The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMay 9, 2007 - Agenda Packet PLANNING & ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL ANNEX 111 POLK AVENUE MAY 9, 2007 AGENDA 7:30 P.M. Call to Order Roll Call NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Meeting Minutes: April 25, 2007. 2. Review & Recommendation to City Council Re: Final Replat of Laws Townhomes, 109 & 111 Lincoln Avenue, Section 23, Township 24 South, Range 37 East, Block 69, Replat of Lots 5 & 6, Avon by the Sea Subdivision - Thomas Laws, Applicant. 3. Review & Recommendation to City Council Re: Final Replat of Beach Breeze, Section 14, Township 24 South, Range 37 East, Block 77, Replat of Lot 6 - Stacey Shoemaker, Applicant. 4. Discussion Re: Evaluation and Appraisal Report, Sections 4 & 5 - Todd Peetz, City Planner. 5. Discussion Re: Regulation of Resort Dwelling Units - Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney. 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 otherNise allowed by lav\!. 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, PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES APRIL 25, 2007 A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on April 25, 2007, at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Chairperson Bea McNeely called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The Secretary called the roll. MEMBERS PRESENT Bea McNeely Chairperson John Fredrickson Donald Dunn Harry Pearson John Johanson 1 st Alternate Ronald Friedman 2nd Alternate MEMBERS ABSENT Lamar Russell Vice Chairperson OTHERS PRESENT Robert Hoog Mayor Pro T em Kate LatOiie Assistant City Attorney Todd Peetz City Planner Duree Alexander Recording Secretary NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval or ivieetinq Minutes: April 11 , 2007. Motion by Harry Pearson, seconded by Donald Dunn, to approve the meeting minutes of April 11 ,2007. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. 2. Recommendation to the City Council Re: Proposed Chmnic Nuisance Ordinance and Code Enforcement Citation Code - Todd Peetz, City Planner. Todd Peetz, City Planner, presented an overview of the proposed Chronic Nuisance Ordinance and Code Enforcement Citation code. It was questioned if the City Code Enrorcement Officer had ever written any citations. Duree Alexander, Code Enrorcement Officer, responded that citations have been issued ror work without permits, and to unlicensed contractors. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, advised that the citations will be revised in compliance with the new ordinance. John Fredrickson questioned if the Sheriff's Dept. knew that they will be working closer with City code enforcement. Kate Latorre responded that meetings wiil be held to discuss issues 'vvith the Sheriff's department and City staff. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes April 25, 2007 Page 2 Bea McNeely questioned if the citations would be in lieu of the Code Enforcement Board. The Board members reviewed and discussed the proposed Ordinance. Questions and concerns were raised regarding: who would be the enforcement authority, and would they be properly trained; would the City budget be adjusted for the additional staff to enforce the program; would standards be established for number of violation(s); public intoxication; noise violations; nuisances such as arson; and loitering. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, explained that by the ordinance listing violations, it would allow the Sheriff's dept. to enforce repeat crimes. The Board agreed that loitering should be included in the list of offenses. By unanimous consensus, the Board members agreed to end the discussion. 3. Discussion Re: Evaluation and Appraisal Report Process - Todd Peetz. City Planner. Todd Peetz, City Planner, provided an overview of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report, along with a step by step explanation of how the Comprehensive Plan will work, and an outline of the process. Discussion followed. 4. Discussion Re: Existinq Land Use and Zoninq Maps- Todd Peetz, City Planner. Todd Peetz, City Planner, presented a copy of the maps to the Board members. Discussion followed regarding the Board's desire to have larger print on the street names. OPEN DISCUSSION Harry Pearson advised that the City agreed to send him to the Florida Planning & Zoning Conference and offered to share any information he collects. Kate Latorre, City reported on the status of the short-term rental ordinance. Harry Pearson advised that Coastal Fuels is going to the Board of Adjustment with an appeal. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, explained that the Building Official's decision is being appealed. She noted that the Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for May 10th. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Bea McNeely, Chairperson Susan L. Chapman, Secretary Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 5/9/07 AGENDA Heading Final Replat Item #2 No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING & ZONING BOARD THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Laws Townhomes Final Replat DEPT.lDIVISION: Building Department Requested Action: Review and recommend to City Council the proposed [mal replat for Laws Townhomes. Summary Explanation & Background: This request is for a [mal replat of lot 5, block 69, Avon-by-the-sea, east of North Atlantic (AlA) and south side of Lincoln Ave. Exhibits Attached: 1) Application by applicant 2) Site report by staff 3) Staff review comments 4) The Final Replat drawing Building Official's Office Department -~-~~.~.~ =. ~ ..-1' :;tf 7 ~ -t-t.""L &~ ~l '---...':/ . . ,- . . - APPLICATION FOR PLAT REVIEW - DATE OF SUBiYlITTAL: 4- 9' -'V I (NOTE: SUBiYlITTAL IYfUST BE SUBl\1ITTED A lY.r:JJ.\\ThIUM OF 30 DAYS PRIOR TO THE PLM1\TJ:NG & ZONING IYIEETING; PLAT IYfUST IYIEET THE REQtJIREiYIENTS OF SECTION 98-41 THROUGH 98-62). IS THIS A PRELThDNARY PLA~, RE-PLAT,~FINAL P~ . . , '--= . A:."\10D'NT OF FILJ1'~G FEE PAID: $ , 3(... Su' k"\IOUNT OF EKGNEERJNG DEPOSIT PAID: S . 71.) 0 . O~ DID BRg:Y~~___~Q_1'NTy,gEQGRAf?J:=rrC RESEARCH DIVISION APPROVK-TIIE ...... .... .,' . "_pu.__,_ _~..,._.., "_"__._.. __"u._.......,..__ REQUEST fOR STREET NAIYIE, IF APPLICABLE? (NOTE: THIS 1'.rEEDS TO BE -DOl'rE-PRIOR TO SU13?vlITTAL). YES _ NO~ N.A. ~ PROJECT NAivfE: lA\J'J-S lZl \.k) wtt--'V tAB-s' PROTECT ADDRESS: \0'9 ~ \ \ \'. L=tNCdW '-1\-\./6 I C-A p~ Cf\..JM~~ ./ LEGAL DESCRIPTION:5Rc..\ l. ~ l-\;\..Jfz--\- V-r~N6-E: 3,'7 B\cd::hC, Lot': s4- 6 . ,~~ o \VI\"ER(S) NA..v1E: "T~ ^^ flS 4 AJ AN( Y LA V-J5; O\v"N"ER(S) A..DDRESS: LL,bD ~!\ f'-Jc S',," '<C\ \ ~ o\l, ~ '-1-; '" I 32- 9 J ? . . c... PROJECT ARCHITECT/ENGI.:.",-EER: 6fA:.\-\ IMfi p:::t N C- PHO~"E NO. OF ARCmTECTIE~GTh'EER: 32-\ - {((S - \.+. 1--, It , - , ..", APPLICAL'iT(S) SIGNATIJRE: (~~B--JQ~~---=-----. . 01fY1'I""ERJAGENT _ . tf I)\.1 f:;- . - vv-o lL t. PH 0 :N""E. NUL\1J3 ER 0 F O~"ERJ A G Ei'-I'"T:-~~l-~-7-+-q..~--~t~-;---- -73-iJ~5~-b-:ty'?--------------------- . -./ I ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ---- --------._-- .- . - - - . - CZ). ....-.L.L.L '-'.L '-'L.L.I..LJ~.L.LL YI.l. I'L.L'\.I1L PRELIMINARY PLAT, REPLAT & FINAL PLAT RECEIPT Project Name: Lcut)s l0\J)n~ n\1le5 RESIDENTIAL: ,/ 1~ 3 Residential Units .............................................TOT Ae7~~ Total # of Units? (4) or more Residential Units $50.00 (1st (4) Units), $50.00 Plus Units @ $7.50 per unit . $ Total: $ ... '" ~- .... ....... .. ........".... COMMERCIAL: $150 per acre of land, or portion thereof. Acres X $150 TOT AL:...............$ SITE PLAN EXTENSION:...... ...... .... .... ... ............. ........ ...... TOTAL:......... ..;....$150.00 SITE PLAN RESUBlvnSSION: 50% of original fee.........TOTAL:..............$ ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- DEPOSIT TOWARDS REVIEW FEES: RESIDENTIAL: 1 .. 4 Units ...............g~ Over 4 Units.................. , . 0 COlvlIviliRCIAL: Up to 4 Acres.................$1,500.00 Over 4 up to 8 Acres.....$2,OOO.00 Over 8 Acres..................$3,000.00 Total Acres: Office Use QPly: Escrov'l Accour.t # 1-202.2400 -------------------------------------------------~--------- ----------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL REVIEW DEPOSIT RECEIVED: $ 3'1,56 ...... TOTAL SITE PLAl'-J SUB:tvfITTAL FEE RECEIVED: $ f 00,- PAID RECEIPT NO. DATE RECVD - - _. --- - --- - --- .-- - - - - ------ --.- -- - - - -- .-- ,.,,.-::: 1 ?$?J!