section 110-28 shall apply to all applications for change of use. ruf: All proposed applications for change of use shall be submitted to the planning and zoning board for i~study and written recommendation to the board of adjustment. Such proposal shall be submitted at least 14 days prior to the planning and zoning board meeting at which it is to be considered. illg.- Upon receipt oflhe planning and zoning board's recommendation, the board of adjustment shall issu~ a written order certifying whether or not the proposed nonconforming use is e(J..!Jally or more restrictive, equally or less intensive, and equally or more compaiible than the present nonconforming use. The board of adjustment shall consider the written recommendation of the planning and zoning board as part of the official record when hearing an application for change of use. ill A1I change of ~,(: recommendations and final orders shall be based on the following relevant factor:. including, but not limited to, whether the requested use: a. uses less :,pace; has fewer (:mplovees; c. requirc;Jc:ss parking; of Cape Canaveral 'dinance No. - -2006 Page 9 of ] 5 @ . -' DRAFf August 16, 2006 d. creates less traffic; e. has fewer deliveries; f. creates less noise; g. creates a better benefit to the surrounding area than the previous use; h. is more acceptable with the existing and future use or make up of the area; 1. is more nonnally found in a similar neighborhood; or 1 creates less of an impact than the present nonconforming use. h. Notice shall be-gi,cn at ka5t 15 days in ad,allee o[th" public healing. The ownel of the propclt,:tfor .'vhich apPlOval is soug,ht or his agent shall be llvtificd by cCJtified mail. Notice orwch hcaring sllali be posted on the ploperty ro1 ~bich the change of 11011confowlrng-usc is sought and at the city hall. I. A courtesy noticc may be mailed to thG plOpGlty 0\'\>11(;15 of1ccord within a radius of 500 feet, picf'tidcd;-htnvc, CJ, failule to mail OlleGei ,G such court.::s, noticc shall not affect any action OJ plocccdillgS taken undel this 31 tide. J. Any pal tj llldyappcal in pClson 01 bG leprcsented by an atto11lc, at the public hcalillg. k. Tlte bOald o[crdjUStl!1Cllt shall-makc \'\>rittcn findings (CItifying c.ompliance in the salllC manllCl t!lahs plO,id.:d fo! in scction 110-47 of this "bapter. In addition to the critcli3 contL1inecl in SeGtiol1 110-47, the bOaJd of adjustment shall also dcte1111inc if thG plOpuc.;cd-nonconfolll1iug use is more restricti ,c, less intensi yG and more-c-om]Jatiblc or i11i'lOp1iate than the prescnt 1l0ncollfoHulng USG and in its detcllnilldtion the bo,lrd of adju:StI11cllt ma) GOnsideI, including, but not limitGd to, the follov'ving. Will the-r..:quested use ei) use less space, eii) hayG fewel employees, (iii) I eqrrire-:les5 paJknrg;- (i,) (1 catc less tI affiG, (v) Ira, e fc~ Ci deli y GI~GS, (~i) (" Gate less noise, ( ,ii) (1 cLttt:l-lJCttCl bwefit to sU1lounding alGa than pIGy ious use, (v iii) be nlOI e d( Lq,table 'v iththv existing and fmul c use 01 make up of the mea, (ix) be more nonnatty-ftllllld ill a si:nihrr-lTcighborhood, 01 ex) be ora less impad than thG plGSGnt 110ll(01I1'o! jll;llg use? Sec. 110-196. Nonconforming lots of record. In any zoning district in which single-family dwellings or duplexes are permitted, a single- City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. -- -2006 Page lOaf IS @ '" DRAFT August 16, 2006 family dwelling or duplex, and customary accessory buildings may be erected, expanded, or altered on any single lot of record, notwithstanding that such lot fails to meet the requirements for area, width, and/or depth for the applicable zoning district. This provision shall only apply where yard dimensions and requirements other than area, width, and/or depth conform in all other respects with the land development regulations for the applicable zoning district. Sec. 110-197. Rep.til S :tbd maint~nmrre; Abandonment. ill A nonconforming use of a building or premises which has been abandoned shall not thereafter be retumed to such nonconforming use. A nonconforming use shall be considered abandoned: ill \Vhen the intent of the owner to discontinue the use is apparent; or ill When the characteristic equipment and the [umishings ofthe nonconforming use have been removed from the premises and have not been replaced by similar equipment within OJ rr? hundred eighty ( 180) days, unless other facts show intention to resume the nonconforming use; or ill \Vhen it has been replaced by a conforming use; or ill Where the us.e is discontinued or abandoned for a period of more than one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days or for eighteen (18) months (545 days) during any three-year period. (b) The city council may [Tant extensions of time for a nonconforming use ofa building orpremises, which would otrcr\vise be considered abandoned pursuant to subsection (a), to continue if the abandonment was directly caused by an act of God or other emergency situation outside of the contrnI. of the property owner. ~ In the event a more specific abandonment, discontinuance, or amortization provision is stated elsewhere in this Ci t\ Code fo r a specj fie nonconfom1ing stmcture, land use, or land area, the abandonment, discontinuance, and amortization provision which requires the nonconformity (0 come into compliance with the current City Code the earliest shall apply. @ No prc)' lsion contail 'ft in this article, or elsewhere in the City Code regarding the abandonment, discontinuance i~r amortization ofnonconfonning stmctures or land uses shall nullify, void, or abrogate a' similar provision contained in a duly executed binding development agreement apP',ved by the City Council. (a) 011 <my-build1ng-devntrcl:-trt-whnh... 01 in paITto any nOllcollforming use, wOIk may be done in all/pcrio-dof+Z-con:;cntITc-months'cn-ordinMY lcpaiu; 01 ol11epai1 01 1 (;placement of nonbei\.J ing-wct!lJ~fu-ttrre-$;\,tiJin-t.snrptt1mt)ing-to all extent not exceeding ten percc,ut of City of C3[1e Canaveral Ordinance P3ge J J of I @ DRAFf August 16, 2006 the replaee111ent ,due oftL,-- buiId~llg, provided that the cubic content of the building, as it existed at the til11C of passdiSe 01 amendment of the ordinance flam which this section is deli ved shall not be inc/cased and, proy ided furtl1Cl, that such /epa!r or Icplaccment shall not affed the asscs5cd valuation-tillie allo\yance bcfoIe termination setting the tim" limit ro! conformity, set [mill in scction 1l0-195(G). (b) Nothing in this chapter shelll be, deemed to PiC, Cllt the stre1lgthGning, 01 !"stOli:ng to a safe eondition-of any building 01 part thereof dec1alcd to be unsafe by an official "harged with pIOteeting the public :Olfcty, upon ordel of such official. Sec. 110-198. ttmporar~ Hepairs and maintenance. ill Reasonable routine repair and maintenance of nonconforming structures is permitted and is not a change which would terminate a nonconforming status, provided the work is necessary to keep the structure in a state of good repair. The work may include the replacement of existing materials with like materials. .However, repairs and maintenance may only be Cluthorized by the city council pursuant to section 110-200 or by the building official provided that the budding official determines compliance with the following: ill The repairs and maintenance comply with applicable building and fire codes. ill No_~i9Iation of Sections ] 10-191. 110-194,110-195.110-197 exists. ill Thc-12!:?rmittee shall be in compliance with all other applicable provisions of this article. ___....u......_.__ ill The:rl' arc no pendinrr code en i~c>rcement actions or liens existing on the subject property. (2} !freplacemeI t materials arc invo Ived, such replacement may not exceed fifty percent ( 50~t) of the fair market vCllue of the stmcture, as established by the Brevard County PrOL1cr ty Aplraiser or by a Iicc1i';ed appraiser, whichever is greater. @ Nothing in this article shall be deemed to prevent the strengthening or restoring to a safe condition of iLl' building or part thereof declared to be unsafe by any official charged with protecting th~rublic safety, upon order of s!'ch official. However, this subsection shall not be construed; . a means of circumventi'ig the intent of this article calling for the elimination of nonconforming structures by a[]owing a nonconforming structure to be substantially rebujlL~so as ta extend the ordinary and natural life of a nonconforming structure. ill The buildilL' cificial is authorized to permit structural alterations to nonconforming structures in installl~":':~.:Nherc the Occupaticmal ~~ilB~tyand Health Administration ("OSHA") City of Cape Can,l\"cn! Ordinance No. Page] or @) ~ DRAFT August 16, 2006 requirements necessitate alterations, provided the alterations shaH not be authorized primarily to replace deteriorated materials. Permittees shall be required to produce verification that said alterations are required by OSHA including, but not limited to, a citation to all applicable OSHA re~'Ulations and any OSHA notifications requiring the alterations. fA\ This section does not apply to structures used for single-family dwelling or two- \u/ family dwelling purposes which structures mav be renovated, repaired, or replaced in accordance with a lawfully issued building permit. The cMual, iutc! DlittCllt, tClllPOliUY 01 illegal use ofland o! str tlcttllGS shall not be sufficient to establish the c.xisfcncc-cf,cnonccJ!lfoilllillg uI)e:-Such'nse shall not be validatcd by tIIG adoption ofihc Oid~lance bCllll ~dlichthis-section-is-deriycd;-tmLsf, it cull1pliG5 ~ith this Ghapter. Sec. 110-199. Reserved-; Temporary Uses. The casual, intermit!ent, temporary or illegal use ofland or structures, or construction of an unlawful structure, shailnot be sufficient to establish the existence of a nonconforming use or structure. Such use or structure shaH not be validated by the adoption of this article or amendments hereto, unless it complies with th_~_Jerms of the City Code. Sec. 110-200. Rescrn::-d: ill The intent a!}(Ip.Q!Ilose orthis section is to recognize that there are limited and special circumstances where overall community and public policy obiectives of the City encourage, and shall be s~Eyedhy, the continuation or some nonconforming uses and structures provided said uses andsJ.r'~~(:;ECS are not detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood and to the community v' 11csiJ'lblished in the Citv' s COil1I2!:.ehensive Plan and City Codes. The City Council des ires tC2cSUl hi ish specific standards for this category of special permit in order to allow the continul1tion of some nonconronDinc lIses and structures notwithstanding any contrary provisions_onl1j~_!rticle or City Code, {Q2 The City QlunciL at a duly held public hearing, mav grant a special permit to allow the continuatioIL(J--.U1Dill'onfom1ing use or structure provided the following terms and conditions are str:j-,:"Jv satisfIed: llcr of the pronertv on WJli~;ll the nonconforming use or structure exists lj:crmit application provic!c(l by the City; and ill JJ' ;!ilj!Es~:!n demonstrates thaf the continuation of the nonconforming use a. is CIlpllble of con!rj1Lwing"l a positive way to the character and serves th,',~;,-~<; (lUhe community incllldmg re-occupancy for the accommodation City oreap" Cana'nill Ordin:li1CC Page 13 of 1 @ ~ , DRAFT August 16, 2006 of neighborhood walk-to-service uses, walk-to-work opportunities, and live- work spaces; reuse of buildings with architectural or historic value; and reuse of buildings that generate a significant economic benefit to the community: and b. 1S compatible with, and not detrimental to, the surrounding neLghborlJOod in terms of traffic, noise, parking, odor, light, intensity and land uses, hours of operation, landscaping, aesthetics, structural design, and density; and c. i0. consistent with the community values, objectives, and policies ~Jabljshed in the City's Comprehensive Plan and City Code. ff2 The City Council may impose conditions and safeguards as a condition of approval of any special permit granted under this section. Secs.ll0-f99201-110-:20. Heservcd. Section 3. Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions. All prior inconsistent ordinances and resolutions adopted by the City Council, or parts of prior ordinances and resolutions in conflict herewith, arc repealed to the extent of the conflict. Section 4. Incorpor:: ion Into Code. This Ordinance shall be incorporated into the Cape Canaveral City Code any section or paragraph, number or letter, and any heading may be changed or modified as necessary to effectuate the foregoing. Grammatical, typographical, and like errors may be corrected and additions, alterations, and omissions, not affecting the construction or meaning of this ordinanc . :l"d tb; City Code may be frcely made. Section 5. Severabi If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or provision of this Ordinance is for :my rea on held invalid or unconstihltional by any court of competent jurisdiction, whether for :ubs procedural, or any other reason, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and incLpendent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of tl1L,Jrdinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption by the City Council of the City f Cape Canaveral, Florida. ADOPTED by the City Counc: of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, this _ day of ,2006. Rf"\.i~DELS, Mayor ATTEST: For Against City of Cape Cana\'C':tI Ordin:tnce No. Page 14 of 15 @ lit " DRAFT August 16, 2006 Burt Bruns -- Bob Hoog ~--'"."-_.__.._.__._---- LCD Nicholas SUSAN STILLS, City Clerk Rocky Randels -- Buzz Petsos First Reading: --_....,~.- Legal Ad published: --" Second Reading: ------- Approved as to legal fom1 and suffIciency for the City of Cape Canaver,,: only: ANTHONY A. GARGAL'IESE, City Attorney City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. -2006 Page 15 of 15 @ ------ -- COASTAL TERMINAL, LLC Security Briefing ...A SECURITY, ECONOMIC, and I ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN AT CAPE CANAVERAL I 8/15/2006 1 Members of the Board, my name is Mark Morrison and my wife and I live at 8931 Lake Drive #503 in Solana Lake. Our condo is most at risk from a terrorist act at the Coastal Fuels tank farm. Speaking to you tonight is especially important because any proposal to add more capacity there has the potential to adversely affect our city as a whole and every member of our city individually. (Not read: This is especially important due to the recent Special Exception Request 06-05 to add two additional storage tanks containing 12.6 million gallons of gasoline. It most certainly and absolutely does not affect only a few so-called "wealthy" condo owners living at Solano Lake, as framed by a local newspaper and others. Nor does it involve any frivolous issues such as the tank farm's appearance or whether or not the tank farm preceded Solano Lake in its construction. No one disputes that the tank farm's appearance detracts from the city's image as "a clean, residential community" and no one disputes that the tank farm existed long before Solano Lake. This city has a huge security problem that threatens all of these caused by the tank farm but my purpose here tonight has a much us.) I came here to address Coastal Fuel's physical security threats and its inherent security problems. Its threats and security problems exist simply because it came into existence before Terrorism changed the world forever on 911. No mitigation exists to remove the inherent threats of the tank farm's physical layout. 