~ J.,-;", ... ~! /.1'. ~ (/ it: y \ Zj <;:; City of Cape Canaveral Final Plat Laws Townhomes Applicant: Thomas A and Nancy D. Laws Location: Section 23, Township 24 South, Range 37 East Proposed Amendment Acreage: 0.175 +/- Acres Permitted 15 DU per acre: 2.6 Proposed Number of Units: 2 Proposed Density: 11.4 DU/ AC Current Future Land Use: C-1 Commercial Current Zoning: C-1 Commercial Description: The applicant proposes to build two, 2-story, townhome units on a 0.175 acre lot. The subject site is located south of Lincoln Avenue, east of Astronaut Boulevard (AlA) A venue and west of Poinsetta A venue. North South East West Zoning C-I Commercial C-I Commercial C-I Commercial C-I Commercial Comp Plan C-l Commercial C- I Commercial C-I Commercial C-I Commercial Existing Commercial / Multi Family Multi Family Commercial Conditions Multi Family Residential Residential Residential / Lincoln A venue Public Services and Facilities in Amendment Area: The Level of Service for parks and recreation is one (2) acres of park land per 1,000 residents. Approximately twenty-four (24) acres of park land exist in Cape Canaveral. This equates to a population of approximately 12,000 residents. The City's population as of i~~pri1, 2004 was 9,807. This is still adequate park space available. ;:?) ~ AlA is operating at Level of Service "A" with 283 available peak hour trips between North City Limits to Central Blvd. AlA from Central Blvd to North Atlantic has a level of Service is "A" with 325 excess trips. The proposed development would access Lincoln Avenue which links to Astronaut Boulevard (AlA). The City of Cape Canaveral provides wastewater treatment. The wastewater treatment capacity is 1.8 million gallons per day (MGD). The existing usage is 1.26 MGD with an excess capacity of .54 MGD. The amount the project could generate is 600 gallons per day. However, there is adequate wastewater treatment capacity available. The City of Cocoa has a total capacity of 56 MGD and currently provides 48 MGD. Approximately 24.4 MGD of water is being used on an average daily basis, leaving 23.6 MGD available. The amount of water needed for this project is 600 gallons per day. However, there is adequate potable water service available with the proposed change. Brevard County provides facilities for solid waste disposal. At this time, the County does not foresee any deficiency with their solid waste facilities. Environmental Description of Amendment Area: The site is a Galveston-Urban land complex (GA) soil type. The soils in this complex are well-drained Galveston sand and sandy soils that consist of reworked and leveled sandy materials that resemble Galveston sand. There appear to be no wetlands on site. Wetland determinations or verification are permitted by St. Johns River Water Management District. There is no known Aquifer Recharge or Floodplain areas associated with this parcel. There are also no known endangered species living on the site. Historical and Archaeological Resources in Amendment Area: There are no known historical or archaeological resources on site. Population Projections and Trends: The average household size is 2.37 per household. The anticipated population increase would be around 5 persons. @ Page 1 of 1 ~w"i. 8I;a;I;'t' . (~.:,<",,~,,:,!,'i--~d"< .,~5'::"'+"J'W'.)% <,." .:,o~ -a _Sue 01 T 1 4 6 .01Z 1 3 . (J) 8 m -I 9 111 13 14 15116 9.01 -L_~ LINca J> I I r--- -I I-~ z 1 \ 3 6 8 I 1 3 4 I -I --L ~ 9 ~1 5.01 ~ L- I ~~"'~"'"ccc.cc'cc~ -L -- JOHN --- z PAL SAY I 7 l 4 1 1 --..., ~l {!tJ http://'vvvvw.brevardpropertjappraiser.conv scripts/ esrirnap.dll ?narne= Brevard 1 &id=200 7050... 5/2/2007 Page 1 of 1 .....I'fI. ... ,~^' "",,,*,,,,,1'.; W '!<8'! c~<<. ",.;"'~* ">:!i,,.~. 4:: . 1;.\.".1111 .~....... ....,.,. ""__.t "k ... ..... ..4,,' .,.'0L...., Af..I!IL. ',' ,"d,.,'.. # I' t,' 'i.~.:'...!" A..w' '*,,' "p.. iii""","'"' y w """y'% .,J', '". .",." "". & http://vv'''vv'vv.brevardpropertjappraiser.corrJ scripts/ esrimap. dll ?name= Brevard 1 &id=2007 0 5 0... 5/2/2007 Memorandum To: Todd Morley, Building Official From: Todd Peetz, City Planner Date: April 12, 2007 Re: Laws Townhomes Final Replat . I have reviewed the Laws Townhomes Final Replat and have no concerns at this time If you have any questions, or need further information please feel free to contact me at 407-629-8880. ~ CQ:) SSA April 19, 2007 Mr. Todd Peetz Miller-Legg & Associates 631 South Orlando Avenue Suite 200 Winter Park, FL 32789 RE: Final Plat Review - Laws Townhomes . Review #1 SSA Job No. 95.0208, Task 050.1003 Dear Mr. Peetz: SSA has reviewed the submitted preliminary plat for the above referenced project. Based on our review, SSA recommends said plat for City approval. This review does not relieve the applicant from other local, state, and federal agencies having jurisdiction over the project site. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, D:)~~~! David Roy Jones, PSM Chief Surveyor DRJ:jls CC: Susan L. Chapman City Engineer's Review Fee For Review #1 - $500.00 I NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL FEES I ,ll,S this project is being reviewed under the original City contract, I I t:'nninoorinn I=ooc fr\r all rC:l\fiou/C' aftar ')nd rO\/ic'1\lI \A/ill ho hillorl ~t cta~ no nor hf'"'lllr \ 1-1 1~11 IVVllr ''bl I vvv IVI ~ll I V Y,......., V Ull.VI L I U If ''''''''"' !!!l! ",lV ~.n!!~_'u L~!,. "f.''''''',.J.V>...,' }..J'-'l lIVU1. 1 '-...u . . ./ STOTTLER SfAGG & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLAl'mERS, INC. ~ 8680 North Atlantic Avenue ~. Box 1630 Cape Canaveral, F10rida 32920 Tel 321.783-1320 ;ax 321.783-7065 . r!iw~': ; . . Tic. #MC000329 #EBOOO0762 #LBOOO6700 / u:~oan sottorrva\cjvif\projects\cape\l-laws townhomes final pIal reVlew1.doc / MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Morley, Building Official TO: Todd Peetz City Planner FROM: Ed Gardulski Public Works Director DATE: April 12, 2007 RE: Laws Townhomes Re- Plat The Public Works Department has reviewed the Re-Plat of the above stated project and have on further comment: @ Page 1 of 1 Todd Peetz From: John Cunningham Ocunningham@ccvfd.org] Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 9:15 AM To: Todd Peetz Subject: Re:Laws Townhomes (Final Replat) Todd, We have reviewed the replat and have no comment at this time. 5/1/2007 r;n \' , ~ Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 5/09/07 AGENDA Heading Final Replat Item #3 No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING & ZONING BOARD THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Beach Breeze Final Replat DEPT./DIVISION: Building Department Requested Action: Review and recommend to City Council the proposed fInal replat for Beach Breeze. Summary Explanation & Background: This request is for a final replat of tract 6 of Section 14, Township 24 south Range 35 East, Chandler Park Subdivision. The replat is located on the west side of Ridgewood A venue north of Washington i~~ venue. Exhibits Attached: J) Application by applicant 2) Site report by staff 3) Staff review comments 4) The final replat drawing Building Official's Office Department ~"r~ ~ :5 ~ W . . - . APPLICATION FOR PLAT REVIEW - - -. DA TE OF SUBiYllTTAL: ~/3 ~ J () J (NOTE: SUBrvllTTAL IYIUST BE SUBNllTTED A lY.IINThIOM OF 30 DAYS PRIOR TO TIIE PLA.l\~WG & ZONIN"G l'vIEETING; PLAT lYIDST l'vIEET THE REQ1JIREIYIENTS OF SECTION 98-41 THROUGH 98-62). IS THIS A PRELThllNARY PLAT, RE-PLAT, OR FINAL PLAT? Fend A:.' 10 l)NT OF FTI,J:1\"G FEEP AID: $ . 3(,.SD ' . k'-IOUNT OF Ei\"GL'rEERJ:NG DEPOSIT PAID: S . . 10 6 DID_~M:Y~._.<:::Q1':N'I'X, G-EQGRAPIUC RESEARCH.DIVISION..APPROVE....ffiE,._..._.___ .w ,__._ _REQ~ST FOR STREET NMJE, IF APPLICA~LE? (NOTE: ~ :N"EEDS TO BE DOl'i"E PRIOR TO SUBl\-llTTAL). YES _ NO _ N.A. .' PROJECT NAiv1E: 'Be. cJ...c,,-'-g t t:.. -e.' 2- e- o ..' '-;:)' Ave..-- CJ1 PROJECT ADDRESS: ~?:.2;?' KL'd6.i'... CvJood J LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See :) teb rV'-l' tk. J ~; J-c. 10 '/0.. V'\ o \v1',"ER(S) NA.'Y1E: C't L, S; h() en\.6-Jv..! . <\o-...~ O\V1'\"ER(S) ADDRESS: lL~ ~ Q.~~ rS-I\ A ft-...rL' . /\ ," -- ~ - . ,_. l__ PROJECT ARCHITECT/EL'lGI:\"EER: ~ (J a.-,--J" 1'\1\. L ft'1 '~3 Ci-,s iU" ve 5; I"'?f PHO~'"E NO. OF ARCHITECT/E'-'GTh"EER: -3.2 I - -; t\ 3 7"'. Lf I ,'l-! ;. APPLICk~T(S) SIGNA TDRE: x1>< J <-A.O-e. ~L-L~ ~AGEN~~ ._ PH 0 N~ NlJiYfBER 0 F O\Th-:ERJ A G E~1:------------'--5-Fl---;=--i:t- t;-Ij-=.-L/(;;OrT-----------:---------------------- - , .,..J l/' il . L,uJ.- . --\ ~,l 'l) U/ -- -- -- --... _.L.......... JL.I ........L -L-l. ,....1..1. r -A-I.L '-L..I....L..I . PRELIMINARY PLAT,~~~LAT RECEIPT Project Name: -:BeA.,-.~ '!Sf e eZ=..-e- RESIDENTIAL: '/ 1,2 & 3 Residential Units .............................................TOTAL: ~ Total # of Units? (4) or more Residential Units $50.00 (1st (4) Units), $50.00 Plus Units @ $7.50per unit $ Total: $ .. . ,.. ....- .-........ _. ........ ....-- COMMERCIAL: $150 per acre of land, or portion thereof. Acres X $150 TOTAL:.............. .$ SITE PLAN EXTENSION:...... ...... ........... ............... ............ TOTAL:....... ....;. ...$150.00 SITE PLAN RESUBMISSION: 50% of original fee.........TOTAL:..............$ ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- DEPOSIT TOWARDS REVIEW FEES: RESIDENTIAL: 1 - 4 Units ....................($zOO.QQ:> Over 4 Units..................$i,500.00 C01'vllv1ERCIAL: Up to 4 Acres.................$l,500.00 Over 4 up to 8 Acres.....$2,OOO.00 Over 8 Acres..................$3,OOO.00 Total Acres: -2/ ,...., 3 Office Use Only: Escrow Account # 1-202.2400 ----------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------~------------------------- . , TOTAL REVIEW DEPOSIT RECEIVED: $ {DO j 00 T9TAL SITE PLAl'J SUBJ\lITTAL FEE RECEIVED: $ 31/5D PAID RECEIPT NO. DATE RECV'D ;.! 1 i" ,~ :"!.ii n;l ; ,1 i I \ I I/:?rf I \11,0 ~ City of Cape Canaveral Beach Breeze Final Replat Applicant: S. L. Shoemaker Location: Section 14, Township 24 South, Range 37 East Proposed Amendment Acreage: 0.628 +/- Acres Permitted 15 DU per acre: 15 units maximum whole site Proposed Number of Units: NI A (2 lots shown) Maximum Potential Density: 9 DUlAC Current Future Land Use: R - 2 Residential Current Zoning: R-2 Residential Description: The applicant proposes a replat of a lot located at 8323 Ridgewood Avenue, Parcel No. 24-37 -14-77 -00006.0-0000.00. The replat will result in two lots created out of the existing one, both with frontage onto Ridgewood A venue. The subject site is located north of Washington A venue and west of and adj acent to Ridgewood A venue. North South East West Zoning R-2 Residential R-2 Residential n:..J_ _____ _ _1 R-2 Residential I\.lugewuou Avenue / R-3 Residential Comp Plan PUB PUB Ridgewood PUB Avenue / PUB Existing Public School Public School Ridgewood Public School Conditions A venue I Public Park Public Services and Facilities in Amendment Area: The Level of Service for parks and recreation is two (2) acres of park land per 1,000 residents. Approximately twenty-four (24) acres of park land exist in Cape Canaveral. This equates to a population of approximately 12,000 residents. The City's population as of April, 2006 was 10,534. There is still adequate park space available. Al A . . t L I f C1 . '" ... ~~ ',1 t"'\n1 '1"1 ., .,., ,.... 1-\. is operatmg a eve 0 ~erVlce --1\.U wnn Li'S.:; avauaDle peaK nour tnps between North City Limits to Central Blvd. AlA from Central Blvd to North Atlantic has a level (i\ V of Service "A" with 325 excess trips. If developed completely as residential, the site could generate 5 to 6 peak hour trips. The City of Cape Canaveral provides wastewater treatment. The wastewater treatment capacity is 1.8 million gallons per day (MGD). The existing usage is 1.26 MGD with an excess capacity of .54 MGD. The Level of Service for wastewater capacity is 118 gallons per capita per day. At 2.35 persons per household, X's the proposed two households, X's 118; the projected demand is approximately 555 gallons per day of wastewater. There is adequate wastewater treatment capacity available. The City of Cocoa has a total capacity of 56 MGD and currently provides 48 MGD. Approximately 24.4 MGD of water is being used on an average daily basis, leaving 23.6 MGD available. The Level of Service for potable water is 264 gallons per household per day. The projected demand is 528 gallons per day. There is adequate potable water service available with the proposed change. Brevard County provides facilities for solid waste disposal. At this time, the County does not foresee any deficiency with their solid waste facilities. Environmental Description of Amendment Area: The site is a Galveston-Urban Land Complex (GA) soil type. The soils in this complex are well-drained Galveston sand and sandy soils that consist of reworked and leveled sandy materials that resemble Galveston sand. The water table generally is below a depth of 60 inches; it is between 40 and 60 inches for short periods during the raining season. There appear to be no wetlands on site. Wetland detelminations or verification are permitted by St. Johns River Water Management District. There is no known Aquifer Recharge or Floodplain areas associated with this parcel. There are also no known endangered species living on the site. Historical and Archaeological Resources in Amendment Area: There are no known historical or archaeological resources on site. Population Projections and Trends: The average household size is 2.35 persons. The two units will probably accommodate four to five new persons. r5: t!c2/ ,~ Page 1 of 1 111".'.\..(1; ClaIl-1Ir ,_.:'.__,:::.J;::., x;,,' '~" '" :< ,,':'. ..':: -:.: _A, "..--<'" __....;.;',; -t ~"... '1'-""%:: <;.,C:. ::,*<1-' ':_,,~ '"."@_~.,:,,,~: -:",,_,,~' ,~:,~,j::~.::"""""_..:;"~~y:::"~;;;,,,,,,..:,,~.) ,"; :~",'. i';~"\~-~"~':P~" p 12.02 l' II' mrl11fh'6LJ 1--_ '.J1 />-" CHANDLER ~ T I ---------____ ir0 ") l :! ,I , J / 9.61 , !"'U""I"1.it J 9 90 '-, 8 . I , I 1 . ~~ '~l 1(~;:]14 P 8 1 I J I 1 . I I 5.0 + I I 1 1 ~.02 I 7 j r I j .I 8 Ai r~ I I 2 I ~ 3 I ~/ ~r ff 1 11= I 5 / B! / 4A I 2 I 3.01 ~ i ) . -1 TUN AV l;;U~q 1,' 1:- m 7 01 "3. -&-~7'8f)iI;91O 11 ~/ 1/3 (.....-_il 11 I 5 6 1 8 I~f-- 2 . lJ ,~/ /' l 2~i .O~ /----L_-,L---JI , Z / / / 9 /i' 14 ( 13 15 16 0 12 1 1 ::' 1 ') 1 21 I I 6 I 1,~M )> I I l -l'L --1 < ADAMS AV ~I 7 -, r-~ ! I [1.I}1 / l / d 11 j I I ~ - ( f I /I-----t .0 I) 7 ~.01 '1.01 3 4 5 6 7 I 8 / I~Y21 4 lL-N---1 i /1.02 I /I 13 ~ I I' jl ,.. I I " I I' 14 ( 14 15 16 10 11 12 13 14 1 fl :5 I) / I 6 / 8.01 // r I .. i 15 ~ (6) http://v.Nvw.brevardpropertjappraiser.corrJscripts/ esrimap .dll ?name= Brevard 1 &id=2007 0 5 0... 5/2/2007 Page 1 of 1 Q 7 http://V.NvW. brevardpropertyappraiser.com/scripts/esrimap.dll ?name=Brevard 1 &id=2007050... 5/2/2007 SSA May 2, 2007 Mr. Todd Peetz Miller-Legg & Associates 631 South Orlando Avenue Suite 200 Winter Park, FL 32789 RE: Final Plat Review - Beach Breeze - Review #2 SSA Job No. 05-0025, Task 047-1003 Dear Mr. Peetz: SSA has reviewed the submitted final plat for the above referenced project. Based on our review, SSA recommends said plat for City approval. This review does not relieve the applicant from other local, state, and federal agencies having jurisdiction over the project site. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to call. (,-f)iQ~~r~IY, D. "./~t ~ Da,;id Roy Jo 5, ~'LS - Chief Surveyor DRJ:jls Cc: Susan L. Chapman City Engineer's Review Fee For Review #2 - N/C NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL FEES As this project is being reviewed under the original City contract, \... Engineering Fees for all reviews after 2nd review will be billed at $95,00 per hour, ) ./ STOTILER SfAGG & ASSOCLi\TES .ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PlANNERS, INC. ~ - 8680 North Atlantic Avenue P. O. Box 1630 Cape Canaveral. Florida 32920 Tel 321-783-1320 Fax 321-783-7065 Lie. #AACOOO329 #EBOOOO762 #LBOOO6700 u:~oan sottoriva\civrf\projects\cape\J-beach breeze final plat review 2.doc Memorandum To: Todd Morley, Building Official From: Todd Peetz, City Planner Date: April 10, 2007 Re: Beach Breeze Final Replat I have reviewed the Beach Breeze Final Replat and have no comments at this time. If you have any questions, or need further information please feel free to contact me at 407-629-8880. ~ ------ MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Morley, Building Official TO: Todd Peetz City Planner FROM: Ed Gardulski Public Works Director DATE: February 15, 2007 RE: Beach Breeze Preliminary Re- Plat The Public Works Department has reviewed the Preliminary Re-Plat of the above stated and we do not have any comments or concern. r/iJ Page 1 of 1 Todd Peetz From: John Cunningham ucunningham@ccvfd.org] Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 9: 13 AM To: Todd Peetz Subject: Re: Beach Breeze (Final Replat) Todd, We have reviewed the replat and have no comment at this time. @ 5/1/2007 Meeting Type: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 4/25/07 AGENDA Heading Discussion Item #4 No. AGENDA REPORT PLANNING & ZONING BOARD THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Discussion - Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Section 4 (legislative changes) and Section 5 (Special Topics) DEPT./DIVISION: Building Department Requested Action: Review Sections 4 and 5 of the EAR for Discussion and direction to Staff. Summary Explanation & Back~round; The City is required to review their Comprehensive Plan approximately every 7 years to stay CUlTent with legislative changes and special topics of State concem. Other topics to be reviewed in future meetings include a community wide assessment; the public participation activities; assessment of the current Comprehensive Plan effectiveness; major issues and proposed amendments. The issues to be discussed in Sections 4 and 5 are legislative issues; while many of the issues are addressed or not applicable, several others will need to be included into the revised Comprehensive Plan. However, there are legislative changes pending that will change how the City operates, especially with the requirement to annually update the Capi:rrl Improvement Element through a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and all cities and counties will be required to have a new school element with a school level of service for each community. Note: the EAR only evaluates and recommends, it does not change the Comprehensive Plan. Proposed changes will follow a "Finding of Sufficiency" (sufficiently reviewed the Comprehensive Plan) by the Department of Community Affairs. Once found to be sufficient, the proposed amendments are then reviewed for adoption into the Comprehensive Plan which will essentially revise and update the Comprehensive Plan at that point. A table of contents is attached which identifies other areas to be reviewed in future meetings. I Exhibits Attached: Sections 4 and 5 of the proposed EAR. I Planning Official's Office I Department I J i I I I .~~ *'-1 .- ' TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction............. ..................................................................................... ...4 1.0 Community Wide Assessment 1.1 Changes in Population and land area. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 1.2 Location of vacant, buildable land. . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .... 7 1.3 Location of existing development in relation to the Future Land Use Map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 1.5 Financial Feasibility of Maintaining Concurrency......................................... ...9 2.0 Public Participation Activities. . . . . . .. .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . ............ .............. ............... ...........1 0 3.0 Assessment of the Comprehensive Plan 3.1 Intergovernmental Coordination Element.................................... ..........................................................................25 3.2 Conservation and Coastal Management Element. ........................................ ...27 3.3 Infrastructure Element (Sanitary Sewer, Drainage, Solid Waste, Potable Water, and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...38 3.4 Transportation Element............................................... ...................................46 3.5 Parks and Recreation Element.............................................................. ....49 3.6 Housing Element. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ..51 3.7 Future Land Use Element..................................................................... ..57 3.8 Capital Improvements Element...................................... ..................................62 4.0 Applicable changes to Chapter 163, Florida Statute (F.S.) and Rule 9J-5, Florida A..dministrative Code (F.A.C.)