1 Credentials: Mark M. Morrison · United States Army employee who manages training technologies inSWA - Advise training teams in Iraq and Afghanistan on terrorist threats, tactics, and techniques - Monitor terrorist situation daiiy - Current Security Clearance: TOP SECRET - Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel - Worked with Army Special Forces 1982-85 - Counter-intelligence operations in Europe 1984-88,1995-2000 - Physical security of special weapons sites, ammunition dumps, petroleum storage, and military community - Member of FDLE Central Florida Regional Domestic Security Task Force Region 5 Anti-terrorist Training Planning Team - October 2002 · The Threat: AI Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, El Fatah, Eco-terrorists · Orlando-Port Canaveral as high as #3 on DHS target list 8/15/2006 2 My qualifications to address physical security threats consist of 23 years experience in the Unites States Army, fully 13 of those years focused on either penetrating and destroying or preventing the penetration and destruction of extremely sensitive material storage facilities. While on Active Duty I carried a security classification one level higher than "SECRET." My work in counter-intelligence and counter- terrorism remains at that classification and unreleaseable-able today, more than 13 years after I retired. As late as 2002, I had access to extremely sensitive information from FDLE Security Task Force 5, which includes Port Canaveral. I currently work for the Army as a civilian Senior Military Analyst and I work terrorism and counter-terrorism issues every day. 2 Incompatible due to inability to secure . Coastal Terminal spokesman at the Solano Lake Meeting on June 29th had no or ambiguous comments on the following subjects: FDLE Central Florida Regional Domestic Security Task Force Region 5 Answer: Provides first regional response to terrorist or natural disasters Orange, Brevard, Volusia, Lake, Indian River, SI. Lucie, and Martin Counties); Apprehension of suspected AI Qaeda operatives at Port Canaveral I Answer: At least six following 911 (according to the Orlando Sentinel) The number of Coastal personnel on-site at any given time Answer: July 4, one unarmed Knowledge of how long the automatic gate at the southern-most entrance remains open after a tanker truck passes through Answer: 15 seconds The proximity, in feet or yards, of fuel storage pipelines, tanks, or trucks adjacent to public highways, sidewalks, and parking lots Answer: Approximately 50 feet The Issue: the physical layout of the tank farm adequate security · Here are some results of a 3D-minute recon · Took 45 photos from outside the property . Never stopped by COllstal SeclJritY . Never questioned by more than a dozen passersby . Tank Farm built for economy of operation, not security 8/15/2006 3 The main point of this slide is that the physical layout of the Coastal Fuels tank farm virtually precludes adequate security from a deliberate terrorist attack. (Not read: During a 30-minute personal reconnaissance of the tank farm I conducted from outside the property on July 4, I took more than 45 photographs from outside the facility. I also drove my automobile within 50 feet of two of its five gates. I did all of this without ever getting stopped or questioned by the lone watchman on duty or by more than a dozen passersby.) The plain fact is that the tank farm was built for economy and not for security. In today's world, that is simply the wrong answer. 3 Camping & Fishing Jetty Park Businesses Parking Cape L~I~ Cape Canaveral Trailer Solano Park Shores Condos Private Homes Shorewood Condos Using the diagram provided by Coastal Fuels for its proposed Exception, a document readily available to the public, I created this diagram of its most dangerous vulnerabilities. A single terrorist could penetrate the tank farm at anyone of these points and produce hon"orific effects, with immediate deaths and destruction for some and for the rest of the city after this complex burns for many hours or even days. ( Not read: It is virtually impossible to secure the north side of the complex due to its proximity to George King Boulevard. This high speed approach allows an intruder to approach live pipelines located within ten feet of the fence without being seen by the watchman in the administrative building. I took approximately 30 photographs of the complex from the sidewalk here and was never seen.) Each of the gates, #4, #5, #6, #7, easily penetrated and the gate in the northwest corner is particularly vulnerable and not observable by the watchman. The automated gates, #6 and #7 remain open and unguarded for 15 seconds after a truck passes through. Without moving or removing the pipelines and tanks here it i impossible to create the required standoff (buffer) distances necessary to cope with a terrorist attack. If you note the size of the formerly proposed addition, you will readily realize that it is not possible to put them anywhere that they do cause a major increase in vulnerability. 4 Entire complex compromised: North Side 0) Watchman in main building0 cannot stop an attack on the north side of the complex; pipelines, tanks, facilities, and gate within 50 feet of George King Blvd I Here is the essential issue: adjacent to George King Boulevard on the tank farm's north side, absolutely no adequate standoff space exists between live pipelines and active storage tanks to prevent a penetration with catastrophic consequences. This compromises the security of the entire tank farm. A terrorist cell does not need a suicide bomber to accomplish such an attack. It just needs a backpack full of explosives or a set of bolt cutters and a saw. (Not read: Some may argue that cameras could provide better security here. The fact is, cameras provide - at best - surveillance, if someone watches and realizes what's happening. The whole nation did not understand a plane slamming into the World Trade Tower on 911. Ask yourself how much more difficult identifying and preventatively reacting to an attack might be in this situation.) 5 Entire complex compromised: North Side Here's another view from George King Boulevard looking in the direction of the watchman's location. If you can't see the main building from here, the watchman cannot see you. (Not Read: On 911, the terrorists did not need to smuggle bombs on-board the four ill-fated aircraft that became flying bombs. They only needed to seize sufficient amounts of bomb- like material. This material was aviation fuel sitting in metal "containers. How is this different from the tank farm? "Transportability," you may say.) A terrorist attack can happen here. In 2004, U.S. Government Counter-terrorism forces uncovered and diffused an AI Qaeda plot to seize 10,000 gallon tank trucks at a refinery in Houston, Texas. 6 Entire complex compromised: North Side Tanks are not the only vulnerabilities within 75 feet of King Street I On the day I took these photographs, Coastal Fuels had one watchman on duty. If he responds to one intruder, no one would be available to respond to another in a different location. (Not read: Tanks are not the only vulnerabilities without adequate standoff from George King Boulevard. Given a distance of more than 200 yards from the watchman's location in the complex's administrative office to the fence that abuts George King Boulevard, absolutely no chance exists to prevent an attack on this side of the tank farm. Remember, if you cannot see the administrative building, the watchman cannot see you. A true security force, which Coastal Fuels does not have, could not handle this situation.) 7 Entire complex compromised: Northwest Corner Q) Northwest Gate - high speed approach not visible to main building (and secured by a padlock and some chain link). High speed vehicle approach within 60 feet of the new road 8/15/2006 8 This is a high speed approach for vehicles. Anyone wanting to penetrate this facility by vehicle can readily do so. The watchman in the administrative building cannot see this gate because his view is blocked by a building. An intruder can "crash" the gate by vehicle or one snip of the chain attached to the lock and an attacker goes right in. (Not read: This is not responsible security. The lock is not the important issue. Having an entrance this close to a high speed approach is a major security threat. Ethics Statement on Coastal Fuels' parent company's, "The Montagne," website makes absolutely no statement about its responsibility to properly secure its far-flung facilities nor about having any responsibility to local communities whatsoever.) 8 Do not put a 12 Million Gallon bomb where it cannot be secured! Threat #2 . Watchman cannot see or stop intruder on the northeast, east, or southeast sides of the complex . No security buffer; no direct route for watchman to take to fence line; high speed access on north . Residents have only two roads out if not incinerated in explosion both exit along tank farm , 8/15/2006 9 I The physical layout of the tank farm precludes a rapid response by a watchman to the fence line on the northeast, east, or southeast sides even if he could see them. Tanks, pipelines, and other facilities prevent a rapid response. The lone watchman usually on-duty does not carry a weapon. In the case of Coastal Fuels tank farm, the most threatening vulnerabilities cannot be removed economically. The facility was built to minimize cost, not to maximize security. Times have changed. We cannot afford to put security second to any other consideration. (Not read: Other vulnerabilities require immediate remediation to the greatest extent possible.) 9 12.6 Million more gallons of gasoline: a city problem l not the problem of a few! Oil storage J tank fire plume 12.6 Million gallons of gasoline = I 8/15/2006 10 If, at any time, Coastal Fuels wins approval to store an additional 12.6 million gallons of gasoline at the tank farm, it will have won approval to put the explosive equivalent of 72,000 sticks of dynamite in our community_ (Not read: A complex of less than 12 tanks in England burned for 4 % days in December of last year. Coastal Fuels complex has 18 tanks of varying iii sizes. The predominant wind direction here for as much as eight months of the year is from the northwest, northeast, or north. Ask yourself: if terrorists attacked and burned the tank farm, including the two new tanks, where would the smoke blow and for how many days? The answer to that question should not escape anyone here. It will blow onto Cape Canaveral as a city and the damage done will create a health, environmental, and economic disaster the effects of which would likely last for several years. This is a threat to the entire city.) 10 Mission Statement: Welcome to the City of Cape Canaveral: A safe, clean, residential beach-side community with tree-lined streets. December 2005 Hertfordshire oil Storage Terminal fire burns for 5 'h days This potentiaL............. .is compatible with Cape Canaveral! Not now.. ...not in the future! I 8/15/2006 11 Photographs do not lie. It is impossible to create the required standoff distances (buffers) necessary to protect the citizens of Cape Canaveral. And if not impossible, certainly financially impractical. Adding additional storage to the existing facility makes a very serious threat a critical, and perhaps, fatal one. I most strongly encourage you to review the slides that I provided the Secretary before tonight's meeting that I will not have time to address in my minutes. ------ End of oral presentation ------------------------------------------------------------___ Additional photographs and information follows with the "Fire and Hazardous Explosion Briefing" following them. The numbers inside octagonal shapes on the following slides refer to the specific location. 11 West Side Gate Near and Main Administrative Building: Threats #3 & #5 . Single gate within less than approximately 60 feet of roadway . Administrative Building with watchman not protected by a fence; cannot see entire tank farm fence . A mid-or-Iarge sized truck can crash through this gate or walk up to the only watchman I No fence here to provide watchman or Admin 8/15/2006 12 12 Entire complex compromised: East Side Gate, Threat #4 . Gate cannot be seen from Main Building and Security . Single gate within less than 45 feet from heavy cover . Appears locked only by padlock and chain . Anyone can approach and penetrate, especially at night Oak hammock buffer I 8/15/2006 13 I 13 Entire complex compromised: West Side Gates, Threats #6 & #7 . Wests ide Automatic Gates no check on driver ID no check of vehicles for security or safety no stand-off for inspection and checks of drivers or passengers; key pad entry; code changes every ??11 - Gates remain open for 15 seconds after vehicle clears with no security immediately available Gaterrhreat #6 Threat # 6 more than 200 yards from main building and security Pipeline within twenty feet of gate t -Gate #7: unmanned security booth indicates a recognition that heightened "watchfulness" may be required at times; !IDmanned Brevard Sheriff's patrol car sat near here after 911, why and why unmanned 8/15/2006 14 Neither the trucks nor the people inside them get positively identified or inspected when entering or leaving the facility. This is a rudimentary procedure lacking at this facility. 14 A Safe and Secure Neighbor? . A possible target? Why here? Orlando/Port Canaveral Complex rated as high as #3 on FBI Target List Current lists Economic Targets (national ratings vary somewhat based on source, government/private) " Oil Pipelines # 1 " Gas Stations and gasoline storage facilities # 4 Oil Companies # 5 Oil Tankers (ships) # 7 " FDLE # 3, 5 Critical Infrastructure Tourist Targets " Walt Disney World # 2 Tourist Targets (continued) " Theme Parks # 4 " Cruise ships # 25 (FDLE # 11 Critical Infrastructure) " Casinos # 29 " FDLE # 1 Key Resource Area Military Targets " "Strategic" storage facilities # 1 " Command and Control Facilities # 2 " NASA # 3 Communications and Intelligence Networks # 6 " FDLE # 3 & 5 Critical Infrastructure Ecological Targets include bodies of water, locks, bridges, national and state parks " FDLE # 11 & 12 Critical Infrastructure i 8/15/2006 15 i 15 A Safe and Secure Neighbor? Symbology at Port and Cape Canaveral makes them attractive targets . Oil - alleged cause 01 the War in Iraq ecological disaster lor ocean, beaches, standing oak hammock - Bush and Cheney association with oil and capitalism . Western "Decadence" - Cruise ships Gambling ships Bars International clientele . Strategic Military - Navy >> Strategic Forces (ballistic missile submarines) " Tactical Forces (port 01 call lor USS Cole; ships transporting war material) - Air Force " Strategic Intelligence >> Space Operations - Coast Guard >> Port Security >> Cruise ship security . International commercial shipping 8/15/2006 16 16 A Safe and Secu Neighbor? . Which facilities got increased protection after 9/117 Port Canaveral . Increased counter-intelligence; overt and covert . Apprehensions of suspected AI Oaeda operatives photographing cruise ships and facilities The Locks closed % mile from entrance; security barriers still ready now I Cruise ships . enhanced security including passengers and luggage . a source of International ''visitors'' and crew . a source of International "visitors" and "crew" . Pakistani "Security" on-board - July 2004, 54 discs captured during raid against AI Oaeda in Pakistan contain detailed plans of U.S. facilities Taliban, AI Oaeda, Osama Bin Laden presumed living in Pakistan . Port Canaveral cruise ship security meetings with Director, DHA, in July, 2004 NASA/Kennedy Space Center Coastal Fuel, LLC . a Brevard County Sheriff's cruiser parked inside the fence unmanned! · Acknowledged THREAT BUT DID NOT PROTECT IT!! . Coastal Fuel, LLC, a "soft" target 17 What is a "Soft" Target? .. A facility, location, or event presumed not worthy of attack by its "defenders" or not having observable, adequate defenses to deter an attack Some characteristics of a "soft" target Unarmed protection; slow, or insufficient armed response to an attack Insufficient numbers of security personnel on-site or able to rapidly respond in sufficient force to contain an attack Untrained or unscreened security personnel; employees, or transients - Inadequate fences, locks, and automated roadway barriers Unobserved, inadequately secured access, or unguarded approaches - Unknown persons or vehicles able to approach within lethal range of security personnel or hazardous materials Insufficient intelligence information on current threats - No security plan or plan unexercised with local authorities and first responders Physically difficult to secure due to inherent hazards, disbursement, high speed approaches, size, or poor visibility - Insufficient or poor quality communications or communications not capable of contacting multiple responding agencies - Overt and covert counter-intelligence operations - Unaware private corporations and citizens Any combination of factors that will likely fail to deter an attack - No one in the organization specifically designated to manage security i 8/15/2006 18 18 What is a "hardened" Target? e The short answer: has everything a "soft" target does not e Least likely to get attacked. . How does the Coastal Fuels facility appear to score: 1. armed protection 1. No 2. armed response to an attack 2. 3. numbers of security personnel on-site 3. No 4. trained or unscreened security personnel; employees, or transients 4. ? 5. fences, locks, and automated roadway barriers 5. No 6. observed, adequately secured access, or guarded approaches 6. No 7. secure handling of approaching unknown persons or vehicles 7. No 8. sufficient intelligence information on current threats 8. ? 9. security plan 9. ? 10. security plan exercised with local authorities and first responders 10. ? 11. physically easy to secure 11. No 12. sufficient and good quality communications 12. ? 13. communications capable of contacting multiple responding agencies 13. ? 14. overt and covert counter-intelligence operations 14. ? 15. aware and alert private corporations and 15. No/? 16. aware and alert citizens 16. No/? 17. someone on-site specifically designated to manage security 17. ? 18. security factors willlikelv deter an attack 18. No SCORECARD: 18 POSSIBLE - 7 X No and 9 X? and 2 X No/? 8/15/2006 19 19 Partial List of UNCLASSIFIED Sources . u.s. Department oh Homeland Security Guidelines . Speech by former Director of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, February, 2004 . Florida's 2005 Domestic Security Annual report . FDLE Information Page on Domestic Security, June 2006 . Presentation to the FDLE Central Florida Regional Domestic Security Task Force Region 5, October 2002 by Sheriff Kevin Beary and members of the Task Force staff . ABC News . The Aspen Institute . The Council on Foreign Relations . The Orlando Sentinel . The Houston Chronicle . The Washinqton Post . Time Magazine . Perspective Magazine . MSNBC . The International Longshore and Warehouse Union . TOO MANY OTHERS TO LIST I 8/15/2006 20 I 20 . How safe are Cape Canaveral residents? Think like a terrorist... Maximize publicity and frighten the common citizen - Kill as many helpless, innocent people and do as much damage as I possible at the lowest cost and risk . already threatened: Solano Lake, Solana Shore, Shorewood, Oak Park, Villages at Seaport, Port Canaveral Trailer Park, Cape Caribe, Ambassador Casino Ship parking lot, International Trade Zone and parking lot, Seafarers Ministry, private homes Sea Port Villas . most threatened by proposed new tanks: Solano Lake, Cape Caribe - If not by terrorists, then what is the threat by nature? - What are the risks? 8/15/2006 21 21 Terrorists Have Oil Industry in Cross Hairs Economic Disruption Is a Key Goal By Justin Blum Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, September 27,2004; Page A12 Terrorists Have Oil Industry in Cross Hairs Economic Disruption Is a Key Goal By Justin Blum Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, September 27,2004; Page A12 Terrorists Target America An exclusive look at what investigators have discovered about al-Qaeda's plans for its next big attack By Bill Powell Time Magazine Aug. 08,2004 Two federal officials said the government is also concerned about the use of large trucks and "vehicular bombs" by al-Qaeda operatives or unwitting third parties. A law-enforcement official said Islamic extremists posing as local drivers but hailing from overseas are a "huge, huge concern." Assessing the accumulation of evidence of a possible attack inside the U.S., a senior intelligence official says, "This is looking more like the real deal every day." Terrorism's Soft Targets By Clark Kent Ervin Sunday, May 7, 2006; Page B04 In America, the few security guards working at soft targets often are unarmed, untrained and unmotivated. Camera surveillance systems (when they are in place at all) tend to be monitored only irregularly, and when the cameras are monitored, the security guards usually focus more on potential thieves and troublemakers than on potential terrorists. Absent an attack on a soft target in this country, the American people simply won't tolerate the draconian countermeasures that Israelis accept without complaint. The upshot is a deadly double irony. The very fact that there hasn't been an attack on a soft target in the United States increases the danger of one. And, the harder we harden hard targets, the more likely an attack on a soft target becomes. Excerpted from "Open Target Where America is Vulnerable to Attack" (Palgrave Macmillan). 22 Terrorists Target America An exclusive look at what investigators have discovered about al- Qaeda's plans for its next big attack By Bill Powell Time Magazine Aug. 08,2004 8/15/2006 23 International Oil Facilities Are a Top Infrastructure Target of Terrorists Protecting U.S. Oil Facilities Perspective Magazine In January 2004, the House Select Committee on Homeland Security released the initial findings of a report, America At Risk: The State of Homeland Security, that alleged gaps in the Bush Administration's homeland security efforts. One finding emphasized lax chemical plant security and noted that there are more than 66,000 chemical facilities in cities, towns, and rural areas in the United States. Oil storage facilities, however, number in the hundreds of thousands and can be even more vulnerable to terrorists than chemical facilities. Around the world, war and acts of terrorism account for a large fraction of major oil spills. Terrorists appear to be targeting pipelines, where the majority of oil spills occurred in recent years. For example, of the 257 largest oil spills in 1999, more were caused by terrorist bombings in Colombia (51) than the combined number of spills from tankers, barges, and other vessels (36) according to data published in International Oil Spill Statistics by Cutter Information Corp. Two war-related oil spills in the Persian Gulf are among the largest ever to occur-the 1983 Nowruz NO.3 well spill during the Iraq-Iran War and the 1991 Sea Island installation spill during the first Gulf War. Each of these was several times lar~er than the spill caused by the Exxon Valdez in 1989. Threats to foreign oil facilities have increased drastically. In pril, terrorists attempting to damage Iraqi infrastructure attacked Arabian Gulf oil terminals in Bahrain. Islamic militants attacked oil complexes and residential compounds in Saudi Arabia in May, killing or capturing several petroleum industry workers. Pipeline bombings in Iraq in June halted oil exports, as insurgents increased attacks prior to the change in government. The federal r~ulatory framework for oil facilities in the United States includes security planning requirements established by the U.S. oast Guard and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Coast Guard rule requires owners or operators of marine transportation-related oil facilities to designate security officers, develop Facility Security Plans, and implement security measures specific to the facility's operations. EPA regulations subject non-transportation-related oil facilities to security requirements that were developed to prevent vandalism, but also can prevent acts of terrorism. An EPA-regulated facility must plan for dischar~es of all types, whether caused by accident, natural hazard (e.g., earthquake or lightning), or deliberate acts e.g., vandalism or terrorism). The requirements address responses to "worst case discharges," which can damage the facility and oil infrastructure, disrupt waterborne commerce, and damage the economy or environment. The Coast Guard and EPA regulations represent a ~OOd start toward securing the nation's oil storage infrastructure. However, these regulations alone are not sufficient. s owners and operators of oil facilities implement these re~ulations, they also should analyze vulnerability and threat information specific to their facility to further reduce the like ihood and consequences of terrorist incidents and damage to their infrastructure. The risk to oil facilities in the United States is a very real one. This spring, the Federal Bureau of Investigation sent an advisory to the Texas oil industry and law enforcement officials warning of a terrorist threat to coincide with the November Presidential elections. Recently, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) modified its National Preparedness Exercise Program to incorporate terrorist attacks on pipelines. However, pipelines are only one element of the oil infrastructure: terminals for pipelines (distribution centers), refineries, and drilling rigs-also attractive targets for terrorists-are outside the scope of DOT's exercise program. It seems appropriate that future exercise pro~rams feature attacks on all key components of the oil infrastructure (e.~., terminals and refineries). This will help ad ress the growing terrorist threats to these facilities by identifying vulnerabi ities and protective measures. 23 Terrorism's Soft Targets By Clark Kent ENin Sunday, May 7, 2006; Page B04 [ I 8/15/2006 24 I 24 Fire Safety Issues Preventing the Approval of Petroleum Products Terminal Expansion in Cape Canaveral, FL Richard Evans 8921 Lake Drive Unit B306 Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 My name is Richard Evans and I am a neighbor living at 8921 Lake Drive in Cape Canaveral. Thank you for considering my views this evening. During my 18 years at CITGO Petroleum, I spent 4 years managing gasoline terminal accounting, and served on the project team to reautomate CITGO's 50-odd operated terminals. When I left CITGO I worked for Toptech Systems, the automation provider for more than half of the terminals in the U.S. including this site, and managed their installation and customer service functions. Florida Statute Section 187.201 requires us to protect lives and property by preventing activities which could cause natural and manmade disasters. Section 38.4 of the Cape Canaveral Code applies prohibitions to gasoline storage in residential areas of the city, and with good reason. The definition of a SPECIAL EXCEPTION in the Cape Canaveral code further states" . . . a use that would not be appropriate generally, or without restriction, throughout the zoning division or district, but which, if controlled as to number, area, location, or relation to the neighborhood, would the public health, , welfare, morals, order, comfort, convenience, appearance, prosperity, or general welfare". The research results we are providing to the Planning and Zoning Board, and which are a part of this document are a limited sample to define the risk that terminal expansion makes to the safety of Cape Canaveral residents, I interviewed Dave Sergeant in his office on Friday July 7th to confinn that the infonnation I am sharing is accurate, 1 The Brandforsk Project 513-021 states that since 1951, there have been 480 reported fuel tank fires worldwide, Of the identified fires, roughly 150 were attributed to lightning strikes, The most recent fire we identified occurred June 12 of this year in Glenpool, OK. That fire was attributed to lightning. Lightning is an ever-present threat to Central Florida, SPILLOVER-Fire hazards increased when flaming gasoline spilled over the notir edge of the fuel storage tank at about 10:45 a. m. Glenpool firefighters battled ground and grass fire in addition to containing the tank blaze. 2 Explorer Pipeline operates this facility. Winds were calm following the morning storm that caused the fire. This allowed the fire to burn vertically as much as possible, and the tank walls melted but did not collapse. A collapse results in a wave of fire going in some direction - toward another tank, or toward homes like ours. Damage claims are resulting more than a mile from the site. 3 The fire occurred on property adjacent to the site of a fire at a ConocoPhillips terminal in April 2003. That fire burned for more than a day before being contained. According to USA Today, hundreds of homes were evacuated during that fire and Glenpool schools closed for two days. ENORMITY OF FIRE-This shot by Bixby Assistant Fire Chief Doug Brasl illustrates the enormity of the tank farm fire Monday I June 12. When lightning the tank that morning I it held about 145,000 barrels of unleaded gasoline. V firefighting teams contained the blaze with water, Explorer Pipeline drained ~ 19,000 barrels of the product from underneath. Here I firefighters begin laying 4,000 feet of hose, preparing for an attack by foam. This next picture shows how firefighters respond to a tank fire. We believe that our emergency response teams would make every effort to save lives and property, but it is unreasonable to expect them to be much more than informed witnesses at a catastrophe, just like the firefighters in this photo. A BLEVE is a possible result from a gasoline storage tank fire. BLEVE is an acronym for "boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion". Another explanation of BLEVE is explained on the same Internet site: "blast leveling everything very efficiently". A National Fire Protection Association document reported that individuals have been killed by a BLEVE as much as 800 feet from the blast source, and damage has occurred from flying objects up to 2700 feet. This photo from Google Earth shows the potential death zone from the center of the eastern of the two proposed tanks. It is impossible for you or future city officials to state "we simply didn't understand what could happen" when the survivors of a tragedy approach our city government demanding answers. State statute and city code require us to establish zoning limits that protect our citizens. We expect you to make the proper answer today rather than electing the tragic answer tomorrow. If you don't recall another sentence I have said to you this evening, please remember this: Fire and explosion are devastating, fire and explosion are possible, and a sufficient boundary of safety must exist. ------ End of oral presentation ------ international BTU 1956:::; 1065JJ56 BTU a 39 "F::; 1059.67 8TU thermochemical::; 1054.36 medium calorie= 4.19002 therm::; 1.055056.1 OS calorie at 15 .C; 41855 STU: British Termal Unit equivalent to the quantity of heat necessary to raise the temperature of a pound of pure from 60 to 61 "f, and it is 1064.5 Joule STUIT 6tu Intemational, has been introduced so that thl:! values expressed in I<cal/kg and in Stu/lb OF coincide. GLEN POOL .. Lightning struck a petroleum tank containing thousands of gallons of unleaded gasoline Monday morning, sending massive plumes of black smoke into the sky and endangering a surrounding tank farm, From WikJpedrll, !he flea ency,;lopeOfll StEVE, pronounced blevy, I" an for "bCllllnlllilfuid lI"'pandiflg vapour llllplClSion" Thio IS 0 type of that can occur wher> a v$5$01 containinll a 1$ ruptured. Such explo~ion$ can be extremely hazardous lIVhan the liquid is wlller, the 9xplO$lon IS usually called a A BLEVE can occur in a v"$sel that stores a .ubetanes th~t 1$ usually a 'll but rs a liquid when preS$UlIZed (for example, The sub.tance will be .tored partly In liqUId fOlm, WIth a gQSaOU9 VQPour above the liquid filling the remainder Of the containar lithe v~ss",1 is ruptUled - for a.ample, dua to 01 failure under pres~ure -the vapour portion may raprdly leak, dropping the pressure marda the eontainar and rllleaaing a wave of ovarpras$ure from the ppim of ruptura This sudden drop In A. fll,EVf onguI!i"9 . I<>nI<<n. pr..sure inside the container caus.s violent 01 the liqUid, whIch rapidly liberates large amounts of vapour in the proceas. The prasaur. of this vapour can be e.tmmaly high, causing a second, much more .