....................................................................... ..66 5.0 Special Topics 5.1 Assessment of the Future Land Use and Residential Coordination for the City's Projected Population with the Brevard County School Board........................... ..85 5.2 Water Supply, Conservation and Re-Use Plans for Cape Canaveral's Projected Population...................................................................................... ...85 5.3 Evaluation of Coastal High Hazard Area Density Reduction and Property Rights............................................................................................. .86 5.4 Assessment of Military Installations Compatibility....................................... ..86 6.0 Major Issues 6.1 Future Land Use Element..................................................................... ..87 6.2 Transportation Element..................... .................................................... ..88 6.3 Housing Element................................................................................. 88 6.4 Conservation and Coastal Management Element......................................... ..88 6.5 Parks and Recreation Element....................... ........................................ ...89 6.6 Future Public School Facilities Element..... ...... ......... ........... ...... .... ............ ..89 7.0 Proposed Amendments. ...... .... ..... ....... ...... ..... ......... ...... ..... ....... .... ............... .92 8.0 Appendix l'v1aps and Tables DCA Letter of Understanding and other correspondence........ .............................. ..108 .... ...,..,~,- rag!;: j 01 ].JU V:IProjectsI2004104-00l70 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_20071Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 R ~' 4.0 Applicable changes to Chapter 163, Florida Statute (F.S.) and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) . 163 JF.S. ;~. . lliO~"'" 00""_1: ."..01,.1-.),,0/\,'1"1".<,"/1,.."0....". .if ,,/;0< .~~ap.tel')lh~ijiJ;: .. ~.. . I h" " /. eJ .. .. r-::-:,-- 92 Required that ports and local governments in the coastal area, which has spoil disposal 163.3178(7) See policy C~4.2 in Add dredge disposal sites to existing responsibilities, identify dredge disposal sites in the comp plan. Conservation Element policy language of C-4.2 in the r-::-:,-- -- Conservation Element. 93 Exempted horn the twice-per-year limitation certain port related amendments for port 163.3187(1)(h) None~procedural change. tn'ansportation facilities and projects eligible for funding by the Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development Council. 9~1 Required rurall cOlllntiies to base their future land use plans and the amount ofland 163.3177(6)(a) N/A designated industrial on data regarding the need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development and the need to strengthen and diversity local economies. 95 Added the Growth Policy Act to Ch. 163, Part II to promote urban infiIl and 163.2511,163.25,14,1 Requirements addressed in Add 2007 Redevelopment Plan red,~velopment. 63.2517,163.2520,16 FLUE. See policies LU~2 language where applicable. --- 3.2523, and 163.2526 and LU-9. 96 Required that all comp plans comply with the school siting requirements by October I, 163.3177(6)(a) Policy to be adopted in LU-l of the 1999. FLUE. 97 M acle transportatiion facilitiies subject to concurrency. 163.3180(1)(a) Policy to be adopted in CI-2.1 of CIE. 98 Rcquired use of professionallly accepted techniques for measuring level of service for 163.3180(1)(b ) A general Traffic Add professionally accepted cars, trucks, transit, bikes and pedestrians. Circulation level of service techniques language to policy CI-1.3 standard is established in ofCIE. the Capitallmprovements Element. 99 ~ Excludes public transit facilities from conculTency requirements. 163 .3180(4)(b ) None~procedural change. 100 Allowed multiuse ORis to satisfy the transportation concurrency requirements when 163.3180(12) Policy to be adopted in CI-4 of CIE. authorizcd by a local comprehensive plan under limited circumstances. tOl Allowed multi modal transportation districts in areas where priorities for the pedestrian 163.3180(15) Not utilized. None-optional provision. environment are assigned by the plan. 102 Exempted amendments for urban infill and I"edevelopment areas, public school 163.31 879(1)(h) and None~procedural change. cOI1l:urrency from the twice..per-year limitation. (i) [Now: (i) and fD] 10;, Defined brownfield designation and added the assurance that a developer may proceed 163.3220(2) No brownfield areas have None~procedural change. with development upon receipt ofa brownfield designation. [Also see Section 163.3221(1) been sought in the City. ~~- for "brownl'ield" defiOlitiol1.] Page 66 of 156 V:\Projccts\2004\04-00170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc '0) Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/l/2007 1(;4 F.S., that required funds from sanction for non- 163.3184(11)(c) compliant plans go into the GrO\vth Management Trust Fund. [Now: Rei ealed] 1(;.5 Repealed Section 163.3187(7), F.S. that required consideration of an increase in the annual 163.3187(7) N/A total acreage threshold for small scale plan amendments and a report by DCA. [Now: Re ealed] 106 Repcaled Sections 163.3191(13) and (15), F.S. 163.3191 (13) and N/A (15) [Now: Re ealed] 107 Allowed small scale amendments in areas of critical state concern to be exempt from 163.3187(1)( c )1.e N/A The City is not in an area None. the twice-per-year limitation only if they are for affordable housing. of critical state concern. 108 Added exemption of sales from local option surtax imposed under Section 212.054, F.S., as 163.2517(3)(j)2. N/A None-procedural change. examples of incentives for new development within urban infill and redevelopment areas. None-optional provision. 110 comprehensive plan amendments and rezoning Currently, a voting Policy to be adopted in IG-1 of ICE include a nonvoting representative of the distriict school board. representative is on the reflective of existing conditions. LPA and P&Z Board. III Required coordination of local comprehensive plan with the regional water supply plan. 163.3 I 77 (4)(a) Policy to be adopted in IG-3 oflCE, and an Objective to be adopted in the Infrastructure (Potable Water) Element to include all water supply re uirements. 112 Plan amendments for school-siting maps are exempt from s. I 63.31 87(I)'s limitation on 163.3177(6)(a) None-procedural change. fre uency. 113 Required that by adoption of the EAR, the sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable 163.3177(6)(c) Objectives and Policies to be water and natural groundwater aquifer recharge element consider the regional water supply adopted under each section of the plan and include a 10-year work plan to build the identified water supply facilities. Infrastructure Element and Objective C-6 should be added to the Conservation Element. 114 Required consideration of the regional water supply plan in the preparation of the 163.3177(6)(d) Policy to be adopted in proposed conservation element. Objective C-6 of the Conservation Element. 115 Required that the intergovernmental coordination element (ICE) include relationships, 163.3177(6)(h) Policy to be adopted in IG-3 oflCE principles and guidelines to be used in coordinating comp plan with regional water supply plans. Required the loeal governments adopting a public educational facilities element execute an 163.3177(6)(h)4. Not utilized. None-optional plan provision. inte,,'-local agreement with the district school board, the county, and non-exempting municipalities. Required that counties larger than 100,000 population and their municipalities submit a I 63.3177(6)(h)6., 7., Coordinate with Brevard County -- inter-local service delivery agreements (existing and proposed, deficits or duplication in &8. and add olic to IG-3 of the ICE Page 67 of 156 ~~, V:\Projects\2004\04-00 170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/l/2007 \ .) ~ [: the provisions of service) report to DCA by January I, 2004. Each local government is based on County Report. required to update its ICE based on the findings of the report. DCA will meet with affected parties to discuss and id strategies to remedy any deficiencies or duplications. 2002: [CI1.. << ] 111,,,,,< 01 'Iorma L . .....~.~~.Rf~~if~t?ij:f,S.. ........:Nl/t\..~. w... "'iii./.' .. .. ''{.r / /i .. 118 Requircd local govcrnments and special districts to provide recommendations for I 63.3177(6)(h)9. N/A None. statutory challges for annexation to the Legislature by February 1,2003. NOTE: this [Now repealed) requirement repealed by Ch. 2005-290, s. 2, LOF. 119 Added a new Section 163.31776 that allows a county, to adopt an optional public 163.31776 N/A educational facilities element in cooperation with the applicable school board. 120 Added a new Section 163.31777 that requires local governments and school boards to enter 163.31777 Policy to be adopted in IG-l of ICE. into an inter-local agreement that addresses school siting, enrollment forecasting, school Also, objectives and/or policies capacity, infrastructure and safety needs of schools, schools as emergency shclters, and should be adopted in the new Public sharing offacilities. School Facilities Element when created. 12l Addled a provision that the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities may be 163.3l80(4)(c) Not utilized. None-optional plan provision. waived by plan amendment for urban infill and redevelopment areas. 