~nrftcanl wave of overpressure (Le , an explosion) which may cornplataly dastroy lles.el and project il as _r the surrounding araa, A BLEVE doe. not reqUlr~ a substance to occur, and therefore is not usually considered a type of 1M substance il)l/Olved ill flammable, IllS likely thatlhe resulting cloud of ttw substance Will ignile a1ler the BLEVE proper has ec' forming a flfeball and pOllsibly a 8LEVE. can also be caused by an external fit'e nearby lh~ stora~ vessal caUl of Ihe contents and pres$ura bUild-up Significant indu$trilll eLeVE. includ@ the accrdarll$ at In In in In in in In the lW'lntth'll a gaG cylinder i$ venting, 6lEVE'. can b. avoided by cooling the cylinder invloved with waler or foam, taking cor~ extlf1guil>h th.. flame, until t1w cylind~r is emply, or the IOllk IS plugged. Other ~rn mrtiglltion mnasur.s Qr. Ii.t.d under lor 'blalllll!Vehlig everythllig very 8fl&ct",aly" Here are the results of some research I've done on Tank Fires on the Internet. Dave Litteral Source: Henry Persson, Anders L6nnermark 1 In total, 480 tank fire incidents have been identified worldwide since the 1950s and the information collected has been compiled into a database. 2 Although great effort has been expended to collect information, there are probably a significant number of fire incidents, which have not been identified. 3 The extent of each of the identified fire incidents may vary considerably, from just a rim seal fire, being extinguished without difficulty, to fires involving a complete tank storage facility with 30 to 40 burning tanks. 4 Assuming that the data is complete for the 1990s and 2000s, this indicates that the number of tank fire incidents, serious enough to be reported by news media, are in the range of 1S to 20 fires per year. S Of aU the identified fires, lightning was declared to be the cause for ignition in about 150 ofthe fires. 6 Although large-scale tank fires are very rare, they present a huge challenge to firefighters, oil companies and the environment. There are only two alternatives for combating such a fire, either to let it burn out and thereby self-extinguish or, alternatively, to actively extinguish the fire, using fire fighting foams. 7 As the hum out procedure will result in a fire that is likely to last several days, complete loss of the stored product, environmental problems, large cooling operations to protect fire spread to adjacent tanks and in some cases potential for a boil-over, this is often not an acceptable alternative. S Extinguishment of a tank fire can only be obtained by using fire-fighting foams. However, historically the chances of successful fire control and extinguishment have been low, especially for larger tanks. Even tanks exceeding 20 m diameter have caused problems in many cases, and for many years, there had been no successful extinguishment of tanks larger than 45 m in diameter. BLEVE 1 BLEVE, pronounced blevy, is an for "boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion", This is a type that can occur when a vessel containing a is ruptured, Such explosions can be extremely hazardous, When the liquid is water, the explosion is usually called a 2 If the vessel is ruptured - for example, due to or failure under pressure - the vapour portion may rapidly leak, dropping the pressure inside the container and releasing a wave of overpressure from the point of rupture, This sudden drop in pressure inside the container causes violent of the liquid, which rapidly liberates large amounts of vapour in the process, The pressure of this vapour can be extremely high, causing a second, much more significant wave of overpressure (Le" an explosion) which may completely destroy the storage vessel and project it as over the surrounding area, 3 A BLEVE does not require a substance to occur, and therefore is not usually considered a type However, if the substance involved is flammable, it is likely that the resulting cloud of the substance will ignite after the BLEVE proper has occurred, forming a fireball and possibly a BLEVEs can also be caused by an external fire nearby the storage vessel causing heating of the contents and pressure build-up BLEVE (Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion) 4 The liquid vaporization-expansion-energy to container-piece weight ratio is such that pieces are propelled for distances up to approximately 1/2 mile (0.8 km). Deaths from such missiles have occurred up to 800 ft (244 m) from larger containers. 5 Fireballs several hundred feet in diameter are not uncommon, and deaths from burns have occurred to persons as much as 250 ft (76 m) from the larger containers. Incompatibility and Resulting Legal Issues My name is Ruth Anders I am a retired attorney. I once served as legal counsel to the planning and zoning office of Anne Arundel county Maryland. later I went to work for the Fed. Hwy Adm. in the chief counsel's office where I served as chief of the general law division and where I retired after 25 years. During that period I was loaned to the US Senate Public Works and Environment Committee where I served as minority counsel for two years under Sen. Lloyd Bentsen from Texas. I also taught law for engineers at George Washington University for a year to help out an ailing professor and I have written many land use law review articles. This special exception is totally incompatible with residential use. This is a beautiful resort and condominium community at the ocean. Who would want to buy property abutting a serious safety hazard, a public nuisance and an unsightly blight? Clearly, such tank construction would severly damage the value of residential property. It would also severly interfere with the use and enjoyment of such property. As a result, it would constitute an unconstitutional taking of property without just compensation. Residents would have the right to file an inverse condemnation action in court. Inverse condemnation means that the property has been so irreversibly damaged in whole or in part that the government should have condemned it and paid just compensation for it. As land and communities become more crowded and governments impose further zoning regulations, cases involving eminent domain and inverse condemnation have increased. As a matter of background, the 5th amendment to the Constitution reads in pertinent part: II no person shall --- be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation" The 14th amendment to the Federal Constitution makes the guarantee of just compensation applicable to the states. We normally think of eminent domain as a government action to condemn land for the construction of roads, bridges, public parks, public buildings etc. Over the years a "taking" has been expanded by the courts to include government agency action that so greatly damages the use of a parcel of real property that it is the equivalent of condemnation of the property. See the Supreme Court case of First English Evangical Luthern Church of Glendale v County of L. A. 482 US 304, 107 S.Ct. 2378 (1987) In the Supreme court case of Natlan v California Coastal Comm. 483US 825,107 S.Ct.3141(1987), the court determined that regulations that strip property of value or that do not substantially advance legitimate state ( or local) interests are takings for which compensation is required. More recently, the Supreme Court has said that eminent domain may be used for a private party to possess the land if it is beneficial to the local economy or improves old and delapidated land such as in urban renewal. This is a liberal view of "public purpose". Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in a dissenting opinion said the "beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process including large corporations and development firms" The case is Kelo v City of New London 545 US ( 2005) docket no. 04-108. Fortunately, in May of this year Governor Bush signed into law H.B. 1567 known as the Eminent Domain Reform Law which puts serious restrictions on local governments to acquire property through condemnation for private use. We citizens will vote on an amendment to the Florida constitution in this regard in November. Thus, a municipal regulation which amounts to a taking of property for a private use would be unlawful under Florida law today and perhaps unconstitutional under Florida law after Nov. . It is our view that if this special exception is ever granted adjacent to our properties, the City will have taken our property under it's zoning regulations. Section 110-354 of the Cape Canaveral zoning code specifically allows a special exception for the storage of liquefied petroleum products without any distance requirement from residents or standards for safety, environmental, aesthetic, air, light, view, noise or pollution purposes. There are no special standards to be met other than the Fire prevention code and that petroleum products in excess of 3000 gallons be in an established fire district. The Federal government and the States have laws that govern the taking of property. For example, the government, in this case the city, must pay property owners for the fair market value of the property before the "taking". We might assume that the "taking" would occur when the special exception is granted. However, realtors have advised us that the mere filing of the request for a special exception for these tanks as allowed in the ordinance may damage our property values for those of us who may wish to sell or lease our properties in the interim time. This is because they are required to reveal to prospective purchasers and lessees all such public proposals. It may be then that the taking occurs on the day the special exception request was made public if ultimately granted. When property values are so reduced because of the adverse effects that it would be tantamount to a confiscation of property, a taking has occurred. The taking of private property includes land as well as inherent property rights such as air and view and fixtures such as our social building, tennis courts, and the like and the value of leases by property owners. OUf properties are also located in a beautiful scenic setting in a gated community all adding to their value. You can't walk children or dogs around a smelly gas fumed area or view cruise ships and shuttle launches with four story high gas tanks blocking your view,or enjoy the social amenities with abutting tanks, barbed wire fences,loud truck traffic and bright lights. Our neighbors who would not suffer damages tantamount to a taking would nevertheless be entitled to relief or compensation from the City when this special exception would be granted because its application would unfairly affect their real property. The law is called the "Bert J. Harris Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act." See chapter 70 of the Florida statutes attached hereto. We also believe tank construction adjacent to our property is so incompatible with our residential use that it would constitute a public and private nuisance. Loud noises, bright lights, odors, safety hazards, pollution of air and water and unsightly conditions have long been recognized by the courts as constituting a nuisance to neighboring properties. A public nuisance is one which affects the public in general and not merely some particular person or persons. A land use may become a nuisance in fact by reason of the circumstances of the location and surroundings. ( Black's Law Dictionary fourth Ed.) It seems outrageous that we would have to go to court to abate a public and private nuisance created by our own city. In summary, we believe the Cape Canaveral City zoning ordinance concerning a special exception for the storage of liquified petroleum products ( see sec. 110.354) is unconstitutional in that it is arbitrary and capricious, denies due process, creates a safety hazard and a public nuisance, has no notice requirement and is contrary to the city's mission statement and I quote" Welcome to the City of Cape Canaveral a , beach-side community with tree lined streets. A far better course of action would be to repeal this special exception in the M1 zone. safety problems from the existing tanks would not be solved but would certainly mitigated. Statutes & Constitution: View Statutes: flsenate.gov Page 1 of 5 Select Year: CIVIL PRACTICE AND RELIEF FROM BURDENS ON REAL PROCEDURE PROPERTY RIGHTS 70.001 Private property rights protection.-- (1) This act may be cited as the "Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act." The Legislature recognizes that some laws, regulations, and ordinances of the state and political entities in the state, as applied, may inordinately burden, restrict, or Limit private property rights without amounting to a taking under the State Constitution or the United States Constitution. The Legislature determines that there is an important state interest in protecting the interests of private property owners from such inordinate burdens. Therefore, it is the intent of the legislature that, as a separate and distinct cause of action from the law of takings, the LegisLature herein provides for relief, or payment of compensation, when a new Law, rule, regulation, or ordinance of the state or a poLitical entity in the state, as applied, unfairly affects real property. (2) When a specific action of a governmentaL entity has inordinateLy burdened an existing use of real property or a vested right to a specific use of real property, the property owner of that real property is entitled to relief, which may include compensation for the actual loss to the fair market value of the real property caused by the action of government, as provided in this section. (3) for purposes of this section: (a) The existence of a "vested right" is to be determined by appLying the principles of equitable estoppeL or substantive due process under the common Law or by applying the statutory Law of this state. (b) The term "existing use" means an actual, present use or activity on the real property, including periods of inactivity which are normaLLy associated with, or are incidental to, the nature or type of use or activity or such reasonabLy foreseeabLe, nonspeculative Land uses which are suitabLe for the subject real property and compatibLe with adjacent Land uses and which have created an existing fair market value in the property greater than the fair market vaLue of the actual, present use or activity on the real property. (c) The term "governmentaL entity" includes an agency of the state, a regionaL or a LocaL government created by the State Constitution or by generaL or speciaL act, any county or municipality, or any other entity that independently exercises governmentaL authority. The term does not include the United States or any of its agencies, or an agency of the state, a regionaL or a Local government created by the State Constitution or by general or special act, any county or municipality, or any other entity that independently exercises governmental authority, when exercising the powers of the United States or any of its agencies through a formal delegation of federal authority. (d) The term "action of a governmental entity" means a specific action of a governmental entity which affects real property, including action on an application or permit. (e) The terms "inordinate burden" or "inordinately burdenedu mean that an action of one or more governmentaL entities has directly restricted or limited the use of real property such that the property owner is permanentLy unable to attain the reasonabLe, investment-backed expectation for the existing use of the real property or a vested right to a specific use of the real property with http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfrn ?p=2&rnode= Vi eWOlO20 Statutes& SubMenu= 1 &Ap.. . 