122 Expanded the definition of "affected persons" to include property ovmers who own land 163.3 I 84(1)(a) None-procedural change. -- abutting a change to a future land use map. 123 Expanded the definition of "in compliance" to include consistency with Section 163.31 84(1)(b) None-procedural change. 163.31776 (public educational facilities element). 124 Streamlined the timing of comprehensive plan amendment review. 163.3184(3), (4), (6), None-procedural change. (7), and (8) 125 Required that local governments provide a sign-in form at the transmittal hearing and at 163.3 I 84(15)(c) None-procedural change. the adoption hearing for persons to provide their names and addresses. 126 Exempted am{,ndmellts related to providing transportation improvements to enhance life l63.3187(1)(k) None-procedural change. safety on "controlled access major arterial highways" from the limitation on the frequency 127 ofDJan amendments contained in s.163.3187(1). Required EARs to indude (1) consideration of the appropriate regional water supply plan, 163-3191(2)(1) Policies to be adopted in each new and (2) an evaluation of whether past reductions jnland use densities in coastal high hazard Objective of the sections in the areas have llmpaired property rights of eurrcnt residents where redevdopment occurs. Infrastructure Element. ]28 Allowed local governments to establish a special master process to assist the local 163.3215 Policy to be adopted in IG-3 of the governments with challenges to local development orders for consistency with the ICE. ---,-- comprehensive plan. 129 Created the LOl:al Goverllllll~nt Comprehensive Planning Certification Program to 163.3246 Provision not utilized. None-optional plan provision. allow less state and regional ovcrsight of comprehcnsive plan process if the local --- ~!.vemmcnll meets certain criteria. 130 Added a provislion to Section 380.06(24), Statutory Exemptions, that exempts from the 163.3187(1) None-procedural change. requirements for developments of regional impact, any water port or marina development if the relevant local government has adopted a "boating facility siting plan or policy" (which includes certain specified critcria) as part of the coastal management element or future land use element of its comprehensive plan. The adoption of the boating facility siting plan or policy is exempt from the limitation on the frequency of plan amendments contained in L...-_ s.163.3187(1 ). Page 68 of 156 V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc C2S) Prepared by Miller Legg - 511/2007 C' Prohibited a local govemment, under certain conditions, from denying an application for 163.3194(6) None-procedural change. development approval for a requested land use for certain proposed solid waste management facilities. and Practices Act. 163.3162 N/A (2): Provides legislative findungs and purpose with respect to agricultural activities and duplicative regulation. (3): !Defines the terms "farm," "farm operation," and "farm product" for purposes of the act. (4): IProhibits a county from adopting any ordinance, resolution, regulation, rule, or policy to prohibit or othenvise limit a bona fide farm operation on land that is classified as agricultural land. (4)(a): Provides that the act does not limit the powers ofa county under certain circLlmstances. (4)(b): Clarifies that a farm operation may not expand its operations under certain circumstances. (4)(c): Providcs that the act does not limit the powers of certain counties. (4)(d): Provides that certain county ordinances are not deemed to be a duplication of regulation. 133 Changes "State Comptroller" references to "Chief Financial Officer." 163.3167(6) N/A 134 Provides for certain airports to abandon DRl orders. 163.3177(6)(k) N/A None-procedural provision. 135 Throughout s. 1 63.3177, F.S., citations for Ch. 235, F.S., are changed to cite the appropriate 163.31776 N/A None-procedural provision. section ofCh. 1013, F.S. 136 Throughout s.163.31777, F.S., citations for Ch. 235, F.S., are changed to cite the 163.31777 N/A None-procedural provision. appropriate section ofCh. 1013, F.S. Page 69 of156 ~G::) ) V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/l/2007 "_/ (10): Amended to c,onform to the repeal of the Florida High-Speed Rail Transportation 163.3167 None-procedural provision. Act, and the creation of the Florida High-Speed Rail Authority Act. Policies to be adopted in each new (13) Created to require local governments to identify adequate watl~r supply sources to Objective of the sections in the meet future demand. Infrastructure Element. (14) Created to limit the effect of judicial determinations issued subsequent to certain None-procedural change. development orders pursuant to adopted land development regulations. 138 (I): Provides legislative findings on the compatibility of development with military Creates 163.3175. N/A installations. (2): Provides for the exchang:e of information relating to proposed land use decisions between counties and local govemments and military installations. (3): Provides for responsive <comments by the commanding officer or hislher designee. (4): Provides for the county or affected local government to take sueh comments into consideration, (5): Requires the representative of the milita1Y installation to be an ex-officio, nonvoting member of the county's or local government's land planning or zoning board. (6): Encourages the commanding officer to provide information on community planning assistance grants. 139 (6)(a): 163.3177 N/A N/A . Changed to require local governments to amend the future land use element by June 30,2006 110 include criteria to achieve compatibility with military installations. . Changed 110 specifically encourage rural land stewardship area designation as an Not utilized. overlay on the future land use map. (6)( c): Extended the deadline adoption of the water supply racHitie!. work plan The City is working with Policies to be adopted in each new amendment until December 1,2006; provided for updating the work plan every five years; the County on the water Objective of the sections in the and exempts such amendment from the limitation on frequency of adoption of supply plan. Infrastructure Element. amcndments. (10)(1): Provides for the coordination by the state land planning agency and the Department of Defense on compatibility issues for military installations. N/A (ll)(d)l.: Requires DCA, in cooperation with otber specified state agencies, to provide Not utilized. assistance to local governments in implementing provisions relating to rural land stewardship areas, Not utilized. (II )(d)2.: Provides for multicounty rural land stewardship areas. (II )(d)3.-4: Revises requirements, includin the acreage threshold for designating a rural Not utilized. Page 70 of 156 ~ V:\Project,\2004\04-00l70 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3,doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 "'~ land stewardship area. (I I )(d )6,j.: Provides that transferable rural land use credits may be assigned at different Not utilized. ratios according to the natural resource or other beneficial use characteristics of the land. (I I )(e): Provides legislative findings regarding mixed-use, high-density urban infill and Not addressed. None-optional plan provision. redevelopment projects; requires DCA to provide technical assistance to local governments, (l I )(f): Provides legislative findings regarding a program for the transfer of development Not addressed. None-optional plan provision. rights and urban infilJ and redevelopment; requires DCA to provide technical assistance to local No previous finding of state. shortage of affordable rental units. Section 1.0 of the EAR provides tables showing updated housing information. (2): Provides definitions, (3): Authorizes local governments to permit accessory dwelling units in areas zoned for Policies to be adopted in H-9 of single family residcntial use based upon certain findings. Housing Element and cross referenced with the City's Land (4) An application for a building permit to construct an accessory dwelling unit must Development Regulations as include an affidavit from thf' applicant which attests that the unit will be rented at an needed. affordable rate to a very-low-income, low-income, or moderate-income person or persons. (5): Provides for ccrtain acceSSOl'y dwelling units to apply towards satisfying the affordable housing component of the housing element in a local government's comprehensivc plan, (6): Requires the DCA to report to the Legislature. 141 Amends the definition of "in compliance" to add language referring to the We kiva 163.3 I 84(l)(b) N/A Par~;way and Protection Act. 142 (1 )(m): Created to provide that amendments to address criteria or compatibility ofland uses 163.3187 N/A None-procedural changes. adjaccnt to or in close proximity to military installations do not count toward the limitation on frequcncy of amending comprehensive plans. (l )(n): Created to provide that amendments to establish or implement a rural land stewardship area do not count toward the limitation on frequency of amending comprehensive plans. 14:3 Created to provide that evaluation and appraisal reports evaluate whether criteria in the 163.3191(2)(n) N/A land use clement were successful in achieving land use com atibility with military Page 71 of 156 ~~) V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Cornp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 --.,/ ~~lstallations. 200S [Cb. 200S-1S7, ss FI~rida] 144 Added the definition of "financial feasibility." Creates ss, None-procedural provision. 163.3164(32) 145 (2); Required comprehensive plans to be "financially" rather than "economically" 163.3177 Add language to Goal of CIE. feasible. (3)(a)5.: Requircd the comprehensive plan to include a S-year schedule of capital Policy to be adopted in CI-4 of CIE. improvements. Outside funding (i.e., from deve'loper, other government or funding pursuant to referendum) of these capital improvements must be gualranteed in the form of a development agreement or interlocal agreement. (3)(a)6.b.I.: Required plan amendment for the annual update of the schedule of capital improvements. Deleted provision allowing updates and change in the date of construction tc be accomplished by ordinance. (3)(b)(1): Requires the CIE reviewed on an annual basis and modified as necessary. An Policy to be adopted in CI-2 of CIE. amendment to the comprehensive plan is required to update the schedule on an annual basis. All publiC facilities shall be consistent with the capital improvements element. Amendments to implement this section must be adopted and transmitted no later than December 1, 2007, Thereafter, a local government may not amend its future land use map, except for plan amendments to meet new requirements under this part and emergency amendments pursuant to s. ](13JJS7(1 )(a), after December I, 2007, and every year thereafter, unless and until the local government has adopted the annual update and it has been transmitted to the state land planning agency. (3)(a)6.c.: Added oversigbt and penalty provision for failure to adhere to this section's Policy to be adopted in CI-4 of CIE. capital improvements requirements. (3)(a)6.d.: Required a 10ng-tE,rm capital improvement schedule if the local government Not utilized. has adopted a long-term concurrency management system. (6)(a): Deleted date (October I, 1999) by which school sitting requirements must be N/A adopted. (6)(a): Add requirement that future land use element of coastal counties must encourage N/A The City is not a coastal the preservation of working waterfronts, as defined in s.342.07, F.S. county. Policy to be adopted in new (6)(c): Required the potable water element to be updated within 18 months of an updated Objective of the Potable Water regional water supply plan to incorporate the altE'rnative water supply projects selected section in tbe Infrastructure by the local government to meet its water supply needs. Element. This adoption is pursuant to the Brevard County portion of tbe Regional Water Supply Plan and is due within 18 months of adoption of the plan. Page 72 ofl56 V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 511/2007 (~ --~;)(e): Added waterways to the system of sites addressed by the reclreation and open Policy to be adopted in R-l of the spal:e element. Parks and Recreation Element. (II )(d)4.c.: Required rural land stewardship areas to address affordable housing. N/A None-optional plan provision. (I I )(d)5.: Required a listed species survey be performed on rurall:and stewardship N/A None-optional plan provision. receiving area. If any listed species present, must ensure adequate provisions to protect them. (ll)(d)6.: Must enact an ordinance establishing a methodology for creation, conveyance, N/A None-optional plan provision. and use of stewardship credits within a rural land stewardship area. (1 1)(d)6,j.: Revised to allow open space and agricultural land to bejust as important as N/A None-optional plan provision. environmentally sensitive land when assigning stewardship credits. (12): Must adopt public school facilities element. Public School Facilities Element to be adopted, policy regarding the timing of element adoption to be included in IG-l ofICE. (12)(a) and (b): A waiver from providing this element will be allowed under certain N/A circumstances. (12)(g): Expanded list of items to be to include colocation, location of schools proximate Objective and policies to be adopted to n;sidential areas, and use of schools as emergency shelters. under the new Public School Facilities Element. (12)(h): Required local governments to provide maps depicting the general location of new No new schools have been schools and school improvcments within future conditions maps. planned. (12)(i): Required DCA to establish a schedule for adoption of the public school facilities Policy to be adopted in IG-l of the element. TIle schedule shall provide for each county and local govell1ment within the ICE for establishment ofthe Public county to adopt the element and update to the agreement no later than December 1,2008. School Facilities Element. (12)(j): Established penalty for failure to adopt a public school facil:ity element. None-procedural provision. (13): (New section) Encourages local govell1ments to develop a "community vision," Using community None-optional plan provision. which proviides for sustainable growth, recognizes its fiscal constraints, and protects its meetings to gather natural resources. information to develop a direction for the future. (14): (New section) Encourages local govell1ments to develop a "urban service boundary," which ensures the area is served (or will be served) with adequate public N/A None-optional plan provision. facihties and scrvices over the next 10 years. See s. 163.3184(17). Page 73 of J 56 ~ V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/l/2007 146 ] 63.3] 776 is repealed 163.31776 [Now: Re ealed] 147 (2): Required the public schools interlocal agreement (ifapplicab]e) to address 163.31777 None-procedural provision. requirements for school concurrency. The opt-out provision at the end of Subsection (2) is deleted. (5): Required Palm Heach County to identify, as part of its EAR, changes needed in its N/A public school element necessary to conform to the new 2005 public sehool facilities element requirements. (7): Provided that counties exempted from public school facilities element shall undergo re-evaluation as part of its EAR to determine if they continue to meet exem tion criteria. N/A ]48 (2)(g): Expands requirement of coastal element to include strategies that will be used to 163.3178 Policy to be adopted in CM-l of reserve recreational and eommercial workin waterfronts, as defined in s.342.07, F.S. Coastal Element. Pag<: 74 of 156 ~~ V IProjects12004104-00 170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_ 20071Cornp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANA VERAL EAR3.doc I 'c:-J Prepared by Miller Legg. 5/1/2007 FI!2rida 149 (1 )(21): Added "schools" as a required concun-ency item. 163.3180 Policy to be adopted in the new Public School Facility Element and in CI-l ofthe CIE. (2)(21): Required consultation with water supplier prior to issuing building permit to ensure Policy to be adopted iu IG-3 ofICE "ad(~quate water supplies" to serve new development is available by the date of issuance and in the new Objectives of the of a certificate of occupancy. Infrastructure Element. (2)(c:): Required all1transportatioll facilities to be in place or under construction within 3 No eun-ent deficiencies. Policy to be adopted in T-l of the years (rather than 5 years) after approval of building permit. Transportation Element. (4)(c:): Allowed concUTTency requirement for public schools to be waived within urban Not utilized. None-optional plan provision. infill and rcdcvdopmcnt areas (163.2517). (5)(d): Required guidelines fOl' granting concurrency exceptions to be included in the Not utilized. None-procedural provision. comprehensive plan. (5)(c) - (g): Ifloeal govelllment has established transportation exceptions, the guidelines Not utilized. None-optional plan provision. for implementing the exceptions must be "consistent with and support a comprehensive straltegy, and promote the purpose of the exceptions." Exception areas must include mobility strategies, such as altelllate modes of transportation, supported by data and analysis. FOOT must be consulted prior to designating a transportation concun-cncy exception area. Transportation concUlTency exception areas existing prior to July 1,2005 None-procedural provision. must meet these requirements by July 1,2006, or when the EAR-based amendment is adopted, whichever occurs last. (6): Requircdlocal govelllment to maintain I'ecords to determine whether 110% de Policy to be adopted in T -3 of the minimis transportation impact threshold is reached. A summary of these records must be Transportation Element and CI-2 of submitted with the annual capital improvements element update. Exceeding the 110% the CIE. threshold dissolves the de minimis exceptions. (7): Required consultation with the Department of Transportation prior to designating a Not utilized. None-optional plan provision. transportation concurrency management area (to promote infill development) to ensure adequate level-of-service standards are in place. The local government and the DOT should work together to mitigate any impacts to the Strategic Intermodal System. (9)(21): Allowcd adoption of a long-term concurrency managemenlt system for schools. Not utilized. None-optional plan provision. (9)(c): (New sedion) Allowed local govelllments to issue approvals to commence Not utilized. None-optional plan provision. cOllstructiollnotwithstanding s. 163.3180 in areas subject to a long-term concurrency management system. -- Pag" 75 of 156 C~ V\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg 5/1/2007 ~) (9)(d): (New section) Required evaluation in EAR of progress in improving levels of LOS standards are Policy CI-1.3 should be revised and serV1lce. discussed in CI-1.3 of the updated as determined by the City. ClE. The City should determine if amendments to the LOS standards are necessary. (10) Added requirement that level of service standard for roadway facilities on the Policies to be adopted in T-3 of the Strategic Intermodal System must be consistent with FDOT standards. Standards