8/1 0/2006 Statutes & Constitution: View Statutes: flsenate.gov Page 2 of 5 respect to the real property as a whole, or that the property owner is left with existing or vested uses that are unreasonable such that the property owner bears permanently a disproportionate share of a burden imposed for the good of the public, which in fairness should be borne the public at large. impacts to real or impacts to real property caused by an action of a governmental entity taken to grant a property owner under this section. (f) The term "property owner" means the person who holds legal title to the real property at issue. The term does not include a governmental entity. (g) The term "real property" means land and includes any appurtenances and improvements to the land, including any other relevant real property in which the property owner had a relevant interest. (4)(a) Not less than 180 days prior to tiling an action under this section against a governmental entity, a property owner who seeks compensation under this section must present the claim in writing to the head of the governmental entity, except that if the property is classified as agricultural pursuant to s. the notice period is 90 days. The property owner must submit, along with the claim, a bona fide, valid appraisal that supports the claim and demonstrates the loss in fair market value to the real property. If the action of government is the culmination of a process that involves more than one governmental entity, or if a complete resolution of all relevant issues, in the view of the property owner or in the view of a governmental entity to whom a claim is presented, requires the active participation of more than one governmental entity, the property owner shall present the claim as provided in this section to each of the governmental entities. (b) The governmental entity shall provide written notice of the claim to all parties to any administrative action that gave rise to the claim, and to owners of real property contiguous to the owner's property at the addresses listed on the most recent county tax rolls. Within 15 days after the claim being presented, the governmental entity shall report the claim in writing to the Department of legal Affairs, and shall provide the department with the name, address, and telephone number of the employee of the governmental entity from whom additional information may be obtained about the claim during the pendency of the claim and any subsequent judicial action. (c) During the 90-day-notice period or the 180-day-notice period, unless extended by agreement of the parties, the governmental entity shall make a written settlement offer to effectuate: 1. An adjustment of land development or permit standards or other provisions controlling the development or use of land. 2. Increases or modifications in the density, intensity, or use of areas of development. 3. The transfer of developmental rights. 4. land swaps or exchanges. 5. Mitigation, including payments in lieu of onsite mitigation. 6. location on the least sensitive portion of the property. 7. Conditioning the amount of development or use permitted. 8. A requirement that issues be addressed on a more comprehensive basis than a single proposed http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?p=2&mode= VieWOi020Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &Ap... 8/1 012006 Statutes & Constitution ;View Statutes: flsenate.gov Page 3 of 5 use or development. 9. Issuance of the development order, a variance, special exception, or other extraordinary relief. 10. Purchase of the real property, or an interest therein, by an appropriate governmental entity. 11. No changes to the action of the governmental entity. If the property owner accepts the settlement offer, the governmental entity may implement the settlement offer by appropriate development agreement; by issuing a variance, special exception, or other extraordinary relief; or by other appropriate method, subject to paragraph (d). (d)1. Whenever a governmental entity enters into a settlement agreement under this section which would have the effect of a modification, variance, or a special exception to the application of a rule, regulation, or ordinance as it would otherwise apply to the subject real property, the relief granted shaH protect the public interest served by the regulations at issue and be the appropriate relief necessary to prevent the governmental regulatory effort from inordinately burdening the real property. 2. Whenever a governmental entity enters into a settlement agreement under this section which would have the effect of contravening the application of a statute as it would otherwise apply to the subject real property, the governmental entity and the property owner shaH jointly file an action in the circuit court where the real property is located for approval of the settlement agreement by the court to ensure that the relief granted protects the public interest served by the statute at issue and is the appropriate relief necessary to prevent the governmental regulatory effort from inordinately burdening the real property. (5)(a) During the 90-day-notice period or the 180.day-notice period, unless a settlement offer is accepted by the property owner, each of the governmental entities provided notice pursuant to paragraph (4)(a) shaH issue a written ripeness decision identifying the allowable uses to which the subject property may be put. The failure of the governmental entity to issue a written ripeness decision during the applicable 90-day-notice period or 180-day-notice period shall be deemed to ripen the prior action of the governmental entity, and shall operate as a ripeness decision that has been rejected by the property owner. The ripeness decision, as a matter of law, constitutes the last prerequisite to judicial review, and the matter shall be deemed ripe or final for the purposes of the judicial proceeding created by this section, notwithstanding the availability of other administrative remedies. (b) If the property owner rejects the settlement offer and the ripeness decision of the governmental entity or entities, the property owner may file a claim for compensation in the circuit court, a copy of which shall be served contemporaneously on the head of each of the governmental entities that made a settlement offer and a ripeness decision that was rejected by the property owner. Actions under this section shaH be brought only in the county where the real property is located. (6)(a) The circuit court shall determine whether an existing use of the real property or a vested right to a specific use of the real property existed and, if so, whether, considering the settlement offer and ripeness decision, the governmental entity or entities have inordinately burdened the real property. If the actions of more than one governmental entity, considering any settlement offers and ripeness decisions, are responsible for the action that imposed the inordinate burden on the real property of the property owner, the court shaH determine the percentage of responsibility each such governmental entity bears with respect to the inordinate burden. A governmental entity may take an interlocutory appeal of the court's determination that the action of the governmental entity has resulted in an inordinate burden. An interlocutory appeal does not automatically stay the proceedings; however, the court may stay the proceedings during the pendency of the interlocutory appeal. If the governmental entity does not prevail in the interlocutory appeal, the http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?p=2&mode= VieWO.lo20Statutes&SubMenu= l&Ap... 8/10/2006 Constitution . flsenate.gov Page 4 of 5 court shaH to the a reasonable attorney fee incurred by the property owner in the (b) Following its determination of the percentage of responsibility of each governmental and following the resolution of any interlocutory appeal, the court shaH impanel a jury to determine the total amount of compensation to the property owner for the loss in value due to the inordinate burden to the real property. The award of compensation shall be determined by calculating the difference in the fair market value of the real property, as it existed at the time of the governmental action at issue, as though the owner had the ability to attain the reasonable investment-backed expectation or was not left with uses that are unreasonable, whichever the case may be, and the fair market value of the real property, as it existed at the time of the governmental action at issue, as inordinately burdened, considering the settlement offer together with the ripeness decision, of the governmental entity or entities, In determining the award of compensation, consideration may not be given to business damages relative to any development, activity, or use that the action of the governmental entity or entities, considering the settlement offer together with the ripeness decision has restricted, limited, or prohibited, The award of compensation shall include a reasonable award of prejudgment interest from the date the daim was presented to the governmental entity or entities as provided in subsection (4). (c)1. in any action filed pursuant to this section, the property owner is entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred by the property owner, from the governmental entity or entities, according to their proportionate share as determined by the court, from the date of the filing of the circuit court action, if the property owner prevails in the action and the court determines that the settlement offer, including the ripeness decision, of the governmental entity or entities did not constitute a bona fide offer to the property owner which reasonably would have resolved the claim, based upon the knowledge available to the governmental entity or entities and the property owner during the 90~day-notice period or the 180-day-notke period. 2. In any action filed pursuant to this section, the governmental entity or entities are entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred by the governmental entity or entities from the date of the filing of the circuit court action, if the governmental entity or entities prevail in the action and the court determines that the property owner did not accept a bona fide settlement offer, including the ripeness decision, which reasonably would have resolved the claim fairly to the property owner if the settlement offer had been accepted by the property owner, based upon the knowledge available to the governmental entity or entities and the property owner during the 90- day-notice period or the 180-day-notice period. 3. The determination of total reasonable costs and attorney fees pursuant to this paragraph shall be made by the court and not by the jury. Any proposed settlement offer or any proposed ripeness decision, except for the final written settlement offer or the final written ripeness decision, and any negotiations or rejections in regard to the formulation either of the seWement offer or the ripeness decision, are inadmissible in the subsequent proceeding established by this section except for the purposes of the determination pursuant to this paragraph. (d) Within 15 days after the execution of any settlement pursuant to this section, or the issuance of any judgment pursuant to this section, the governmental entity shall provide a copy of the settlement or judgment to the Department of legal Affairs, (7)(a) The circuit court may enter any orders necessary to effectuate the purposes of this section and to make final determinations to effectuate relief available under this section, (b) An award or payment of compensation pursuant to this section shall operate to grant to and vest in any governmental entity by whom compensation is paid the right, title, and interest in rights of use for which the compensation has been paid, which rights may become transferable devetopment rights to be held, sold, or otherwise disposed of by the governmental entity. When there is an award of compensation, the court shall determine the form and the recipient of the http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?p=2&mode= Vi eWO.lo2 0 Statute s& SubMenu= 1 &Ap... 8/1 0/2006 Statutes & Statutes : Page 5 of 5 and as well as the terms of their acquisition. (8) This section does not supplant methods agreed to by the parties and lawfully available for arbitration, mediation, or other forms of alternative dispute resolution, and governmental entities are encouraged to utilize such methods to augment or fadlitate the processes and actions contemplated by this section. (9) This section provides a cause of action for governmental actions that may not rise to the level of a taking under the State Constitution or the United States Constitution. This section may not necessarily be construed under the case law regarding takings if the governmental action does not rise to the level of a taking. The provisions of this section are cumulative, and do not abrogate any other remedy lawfully available, induding any remedy lawfully available for governmental actions that rise to the level of a taking. However, a governmental entity shaH not be liable for compensation for an action of a governmental entity appUcable to, or for the toss in value to, a subject real property more than once. (10) This section does not apply to any actions taken by a governmental entity which relate to the operation, maintenance, or expansion of transportation facilities, and this section does not affect existing law regarding eminent domain reLating to transportation. (11) A cause of action may not be commenced under this section if the claim is presented more than 1 year after a law or regulation is first applied by the governmental entity to the property at issue. If an owner seeks relief from the governmental action through lawfully available administrative or jUdicial proceedings, the time for bringing an action under this section is tolled until the conclusion of such proceedings. (12) No cause of action exists under this section as to the application of any law enacted on or before May 11, 1995, or as to the application of any rule, regulation, or ordinance adopted, or formally noticed for adoption, on or before that date. A subsequent amendment to any such law, rule, reguLation, or ordinance gives rise to a cause of action under thIS section onLy to the extent that the application of the amendatory language imposes an inordinate burden apart from the law, rule, regulation, or ordinance being amended. (B) This section does not affect the sovereign immunity of government. History. --s. 1, cn. 95-181; s. 1, ch. 2006-255. Disclaimer: The information on this system is unverified. The journals or printed bills of the respective chambers shoutd be consutted for offici at purposes. Copyright () 2000-2005 State of Florida. http ://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?p=Z&mooe= VieWOiOZOStatutes&SubMenu= 1 &Ap... 8/l 0/2006 To: All City Council Members, the City Manager, City Attorney, and Planning and zoning board: The purpose of this correspondence is two fold; First, we the residentsof Solana Lake, request that you deny Coastal Terminal"s request for a postponement and Second that you repeal the special exception in the zoning ordinance concerning petroleum tanks in M1 zones Reasons for denying Coastal Terminal's request for a postponement: 1. The exception application on file with you is now invalid because the application refers several times to plans attached to that document. If Coastal Terminals wants to relocate the tanks they must reapply to the state and other agencies of the city must review the new plans etc. It becomes a new request pro facto. All concerns must be reconsidered for public safety, health and welfare purposes. 2. Coastal Terminal's request for a rescheduling is invalid because it is dated a day after the request was actually delivered to the City and that date is a Saturday when the city does not do business. Under the Florida Sunshine law a meeting must be held with publiC notice regarding decisions of a board that affects the public. 3. Coastal's stated necessity for rescheduling ..~~ so that we may continue to review the concept--~" clearty indicates poor planning initially and no planning at present because of the vagueness of the request. Their ability to property plan is further drawn into question by the fact that they cannot fix a time of completion of this "concept review". Such a review should be conducted and concluded long before they subject the State, the city and its residents to a consideration of it's serious consequences. Remember, our property values are at stake in the interim. 4. The application on file is from Coastal Terminal LLC a subsidiary of TransMontaigne Inc. Notice that the address has changed from a Denver Colorado address to one in Georgia. On Thursday June 22, 2006 TransMontaigne Inc. announced that it has entered into a merger agreement with Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc. TransMontaigne expects the merger to close between mid~ August and mid~September 2006. The announcement states ,,~- This information may involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward~looking statements." Thus, a whole new company or new management should ask for this exception in it's own right when it is formed to allow proper review and consideration by public officials and private residents. 5. All of the review that has gone on before is now a waste of taxpayer money There is no assurance that this will not continue to be the case. Therefore the postponement for such vague reasons is not in the public interest. Reasons for Repealing the special exception in M1 zones for storage of liquified petroleum products. Sec. 110-354 (c)(6). In addition to the reasons presented before the Cape Canaveral City Council on July 18,.2006: Chapter 180.02 of the Florida statutes entitled "Powers of Municipalities" specifically provides that any municiipality may execute all of its corporate powers as may be necessary for the promotion of the public health, safety and welfare. Chapter 376.021 of the Florida statutes states: "(1) The legislature finds and declares that the highest and best use of the seacoast of the state is as a source of public and private recreation" (2) the legislature further finds and declares that the preservation of this use is a matter of the highest urgency and priority_If (3) the legislature further finds and declares that (a)"-~- the transfer of pollutants between terminal facilities within the jurisdiction of the state and state waters is a hazardous undertaking; (b) spill, discharges and escapes of pollutants-~pose great danger and damage to the environment of the state, to owners and users of shore front property, to public and private recreation, to citizens of the state and others---(c) such hazards have frequently occurred in the past, are occuring now and present future threats of catastrophic proportions all of which are expressly declared to be inimical to the paramount interests of the state as set forth herein; and (d) such state interests outweigh any economic burdens imposed by the legislature upon those engaged in transferring pollutants and related activities" The city council of Cape Canaveral, the planning and zoning board, and the board of adjustment, as a part of the state, have a duty and responsibility to support and compliment these legislative findings. These tanks may have been appropriate in 1990 and before, but now they clearly are not with the residential and recreational development in this seaside area.You allowed our homes and resorts to be built here after that time. You all know that Coastal's ground contamination is not cleaned up and may take years to do so. In the meantime new pollution may be occuring. We have heard feeble excuses from city officials that tank companies have property rights in the special exception but this is not true. No one has a "right" to an "exception".Coastal Terminals is asking for a "favor". We, the neighboring property owners, on the other hand, are asking for a true entitlement. That entitlement is our short and long-term safety and welfare along with sustained property values. The city cannot hide from it's responsibilities by postponing them hoping they will go away. Therefore the city must protect the public safety, health and welfare by repeating this special exception immediately under the exercise of its police power. The matter is so serious that a moritorium should be placed on this provision while the city acts. in our view the proviSion is arbitrary and capricious, and can only create a pubtic nuisance under the best of circumstances. Remember, you don't allow fireworks stores within 1000 feet of a residential zone but 6.3 million gallon petroleum tanks can abut us. The time to act is now! Subject: Solana request for repeal of Special exception for tanks My name is Ruth Anders,(give experience) I am here as a representative of Solana Lake, and all of our neighbors to request that section 110-354 (c) (6) of the city zoning ordinance allowing a special exception for liquified petrolium tanks be repealed. We know it will not have an effect on the current proposal coming up on Aug. 9th because that proposal would be grandfathered in, but no longer would any other special exception be granted for tanks in this city. We have written petitions from many residents in the city to support this request. I am sure we could get many more but we only had about four days to put this together. Even at that 464 city residents are on our side and I am submitting their names on the petition to you. Our reasons for repeal are: First,the serious safety hazards, health hazards, and property damages new tanks would create. Would you want one next door to you? Second, this special exception does not promote the public health, safety, welfare, comfort, convenience, appearance or prosperity but instead does just the opposite Third, It would provide a permanent solution as no company, including Coastal Terminals LLC, could come back in two or three years and put us through aU of this again. and Fourth, In our view, the present requirements are virtually standardless and are thus arbitrary and capricious and constitute the creation of a public nuisance. The special exception allows the storage of liquified petroleum products without any distance requirement from residents or standards for safety, environmental, aesthetic, air, light, view, noise or pollution purposes. There are no special standards to be met other than the Fire prevention code and that petroleum products in excess of 3000 gallons be in an established fire district. The city is far too developed to allow this situation to continue. The existing tank farm was first implemented about 50 years ago and the last request for a special exception to construct more tanks was granted in 1990. At that time, Coastal was told no further expansIon would be allowed. However, the city did not address this issue in it's zoning ordinance in the interim 16 years. None of the condominiums, town homes, resort ofCapeCaribe or other residential homes were in existence in 1990. By contrast, the picture I am holding shows how many residents now live too close to the existing tanks. We cannot imagine how the city let these high density residential uses be developed so close to existing tanks. I am sure you know, that under your existing zo a fire works store and adult entertainment must be no closer than 1000 feet from residential zones. But it is ok to have tanks holding 6.3 million gallons of gasoline e,ach, directly abutting developed residential property? This is outrageous! Many of the existing tanks are already within 200 to 900 feet of our newer high density residential buildings.( Not the property lines which are even closer) When we bought our homes we had the right to assume that the city was looking out for our health, safety and welfare and would not have allowed these residential developments to be constructed otherwise. We were dumb and happy. This issue has awakened us to the fact that we are residents of the City of Cape Canaveral and we have rights and responsibilities also. We do not want any other residents of this city to go through what we have gone through with this scary proposal.. The more we learned, the more we found out that the right hand does not always know what the hand is doing on this issue. 'Worst of all, the residents have been left out of the 100p.We are not even required to receive written notice of such proposals. Thatls unbelievable. Some of us in Solana Lake received written notice and some did not. We all own property within 500 feet of this proposal because we are aU condominium owners. Likewise, no written notice has been received announcing the postponement of the current special exception proposal until Aug. 9. We learned of the postponement by word of mouth. This, we are told, is because notice is a courtesy only. Notice cannot be a courtesy, when safety, health and property rights are being affected. It IS a due process requirement under the 5th and 14th amendments to the Federal Constitution. You need to fix this as soon as possible. The state DEP does require a public notice in the newspaper, but no wonder no one noticed when it was published in April of this year. The company name in the notice was the parent company, TransMontaigne Inc. and not Coastal Terminals LLC. The public notice only said it was for a permit to construct storage tanks 30 and 31 at a certain cape canaveral address and f! that the facility is a source of air emissions" What does that teU us? How misleading can a notice be.? The City and everyone up through the State government has a duty to keep us informed.in a responsible way of matters affecting our homes, our property values and our lives. For example, through this excercise we discovered that we did not even know of evacuation routes in our community if a disaster occurs. Maybe the city and the fire department know, but they forgot to ten the people who live here. To give you an idea of disaster, my sister Joyce Rosemary. is with me tonight and would like to share with you what it was like to live through a tank explosion in Torrance California m 1987. This concludes our presentation. Again, we ask that you repeal the special exception for liquid petroleum tanks in light industrial zones. We would also like to request that the city put a moritorium on any new tank special exception requests in the interim. We would appreciate notice of your decision as soon as you have had an opportunity to consider it. . Meeting with Mayor Randels on July 6 2006 at Solana Lakes Condominiums The following is an outline of the issues discussed with the Mayor INFORMATION PROVIDED BY COASTAL TERMINALS TO SOLANA LAKES RESIDENTS 2 tanks on berms. forty two feet high within 100 to 300 feet of buildings and amenities . Our social building is 307 feet from a proposed tank. Trees and grass. The existing buffer will be replaced with a barbed wire fence and concrete. Each tank would contain up to 6.3 million gallons of gasoline and would be 160 feet in diameter. We have found out a lot in a little over two weeks when we organized to oppose this proposal. The mayor was encouraged to interrupt if any of the points we make are not accurate. ZONING SPECIAL EXCEPTION-- TANKS HOLDING PETROLEUM PRODUCTS MAYBE CONSTRUCTED IN AN M1 ZONE BY SPECIAL EXCEPTION 1. the Board of Adjustment, with two vacancies at present, makes the final decision considering the p& z recommendation on this request. Citizens have 30 days to appeal to a court of law on the record that has been made at the 2 publiC hearings. The mayor and city council as our only elected officials in the matter have no say or decision making obUgations or responsibilities. This is just incredible to us. 2. In 1990 a special exception was granted to Coastal Oil to expand it tanks. The then mayor objected that the tanks should be placed north to the port to no avail. 3. How did our residential development get approved by the City with existing tanks located within 800 to 870 feet from the then proposed buildings and amenities? (not the property lines which are even closer) this is according to my own measurements from a scaled drawing. a. How come we were not made aware of this when we purchased our condos? Relators are required to make such facts known to prospective purchasers. In fact, they must make this proposal known to prospective purchasers right now. We have a right to assume that the city would not allow known safety hazards to exist or be created when they approved the Solana Lakes development plan. 4.. It is ironic that the city's Z'o' does not allow a fireworks store to be located within 1000 feet of residential property (not the buildings) nor may adult entertainment be within such 1000 feet but 6.3 million gallons of gas times two can? 5. Written notice was sent to some of us within 500 feet of the special exception property but not all. When we investigated they told us the notice is a courtesy not a requirement. What? a. It is ironic that the city sent a notice to the entire area of Cape Caribe's request for a liquor license. b. Such lack. of notification requirements places an undue burden on homeowners to notify our neighbors within Solana Lake who were not notified, not to mention Solana Shores, Shorewood and the other adjacent neighbors of the seriousness of this proposal. c. The notice was sent to us in less than 30 days from the p & z hearing set for July 12. This places an undue burden upon homeowners to investigate and prepare our serious objections and concerns for the record so that they can be considered in the event of a court appeal. IN SUMMARY, WE BELIEVE THE CAPE CANAVERAL CITY ZONING ORDINANCE AS PRESENTLY WRITTEN CONCERNING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE STORAGE OF UQUIFIED PETROLEUM PRODUCTS (SEE SEC. 110.354 OF THE CITY Z.O.) IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN THAT IT IS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS, DENIES DUE PROCESS, PROVIDES FOR NO DECISION BY ELECTED OFFICIALS, HAS NO NOTICE REQUIREMENT AND IS CONTRARY TO THE CITY'S MISSION STATEMENT and I quote" Welcome to the City of Cape Canaveral a safe, clean, residential beach- side community with tree lined streets." Mr. Mayor, we do not want to go to court to resolve this problem, we would instead appreciate it very much if you took up this issue with the rest of the city council to immediately void the special exception provision in the M 1 zone until the city can investigate the legal and policy aspects of the current provisions. THE FACTS i.We were not told that Coastal Terminal LlP has been cited for environmental contamination of ground water since 1988. Nor were told that Brevard County has already approved a remedial action plan. We have been informed that publiC and private funds have been set aside to clean up the hydrocarbon contamination that exists beneath most of the area. Shouldn't that be Coastal Terminals' responsibility? Why taxpayers funds? How can they ask for more tanks when they haven't cleaned up the current problem? Would they want the taxpayers to fund that too? 2. We have many environmental concerns but can find no environmental studies that have been conducted or environmental impact statements. 