must Transportation Element, CI-l of the consider compatibility with adjacent jurisdictions. CIE and IG-2 of the ICE. (13) Required school 'concurrency (not optional). Public School Facilities Policy to be adopted in IG-l of the Element required by ICE and in the new Pnblic School December 2008. Facilities Element when created. (13)(c)l.: Requires school concurrency after five years to be applied on a "less than Policy to be adopted in new Public districtwide baisis" (i.e., by using school attendance zones, etc). School Facilities Element. (13)(c)2.: Eliminated exemption from plan amendment adoption limitation for changes to service area. boundaties. None-procedural provision. (13 )(c)3.: No application for development approval may be denied if a less-than- Policy to be adopted in CI-l of the districtwidc measurement of school concurrency is used; however the development CIE and in the new Public School impacts must to shifted to contiguous service areas with school capacity. Facilities Element. (I 3)(e): Allowed school concurrency to be satisfied if a developer executes a legally Policy to be adopted in CI-l of the binding commitmeut to provide mitigation proportionate to the demand. CIE and in the new Public School Facilities Element. (13 lee) 1.: Enumerated mitigation options for achieving proportionate-share mitigation. Policy to be adopted in CI-l of the CIE and in the new Public School Facilities Element. (l3)(e)2.: If educational facilities funded in one of the two following ways, the local govclllmcnt must credit this amount toward any impact fee or exaction imposed on the Not utilized. community: . contribution of land . construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition (l3)(g)2.: (Sectiion deleted) - It is no longer required that a local government and school board base their plans on consistent population projection and share 'information regarding None-procedural provision. lanned public school facilities, development and redevelo ment and infrastructure needs Page 76 of 156 (:-1 V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/]/2007 ~) FI'~rida of public school facilities. However, see (l3)(g)6.a. for similarrequirement. (l3){g)6.a.: [Formerly (13)(g)7.a.] Local governments must establish a uniform Policy to be adopted in Cl-I of the prOl:edure for determining if development applications are in compliance with school CIE and in the new Public School cOlll:urrency. Facilities Element. (13 ){g)7. [Formerly (13)(g)8.] Deleted language that allowed local government to None-procedural terminate or suspend an interlocal agreement with the school board. provision. (13 )(h): (NI~w 2005 provision) The fact that school concurrency has not yet been None-procedural implemented by a local government should not be the basis for either an approval or denial provision. of a development permit. (15): Prior 110 adopting Multimodal TranspOl'tation Districts, FDOT must be consulted to assess the impact on level of service standards. If impacts are found, the local government Not utilized. and the FDOT must work together to mitigate those impacts. Multimodal districts established prior to July 1,2005 must meet this requirement by July 1, 2006 or at the time of the EAR-base amendment., whichever occurs last. (16): (New 2005 section) Required local governments to adopt by December I, 2006 a method for assessing proportionate fair-share mitigation options. FDOT will develop a model ordinance by December 1,2005. City adopted proportionate Policy to be adopted in 1'-1 fair-share mitigation reflective of existing conditions. ordinance in December 2006. 15,J (17): (New 200:5 section) If local government has adopted a community vision and urban 163.3184 Not utilized. None-procedural provision. service boundary, state and regional agency review is eliminated for plan amendments affecting property within the urban service boundary. Such amendments are exempt from the l'imitation on the frequency of plan amendments. (18): (New 200:5 section) If a municipality has adopted an urban infill and redevelopment area, state and regional agency review is eliminated for plan amendments affecting N/A None-procedural provision. property \vi thin the urban service houndary. Such amendments are exempt from the limitation on the frequency of plan amendments. 151 (I )(c)I.f.: Allowed approval of residential land use as a small-scale development 163.3187 None-procedural provision. amellldment when the proposed density is equal to or less than the existing future land use category. Under certain circumstances affordable housing units are exempt from this limitation. (I)(c)4.: (New 2005 provision) If the small-scale development amendment involves a None-procedural provision. rural area of cdtical economic concern, a 20-acre limit applies. (I )(0): (New 2005 provision) An amendment to a rUl'al area of critical economic None-procedural provision. concern may be approved without regard to the statutory limit on com rehensive Ian Pag" 77 of156 V:IProjectsI2004104-00170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_20071Comp Planl2007 EARI2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc (~) Prepared by Miller Legg, 5/1/2007 ~ 152 (2)(k): Required local governments that do not have either a school interlocal agreement or 163.3191 City has an executed None-procedural provision. a public school facilities element, to determine in the EAR whether the local government interlocal agreement. continues to meet the exemption criteria in s.163.3177(12). (2)(1): The EAR must detemline whether the local government has met its various water The Potable Water section Policies to be adopted in new supply requirements, including development of alternative water supply projects. of the Infrastructure Objective ofthe Potable Water Element does not detail section of the Infrastructure alternative water supply. Element dealing with Water Supply. (2)(0): (New 2005 provision) The EAR must evaluate whether its Multimodal Transportation District has achieved the purpose for which it was created. Not utilized. (2)(p): (New 2005 provision) The EAR must assess methodology for impacts on Policy T-1.2 of the Adopt further policy language in T- transportation fa<:i~ities. Transportation Element 1.2 of the Transportation Element discusses LOS standards as needed and volume to capacity ratio standards for measuring impacts on transportation facilities. (10): The EAR-based amendment must be adopted within a single amendment cycle. Failure to adopt within this cycle results in penalties. Once updated, the comprehensive None-procedural provision. ~ must be submitted to the DCA. 153 (10) New section designating Freeport as a certified community. 163.3246 N/A (I I) New section exempting proposed ORIs within Freeport from review under s.380.06, 2006 [Ch. of Florida 1 154 None-optional element. -- s.163.3164(33), F.S. Ch. 2006-255, LOF. 155 Defines agriculltural enclavl~. Ch. 2006-255, LOF. 163.3164(33) None-procedural change. -- Adds new paragraph encouraging local govell1ments with a coastal management element Policy to be adopted in CM-! of the 156 to adopt recreational surface water use policies; such adoption amendment is exempt from 163.3 177 (6)(g)2. Coastal Element. the twice per year limitation on the fi'equency of plan amendment adoptions. Ch.2006.. 220, LOF. 157 Allows the effect of a proposed receiving area to be considered when projecting the 25-year 163.3177(11)( d)6. N/A or greater popu!!ation with a rural land stewards hi area. Ch. 2006-220, LOF, Recognizes "extremely-low-income persons" as another income groups whose housing 163.31771(1), (2) and None-optional plan provision. 153 needs might be addressed by accessory dwelling units and defines such persons consistent (4) with s.420.0004(8), F.S. Ch. 2006-69, LOF. 159 Assigns to the Division of Emergency Management the responsibility of ensuring the 163.3178(2)( d) None-procedural provision. reparation of IIpdated regional hurricane evacuation plans. Ch. 2006-68, LOF. Pag" 78 of 156 @ V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_2007\Cornp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EARJ.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 ~ Chan ges area 160 the elevation of the category I storm surge line as established by the SLOSH model. Ch. 2006-68, LOF. Objeetive CM-6 of the Policy to be adopted in CM-7 of the Adds a new section allowing a local gove1l1ment to comply with the requirement that its Coastal Element directs Coastal Element to update the comprehensive plan direct population concentrations away from the CHHA and populations away from the reference to the 1987 Brevard 161 maintains or reduces hurricane evacuation times by maintaining an adopted LOS Standard 163.3178(9)(a) CHHA. Objeetive CM-7 County Peacetime Emergency Plan for out-of-county hurricane evacuation for a eategory 5 storm, by maintaining a 12-hour references a Brevard and to establish updated LOS hurricane evacuation time or by providing mitigation that satisfies these two requirements. County 1987 plan standards for hurricane evacuation. Ch. 2006-68, LOF. discussing evacuation standards. Adds a new section establishing a level of service for out-of-county hurricane None-procedural provision. 162 evawalioll of no greater than 16 hours for a category 5 storm for any local gove1l1ment 163.3178(9)(b) that wishes to follow the process in s. I 63.3178(9)(a) but has not established such a level of service by July 1,2008. Ch. 2006-68, LOF. Requires local governments to amend their Future Land Use Map and coastal Policy to be adopted in CM-6 of the 163 management clement to include the new definition of the CHHA, and to depiet the 163.3178(2)( c) Coastal Element and LU-5 of the CHHA on the FLUM by July 1,2008. Ch. 2006-68, LOF. FLUE. Allows the sanitary s{,wel' concurrency requirement to be met by onsite sewage None-optional plan provision. 