3. We have serious hazardous materials safety concems both from a tank expfosion, which could occur from lightening alone, to terrorism acts. We can find no studies or safety regulations on this issue. The zoning code states that the storage of liquified petrOleum products must comply with standards set out in the National Fire Protection Association, Fire prevention code and that products in excess of 3000 gallons shall be in an established fire district. We can't find these requirements or if they have been met and the fire marshall has not returned at least 5 attempts to speak to him by phone. NOTE thanks to our meeting with the mayor this issue has been resolved. We have met with fire officials and have access to the code. We still have very serious fire safety concerns. We have serious air pollution safety concems as well. We know that fumes from gas cause cancer but what city requirements does the tank company or it's trucks have to comply with to prevent the pollution of the air? We know the air is already polluted from the existing tanks but we do not know what will keep matters from becoming worse with the addition of two more tanks? Could the air explode? 4. We have serious aesthetic concems, as this is a beautiful beach community and our property values are directly related to the views, and aesthetic amenities we are lucky enough to have here. The Supreme court long ago said that governments may regulate use for aesthetic reasons alone.{ See Berman v Parker 348 US 26 75 S.Ct. 98 (1954)). We have been told by Coastal that there are no plans to create a buffer of trees or other things to screen the unsightly tanks from view, that instead they will construct a barbed wire fence. What can the city do to prevent this blight on our community? 5. We have serious noise and vibration concems from the movement of trucks coming and going refueling. Are there any city requirements on this issue when the land use abuts a fully developed residential zone so as not to cause a publiC nuisance? By contrast, we believe oil tanks in close proximity to highly developed residential use are a public nuisance per se, that means in and of itself. 6. The tanks are totally incompatible with our pre existing residential use and zoning. IT WOULD BE A FAR BETTER POLICY ON THE PART OF THE CITY TO ACQUIRE THIS LAND BY PURCHASE OR CONDEMNATiON TO CREATE A BUFFER ZONE FOR THE PROTECTiON OF ITS CITIZENS, A taking in fee simple or the taking of a conservation easement as provided for in the Florida statutes would be a welcome relief and solution to this serious problem. The city could seek assistance of the county and state in this regard. note: since the meeting, Rep. Bob Allen has stated his support for our opposition and has said he will investigate the acquisition solution and get back with us. Otherwise, if this special exception were granted or asked for again two years from now as at/owed by the city code, we property owners would be compelled to file a suit in inverse condemnation asking the city to pay us just compensation for the damaging and taking of our property . , , I " " , ,'_ 4 f ',_, ,,;.'i(,r ", ~~ IJ~, l~ ,tfII 'W:~~""'Y' ....~. :~ ..'$ S~ t- I ~~, ~ . i k " To: The Planning & Zoning Board Of The City of Cape Canaveral From: Evelyn Tennenbaum 8941 Lake Drive Apt. 306 Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 Phone: 321-799-4132 Subject: Special Exception Request No. 0605 View {loint: Ol!)>osed Date : August 23, 2006 1 My name is Annie! Evelyn Tennenbaum and I'm a Resident of Cape Canaveral- specifically Solana Lake, the condominium that abuts Coastal Fuels Tank Farm. I'm not going to give you my resume or claim any expertise, but I will speak as a resident, who has a strong interest in my community. I am a tax payer and I proudly possess a Florida Voter Registration Card. For many years I taught in an area in New York where a statistically significant number of children suffers from asthma. I don't think it is a coincidence that my coworker died from emphysema. So you see I would pay particular attention to pollutants of any source that would affect the health of our environment, or for that matter wildlife habitats). AIR Quality Now The air quality index for Brevard County is monitored by a Facility in Cocoa Beach. IT MOST CERT AINL Y is not Indicative of ozone levels surrounding the Port area. Your nose is a very good indicator of air quality. The air increasingly reeks with the stench of pollutants. Vapors are discharged when storage tandks are filling. Breathing small_amounts of gasoline vapors affect the nervous system and can cause breathing difficulties. The noxious odors, which emanate from the storage of asphalt, acts as a respiratory irritant that can trigger asthma attacks. There are many more gasoline tanker trucks on the road, more traffic & more pollution. Think about the health risks that are already present. Think about the health risks 10 years from now. There are currently 2,150 residences within a one mile radius of the current tank farm. The increasing activity and growth of Costal Fuels will surely affect the health and quality of life of everyone within that one mile radius and the surrounding community. JULY I AUGUST 2006 Elder Update 13 Betore March 2006, only Brevard County and the City of Cape Canaveral were involved. A series of presentations last spring started the CF AL ball rolling. Department of Elder Affairs staff addressed the Brevard Commission on Aging (BCOA), Brevard County Board of County Commissioners and city managers from each of the municipalities. Created in 2000, the BCOA is tasked by the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners to identify community resources tor elders, analyze their strengths and identifY areas that need improvement. With approximately 23 percent of Brevard County's total population age 60 and older, and that percentage expected to increase during the next five to 10 years, social service agencies and local governments will be challenged to address a broad range of age-related issues. Through the diligent etforts of Harris and Cape Canaveral Mayor Rocky Randels, the 15 municipalities of Brevard County joined the county's eftorts to evaluate their communities from a lifetime perspective. The result was that between April 6 and May 3, all municipalities in the county had officially passed resolutions in support of Communitiesfor a Lifetime. "What better way to show our seniors how much they are appreciated than to have all of Brevard's communities designated a Community for a L!fetime. This was our goal during Older Americans Month," said Tammy Harris, Brevard Commission on Aging Planner with Brevard County Housing and Human Services. To learn more about the Brevard County initiative, contact Tammy Harris at (321) 633-2076 or tammyharris@brevardcounty.us. Communities for a Lifetime - The above article was included in the July/August 2006 Publication of the Florida Department of Elder Affairs Our Mayor Rocky Randalls has committed himself to this exemplary program, Communities for a Lifetime. A community that participates in this pr02ram must be mindful that the a2ed and those afflicated with repiratorv problems are particularly vulnerable to air pollution. It is imperative that we protect our residential communities from further exposure to toxins and contaminants. When I moved to Cape Canaveral I did not see any ! I should have been advised that senior citizens and those with respiratory problems should not live in this area. Building new storage tanks would necessitate the removal of trees. These trees can not be replaced; because of their size and location, they provide a natural barrier and screen. They act as a filter for pollutants.. Trees and other vegetation are a principal source of oxygen. Destroy a tree and you destroy the habitat of countless creatures. Now add contaminated ground water and you've created the final death blow to the environment.. Particularly since this could introduce new ground water contamination. When Coastal Fuels asked for a special Exception, they did not volunteer to inform us that a dissolved hydrocarbon plume (gasoline compounds) was already present in the ground water beneath a majority of the site. The estimated area of that contaminated ground water is 300,000 square feet. The estimated area of contaminated soil is 15,000 square feet. Most contamination occurred from the newest tanks #17 & 18. The Plume has been a problem for over 10 years. Living at the Space Coast we have learned that each launch entails some element of risk. Despite all the research and tests The Space program has experienced tragic errors. No one can guarantee that the Coastal Fuels tank farm, will not drastically impact our health and safety. In sharp contrast to our lovely communities, is the area of North Atlantic Avenue that borders the Coastal Fuels facility. North Atlantic Avenue fully exposes an unsightly barbed wire fence facility suggestive of a prison. There is no buffer to obscure the view because of the concerns of The Department of Homeland Security. Is there adequate screening and lor buffering provided to protect and provide compatibility to adjoining properties? The answer is NO. Trees would hinder Fire Fighters and provide hiding places for Terrorists. Let's get our priorities straight! Adult entertainment establishments and stores that sell fireworks must maintain a distance of 1,000 feet from a residential area, but no such requirement for Coastal Fuels.. A memorandum to The Public Works Director dated 6/29/06 summarizes environmental conditions at the Coastal Fuels Cape Canaveral Terminal. Here is an excerpt from that memorandum.... . The release of hydrocarbon compounds (gasoline compounds), was first documented in 1988 · Numerous subsequent hydrocarbon releases have been detected and documented.. The diagram of current ground water contamination clearly shows the extent of the pollution present in the ground water beneath a major portion of the site. The Cleanup Operation for this hU2e area of Contaminated 2round Water - Dissolved Hydro Carbon Plume, has not yet started! There is no quick fix for this problem which continually resurfaces and is common to tank farms.. To study the history of contamination at the Coastal Fuels site, one can only conclude that this type of industry should not be located near a residential area. The addition of more storage tanks would only extend the area of contamination. It is hi2hly relevant that a 1,000 2allon diesel fuel tank leak occurred in Cocoa Beach on July 19., 2006 - cause unknown. Despite precautions storage tanks can leak! The city ought to consider creating a conservation easement in this area to protect our environment and property values. This will be more cost effective in the long run since taxpayer dollars account for 740/0 of the cost to clean up the site - Coastal Fuels only 260/0.. . '-- -.... (J) .. __ (,/1 "t i W' , !i . '<'. ,,:;;~ '--s'~ t~':f~> ~-i f ~"",;, \ I .,.:< """"" ~ \ \ . 0~s -., I @ \ \ I I 0 \ ?~ , I --- ." I \ I I ~i5 \ 0 ~~m:u.~~ \ --- ~UNt , ---- , - fUiC[ UIi[ \ f:~COi';.~ . ,:25 so- M" -100-_ -""""""'" -1,000 -vall. ..... fiGURE 7 " ff'I:r~1 BENZENE CONTOUR IMP "" :uor !JEl~ ~ ~~ OC1{Ct!Cl-l 'I..llH% CAPE CANA'IER1lL TERMlNAl "AiAPi,n;: OJljn:m:; OIfJ'5 COAST At FlJELS !dARl<flING. INC. _1'FIOllIJCi~...c. .~"tl<1~"."..liC' V'$ t f;f;Z~89S~ZE 9t;Z~ ~k80-900Z MEMORANDUM TO: Ed Gardulski Public Works Director FROM: Jeff Ratliff StonDwater Adndnistratot City of Cape Canaveral 86...1240 DATE: 06/29/06 HE: Coastal Fuels Cape Canaveral Terminal Below is a summary of environmental conditions/cleanup efforts conducted at the Co~1:al Fuels Cape Canaveral Terminal: Historical Releases: . The release of hydrocarbon compounds (gasoline compounds) was first documented in 1988. . Numerous subsequent hydrocarbon releases have be.en detected and documente<L Recent Investigations: ... A dissolved hydrocarbon plume (gasoline compounds) is present in the groUtldwater beneath a majority oftbe site. . The dissolved plume has migrated northward under George King Boulevard. . The estimated area of grou.ndwater impacts is 300,000 square teet. . The estimated area of soil impacts is 15,000 square feet. . No municipal or private potable wells are located within l;4~tniIe of the site. Cleanup Activities: ,. A Remedial Action Plan (RAP) to cleanup the soil and groundwater has been approved by Brevard County. . Pilot testing has been petformed of an air-sparginglsoil vapor extraction system. . The facility is enrolled in tbe Pre-approved Advance Cleanup Program (PAC) ~ public/private funds have been allocated to cleanup hydrocarbon contamination beneath the site. t:d Wd80:t:T 9002 ST '6n~ E[t:T898Tt:[: 'ON X~~ f'ld3dtt::.'i: ~~Od..:l To: The Planning & Zoning Board Of The City of Cape Canaveral From: Evelyn Tennenbaum 8941 Lake Drive Apt. 306 Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 Phone: 321-799-4132 Subject: Special Exception Request No. 0605 View point: Q{!posed Date : August 23, 2006 Environmental Sources and Document Research Brevard County Natural Resources Management Office, Pollutant Storage System, Remediation & Hazardous Waste System Cape Canaveral Building Department Department of Environmental Protection Air Resource Management EP A Symposium .. 2002 Florida Today Illinois Deparment of Public Health Environmental Fact Sheet OCULUS Website Please note that for the sake of brevity, it was not possible to include documents, in their entirety. The purpose of providing excerpts from these documents is to illustrate the numerous occurrences of hydro carbon releases, and to document the existence of the present contamination. -.-.- matter" Port Canaveral Contamination October 27, 2003 !d!,pe Canaveral Port Authority - Consultant contracted to the CPA encounters evidence of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination November 20,2003 CP A informs Coastal Fuels Marketine't (CMFI) Incorporated of the release discovery & location in close proximity to under ground pipeline November 21,2003 The Brevard County Natural Resources Manaeement Office't (BCNRMO) notified December 3, 2003 CFMI submits Incident Notification Form to the BCNRMO January 9, 2003 CFMI personnel conduct a limited investigation of South Cargo Pier 3 area to confirm presence of contamination March 2004 Subsequent site assessment activities delayed until 5/04 by regular business operations of the tenants of South Cargo Pier 3 area March 23, 2004 Monitoring wells installed & fluid levels measured May 2004 Limited Contamination Assessment Report prepare for: Coastal Fuels Marketing Inc.. Prepared by: L T Environmental, Inc.. Department of Environmental Protection Certified Mail Return - Receipt Requested Notification of property owners of pollution found on their property in ground water & soil, during an assessment of following site: Coastal Fuels Marketing ,Inc.. 8952 North Atlantic Cape Canaveral, FL.. 32920 of Ardama,'1 residue" owned ,me! 3UCf6u!"I)LCAI't HI 05-06-04 SoCrgoPT3LCAR P' 05JJ{j..()4 - v ne~ ~~!.:~~~~~ lie. ' CJfi FLORIDA'S SPACE COAST - OHleE Of NATURA.l RESOURCES MANACEMENT Teiep"otl< (407) 633.2Q17 3un <::om 366-20\7 2725 Sr. Jo>tns St, V era. F'~ 32940 FAX: \407) 633.2029 April 1 1, 1996 Ms. Idayna Stokes Coastal Fuels Marketing, Ine P.O. Box B124 2401 Eisenhower Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316 RE: Remedial Action Annual Report (Year One, Half Two) 17 & 18 Area 10 Tanker Turn Road Cape Canaveral, Florida F ACID #058500881 Dear Ms, Stokes: The Brevard County Natural Resources Management Division has reviewed and approves the Remedial Action Annual Report dated January 31, 1996 (received February 12, 1996) for the above referenced facility. This office concurs with the recommendation to discontinue groundwater recovery from recovery wells RW-2 and RW-4, Please substitute these two recovery wells for monitor wens IRA-II and IRA-27 in the quarterly sampling regime. This office also agrees with the recommendation to continue operation of the VES system. If you have any questions regarding this review. please feel free to give me a caU at (401) 633- 20n. Sincerely, NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DIVISION . /j (:. , / . :-~~) /~. "0::):. \0'" ( / / "--'..r . ._ .......... , '- Leesa Souto Environmental Specialist .. . . . , ... ~ 'I..' ... '" ~ !i- ce. William Scanlan, FDEP-Bureau of Waste Cleanup ?*~~'~flp Jim Holst, Handex ofFlorida-Mt. Dora ... -" PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPfR "'. -I /;/" :. ~ ,~ ~ .' " ~(,' " P:s~ L' p , " ,'_:~, )_':\:~~-V: I~'\ , "J.;t A-, - fJ --.. " IT Corporation A Mem],a oj Tile rr eMU) . . LIMITED CONTAMlNA TION ASSESSl\1ENT RJ<:PORT COASTAL CAPE CANA VERt\L TERMINAL 10 Tanker Turn Road Cape Canaveral, FL F.A.C. ID # 058500887 IT Corporation Project 830805 December 20, 2001 Prepared for: EL PASO CORPORA TION 1001 Louisiana St. Houston Texas, 77252 (~~ppr~;~ / ~CI~j. 4J~___~ / ' J son L. Whitman James P. Bowen, P.G. 0,..._'' 1 Project Hydrogeologist Project Manager N:1final Projed Documonl,\830805\LCft.R.ll-{) I.doc IT Corporation .4 Member of The The original Contamination Report was approved by BCONRMD on June 9, 1 and characterized petroleum hydrocarbons in the soil and groundwater as being representative the "gasoline analytical group". AdditIOnal assessment was conducted in response to a which modified the original CAR. Subsequently, a CAR Modification \vas BCO'N'RlvID in February of I The Remedial Action was approved on 1994. The remediatIOn the contractor was and treat with soil vapor extraction (SVE). pumped vapors from a network of vertical extraction points around the two tanks 17 & 18. This network of wells is piped underground to a manifold m the equipment compound and vapor was apparently pumped out of the manifold with a catalytic oxidation system equipped with an integral vacuum pump. The network 23 vertical extraction points and underground piping is still in A 25 oxidizer treatment unit provided the vapor treatment. groundwater recovery treatment includes a network or extraction wells eqUIpped with submersible pumps. These pumps are piped to the compound, via piping, to a In groundwater treatment was provided by three bioreactors. The effluent from the bioreactors was polished using a low air stripper. A groundwater remediation system installation was initiated on August 10, 1994 with the five recovery and two supplemental monitoring wells. Installation was completed September 1994, the was activated on October 31, 1994 and deactivated by October 31, 1995. The bioreactors operated from October 1994 to July, 1995 at which time the air su-ipper was used as the only groundwater treatment device. During the October 2001 sampling episode, ITC personnel activated the submersible pumps to confirm that they were operational (they were), the blower to the air stripper was not operational. 1.3 Well Area Survey A well survey conducted accordance with the 1992 CAR did not identify any public, semi-public, or domestic use water wells within a 0.5 mile radius of the site. Additionally, the report stated that "contact with the water department of the City of Cape Canaveral and the water management office of the Canaveral Port Authority confinned that there are no municipal water wells within the area". 2.0 Site Assessment 2.1 Soil Quality Investigation and Assessment the were In 17 and No. I 8 to identify the extent of fuel impacted soils. The samples were screened for N:\Fimd Projcct DQcumenlS\830805\LCAR_Il-O I.doc ., .. l,T Corpo...tion A ),ft:mber of The /1' Group the presence of volatile organic vapors using a Heath Porta-FlD Il Organic Vapor Analyzer (AD). contaminated" by Section 17- 770.200(2), F.A.c., was found in the vicinities of and The r~3 CAR Modification, in response to a fuel release at a failed fuel pump located at AST No.IS, addressed the extent of the soil impact of the new release. The estimated extent of hydrocarbon vapors in the soil, as presented in the approved 1992 CAR, included the area in which the new release occurred. In order to comply with the DEP guidelines for a LCAR, an updated soil assessment has been conducted in and around tanks 17 and 18. The organic vapor plume has been diagrammed on a scaled site plane (Figure 2-1). The resulting data from the corrected organic vapor measurements obtained have been tabulated in Table 1. Complete geologic logs have been included in Appendix C. Three soil samples have been collected from the areas where the high, medium, and low OVA readings were detected and the samples analyzed for BTEX and MfBE using EPA Methods 8260B, PAHs using EPA 8270C, and TRPH using Fl.-PRO. This data (Appendix B) has confirmed the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons (reported as FLPRO) in excess of the sol! cleanup target levels (SCTI....) developed in Chapter 62-770, FAC. The laboratory data resulting from the confirmatory analysis of soil can be found in Table 2. 2.2 Water Table Elevations Groundwater elevations were collected in conjunction with the August 27 through 29, 2001 sampling events. The water levels were collected with an oil-water interface probe that is capable of measuring liquid levels to the nearest 0.01 feet Table 3 provides a summary of the water table elevations used to interpret the groundwater flow direction. No liquid-phase hydrocarbons were found in the monitor wells tested on the week of August 28, 2001. The general groundwater flow direction, as interpreted from the August 27 & 28, 2001 depth to water data, is trending (0 the west-northwest. The calculated water table elevations are depicted in Figure 2-2. The average depth to water during the August 27 & 28,2001 sampling event was approximately 9.18 feet bls. 2.3 Groundwater investigation and Assessment The most recent groundwater assessment was conducted by IT Corporation (IT) on August 27 & 28, 2001. Groundwater samples were collected from (28) twenty-eight monitoring weBs on or adjacent to the site. A summary of the sampled wells is as follows: SOW, DMW-2, IRA-I, IRA-2, IRA-3, IRA-4, IRA-5, IRA-6, IRA-7, IRA-8, IRA-9, IRA-15, IRA-16, IRA-n, IRA-18, IRA-20, IRA-21, MW-l, RW-l, RW-2, RRW-3, RW-4, RW-5, RW-6, X-I, X-2, X-3, QA-l. and QA-2. The well locations are illustrated in Figure 1-2. Prior to groundwater sampling, the wells were purged of approximately five volumes of water to ensure that the samples were representative of aquifer conditions. During the water purging, ITC personnel monitored the water quality for pH, temperature, N:\Final Project Docuffien::s\830805\LCAR_ll-{)j doc 3 The EPA Fourth Biennial Sheraton Cleveland Centre Hotel in and Beatriz Oliveira USEPA A. or or roeten, can at a IS IS to ensure an a assure stored vents to Gasoline Fact Sheet Page lof3 '; 11I181s Iepalbl,II., Pollle'" GASOLINE GASO.LINE This fact sheet provides answers to questions about gasoline. It will explain what gasoline is, how you can be exposed to it, how it can make you sick, and ways to reduce or prevent your exposure to gasoline. What is gasoline? Gasoline is a pale brown or pink liquid made from processed crude oil. It evaporates easily, is very flammable and can form explosive mixtures in air. Typical gasoline contains about 150 different chemicals, including benzene, ethyl benzene, toluene and xylene, which al~Q ~re known as ~!he~ B !E~~~!!!E~~llo!!_~1~__ Gasoline also contains chemicals such as lubricants, anti-rust agents and anti-icing agents that are added to improve car performance. These chemicals usually are only present in very small amounts. Before the 1980s, lead was commonly used in gasoline as an anti-knocking agent. The use of lead has been stopped due to air pollution and the possibility of adverse health effects. Some gasolines also contain ethanol, which is made from corn. Ethanol helps a car run more efficiently and it produces less pollution. How does gasoline get into the environment? Spills, leaks or improper disposal of gasoline can cause contamination of soil, groundwate!, surface water and air. Leaking underground storage tanks or pipelines also can cause gasoline to enter surrounding soil and groundwater. Gasoline can be released into the air when large tanker trucks are filled and emptied and when you fill your car at the service station. How can I be exposed to gasoline? You can be exposed to gasolineby -= . . breathing gasoline vapors, . drinking water contaminated with gasoline, or · touching gasoline or soil or water contaminated with gasoline. ! The most common exposure to gasoline occurs by breathing vapors when filling your car's fuel tank. Vapors also can be present in air when gasoline evaporat~s out of contaminated http://v..rww.idph.state.il.us/envhealthlfactsheets/ gaso line.htm 07/07/2006 Gasoline Fact Sheet Page 2 of3 soil or water. Gasoline vapors can build up in basements, crawlspaces and living areas.: When gasoline seeps into soil. it can contaminate grQundwate.LllS.edfOL.m:inking. Most chemicals in gasoline are removed during water treatment, but people who drink untreated water or water from private wells can be exposed. GasQline also C::l1J he ::lhsorh~d throl)gh~~ skin during contact, such as when pumping gas or cleaning up a gasoline spill. ~ What are the hcalth cffccts of gasolinc exposure? , I Many adverse health effects of gasoline are due to individual chemicals in gasoline, I1l~:!!1Y BTEX, that are present in small amounts. Breathing small amounts of !:;asoline vapors can Jead to nose and throat irritati~~ dizzin~ss, l1al!~a,vo~~ing, ~onfuSionan(r breathin difficulties. Symptoms from swallowing small amounts of gasoline include ! I mouth, throat and stomac IrrItatIOn, nausea, vomItmg, Izzmess an ea ac es. . .~- Swallowing gasolinecavses-inanyacCidentarpmsorungseadiyear: SomeeffeClsofskin ~~:~1::C~o~~~:e~ih!~_"!l-'L~E!!!!)l[Jb~O.,,"d~~~_"'!'9~S I The health effects of being exposed to gasoline over long periods of time are not well I known. This is because people exposed to gasoline are usually exposed to many other things i that also can cause health effects. Some workers who are exposed to gasoline every day in their jobs have suffered memory loss and decreased muscle function. At very high levels, some of the chemicals in gasoline, such as benzene, are known to cause cancer. Current evidence, however, does not show that exposure to low levels of gasoline causes cancer in humans. Can I be tested for gasoline exposure? There are currently no tests to measure gasoline in your body but, if you think you are ill because of gasoline exposure, consult your doctor immediately. How can I reduce my exposure to gasoline? Due to the widespread use of gasoline in cars, trucks, buses and lawn care equipment, eliminating exposure would be difficult. Typically, you can smell gasoline at levels that would not be expected to cause adverse health effects. Since gasoline can be smelled at low levels, the source can usually be found and eliminated. If you suspect that your water supply is contaminated with gasoline, here are a few ways to reduce your exposure: · If gasoline is in your well water, do not drink it Consider using bottled water instead of tap water or connecting to a public water supply. · Shower or wash in cooler water. Wash and rinse clothes in cold water. The hotter the water, the more gasoline evaporates into the air you breathe. · Air out bathrooms, washrooms and kitchens during and after water use by opening doors and windows and turning on exhaust fans. Where can I get more information? http://www.idph.state.il.us/envhealth/factsheets/gaso line .htm 07/07/2006 My name is Mary Ann Brokus. I am a resident of Solana Lake. I am reading this speech for Gail Duncan. She and her husband are also residents of Solana Lake. She was prepared to deliver this speech on July 12 and again on Aug. 9th, but is now out of state visiting family. My husband and I are both retired real estate Brokers. I have 16 years of real estate experience as wen as 10 years of sales and sales management experience with a Fortune 500 company. My husband has 30 years of real estate experience. For many years he specialized in creative marketing for condominium builders and developers whose projects were either difficult to sell and/or in financial difficulties. VVe also owned a construction company, building single family homes. We understand the dynamics of property values and how they are affected. We looked at many places before deciding to buy here. VVhen we saw Solana Lake, we immediately fell in love with this quiet, beautiful, beach-side community. We love being close to the beach, the view of the ships coming in and out of the Port, and the lush landscaping and peaceful setting. We perfectly fit the City's Mission Statement: "A safe, clean residential beach-side community with tree-lined streets." Currently, our homes have a buffer of approximately 800 feet from the existing tanks. If the current Special Exception allowing liquefied petroleum tanks in the M-l zoning is allowed to continue, the likely placement of tanks would be even closer and would change everything about our quiet, peaceful, view property. VVhat is now a group of neighborhoods with a predominant high value, between 300 and 700,000 dollars, would become property blighted with external obsolescence, which would dramatically affect the current value. According to a local property appraiser, there is no place where fuel tanks are next to residential properties in the entire county of Brevard, probably the whole state. Cape Canaveral's Ordinance regarding Special Exceptions, specifically Section. No. 110- 39, says it must be considered whether a special exception would have an adverse impact on views and vistas, prices, neighborhood quality, traffic-generating characteristics, compatibility and harmony with adjacent land uses. It further states that a Special Exception should not adversely impact land use activities in the immediate vicinity. If the special exception provision were to continue, the day could come when our views would be huge gasoline tanks with dirt berms, and chain link fencing topped with barbed wire. There would be an increase in traffic, in noise and pollution from trucks coming in and out as well as an increased odor from the tanks themselves. The required lighting would be very intrusive and annoying. The existing Oak Hammock and shrubs would be eliminated or drastically reduced. Our views would be of an unsightly nuisance. Solana Lake would no longer fit Cape Canaveral's Mission Statement. It would no longer be the safe, peaceful, and beautiful setting in which we purchased our homes. Local Realtors and local Property Appraisers have agreed that our property value would decline. It would be difficult to sell. It is not what buyers want to live next to. Most would look elsewhere, and those who might consider it, would only do so by paying far less. The present tank farm was first built in the early 1950's, before there was any residential development here. In 1990 two tanks were approved by Special Exception to M-l zoning. As you can see from this overhead photograph there were about 100 acres of vacant land here and, of course, no opposition. Any future placement of tanks here would no longer be compatible with the newer more densely populated residential setting you see in the current photo. We have seen tremendous growth here with more and more condominiums, a beautiful, first class resort, and a recently rebuilt, very popular county park. This has evolved into a very sought after beach-side community for buyers and visitors alike. Cape Canaveral envisioned the building of these residential areas and the city has watched them flourish. The city has seen the property values grow, and the tax base increase. Our properties are described as highly desirable. We don't want the fear of more tanks hanging over our heads, or potential buyers to be looking elsewhere, and we don't want to see our property values decline. We ask that you maintain the integrity of the neighborhood and your constituents' property values by repealing the special exception for M-I zoning. More tanks would not fit in with the profile of a residential, resort neighborhood and would constitute an illogical and incompatible adjacency. Gail Duncan 8911 Lake Drive #203 Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 4B WEDNESDAY, JULY Wll-Z-- HRv ;A P R-t ( ! II' fi'v \\~)C' he OJ 'V 1 ~ C)'() o 8( 2 J (}~ 0