164 treatment and disposal systems approved by the Department of Health. Ch.2006-252, 163.3180(2)(a) LOE 165 Changes s.380.0651 (3)(i) to s.380.0651 (3)(h) as the citation for the standards a multiuse 163.3180(12)(a) None-procedural change. DRI must meet or exceed. Ch. 2006-220, LOF. 166 Deletes use of extended use agreement as part of the definition of smal1 scale amendment. 163.3187(1)( e)1.f. None-procedural change. eh. 2006 [Ch. Laws of 145 The use element must clearly identify the land use categories in which public 163.3177(6)(a) schools are an al10wable use. When delineating the land use categories in which public schools are an allowable use, a local government shal1 include in the categories sufficient land proximate to rcsidential development to meet the projected needs for schools in coordination with public school boards and may establish differing criteria for schools of different type or size. Each local governrnent shall include lands contiguous to existing school sites, to the maximum extent possible, within the land use categOJ;es in which public schools are an allowable use. The failure by a local gove1l1ment to comply with these school siting requirements will result in the prohibition of the local government's ability to amend the local comprehensive plan, except for plan amendments described in s. 16JJ] 87(1 )(b), until the school siting requirements are met. Amendments proposed by a local govemment for purposes of identifying the land use categories in which public schools are an alIowabJ.e use are exempt from the limitation on the frequency of plan amendments contained in s. Ui}}18L The future land use element shall include criteria that encourage the location of schools proximate to urban residential areas to the extent possible and shall require that the local govemment seek to colI ocate public facilities, such as parks, libraries, and community centers, with schools to the extent possible and to Pag" 79 of 156 @J V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 encourage use schools as focal points for neighborhoods. For schools serving predominantly rural counties, defined as a county with a population of 100,000 or fewer, an agricultural land use category shall be eligible for the location of public school facilities if the local comprehensive plan contains school siting criteria and the location is consistent with such criteria. Local govemments required to update or amend their eomprehcnsive plan to inelude eriteria and address eompatibility of adjacent or closely proximate lands with existing military installations in their future land use plan element shall transmit the update or amendment to the department by lune 30, 2006. Creates a new section related to electric distribution substations; establishes criteria Policy to be adopted in LU-3 ofthe addressing land use compatibility of substations; requires local govemments to pelmit FLUE. substations in all FLUIvl categories (except preservation, conservation or historic 167 preservation); establishes compatibility standards to be lIsed if a local government has not 163.3208 established such standards; establishes procedures for the review of applications for the location of a new substation; allows local govemments to enact reasonable setback and -- landscape buffer standards for substations. Ch. 2006-268, LOF. Cre21tes a new section preventing a local govemment from requiring a permit or other None-optional plan provision. 168 approval for vegetation maintenance and tree pruning or trimming 'Within an established 163.3209 electric transmission and distribution line right-of-way. Ch. 2006-268, LOP. Community Workforce HOllsing Innovation Pilot Prog.-am; created by Ch. 2006-69, None-optional plan provision. 169 LOF, section 27. Establishcs a special, expedited adoption process for any plan amendment that implements a pilot program projeet. Affordable housing land donation density incentive bonus; created by Ch. 2006-69, None-optional plan provision. LOF, seetion 28. Allows a density bonus for land donated to a loeal govemment to provide 170 affordable housing; requires adoption of a plan amendment for any such land; sueh amendment may be adopted as a small-scale amendment; sllch amendment is exempt from -- the twice per year limitation on the frequency of plan amendment ado tions. 91-5.003 56 Revised thc definitions of affordable housing, coastal planning area, port facility, and 91-5.003 None-procedural change. wctlands. 57 Repeal the dcfinitions of adjusted for family size, adjusted gross income, development, 91-5.003 N/A None-procedural change. high recharge :Hell or prime recharge area, mass transit, paratnmsit, public facilities, ve:!:I low-income family. 58 Rcvised provisions relating to adoption by reference into the local comprehensive plan. 9J-5.005(2)(g) and None-procedural change. (8)(j) Pag" 80 of 156 ~) V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 \: , 59-- Repealed transmittal requirements for proposed evaluation and appraisal reports, 9J-5.0053(2) through None-procedural change. submittal requiremcnts for adopted evaluation and appraisal reports, criteria for (5) determining the sufficiency of adopted evaluation and appraisal reports, procedures for adoption of evaluation and appraisal reports. Note: transmittal requirements for proposed evaluation and appraisal reports and submittal requirements for adopted evaluation and ~-- appraisal reports were inC01]7orated Rule Chapter 9J-ll, F.A.C. Repea led conditions for de minimis impact and referenced conditions in subsection 9J-5.0055(3)6 N/A None-procedural change. 111' ,1 ROlli), F.S. March 21, 1999 2( in Xi jJljt~rr. ,i. VV I'i:, iXi X: !,,,..,,,..,,;..,.. 1---- :. ii 6] Required the future land use map to show the transportation concurrency exception area 9J-5.006(4) Not utilized None. boundaries of sllch areas have becn designated and areas for possible future municipal incorporation 62 Required objectives of the Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Stormwater Management, Potable 9J-5.011(2) N/A Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge E]ement to address protection of high f--,.-- rccharge and prime recharge areas. 63 Repealed the Intcrgovernmental Coordination Element process to determine if 9J-5.015(4) ICE provides for impacts None. development proposals would have significant impacts on other local govemments or state on other or regional resources or facilities, and provisions relating to resolution of disputes, j urisdi cti ons/resources. modification of development orders, and the rendering of development orders to the '64- Department of Community Affairs (DCA) Clarified that local governments not located within the urban area of a Metropolitan 9J-5.019(1 ) N/A Planning Organization are requircd to adopt a Traffic Circulation Element and that local governmcnts with a population of 50,000 or less are not required to prepare Mass Transit "(;5-- ~~d Ports, Aviation and Rclated Facilities Elements. Required objectives of the Transportation Element to: 9J-5.019(4)(b) . Coordinate the siting of new, or expansion of existing ports, airports, or Adopt language in Objective T -2 as relatcd facilities with the Future Land Use, Coastal Management, and required in the Transportation Conservation Elements; Element. Language to be adopted in LU-3 ofthe FLUE, add objectives to both the Coastal and Conservation Elements and add policy in IG-3 of the ICE. . Coordinate surface transportation access to ports, airports, and related facilities Adopt langnage in Objective T-3 of with the traffic circulation system; the Transportation Element, LU-3 of the FLUE and IG-2 of the ICE. . Coordinate ports, airports, and related facilities plans with plans of other Adopt language in Objective T -3 of transportation providers; and the Transportation Element, LU-3 ofthe FLUE and IG-2 of the ICE. . Ensure that access routes to ports, airports and related facilities are properly Adopt language in Objective T-3 of integrated with other modes of transportation. the Transportation Element and IG- f-66-- 2 of the ICE. ~Jired policies of the Transportation Element to: 9J-5.019(4)(c) . Provide Ii)r safe and convenient on-site traffic flow; Policy to be adoptcd in T-l of the Transportation Element. Page 81 of 156 Y:\Projects\2004\04-00 170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006 _2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANA YERAL EAR3doc ,-"""'" ~ Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 --.- -- Establish measures for the acquisition and preservation of public transit rights- Policy to be adopted in T-4 of the . -- of-way and cOlTidors; Transportation Element. . Promote ports, ailrports and related facilities development and expansion; Policy to be adopted in T-2 ofthe Transportation Element and IG-2 of the ICE. . Mitigate adverse structural and non-structural impacts from ports, airports and Policy to be adopted in T -3 of the related facilities; Transportation Element, LU-3 of -- thl~ FLUE and IG-2 of the ICE. . Protcct and conserve natural resources within ports, airports and related Policy to be adopted in T-3 ofthe facilities; Transportation Element, LU-3 of -- the FLUE and IG-2 of the ICE . Coordinate intermodal management of surface and water transportation within N/A ports, airports and related facilities; and . Protect ports, airports and related facilities from encroachment of incompatible Policy to be adopted in T-2 of the land uses. Transportation Element and in LU- ---z;j-- -- 3 of the FLUE. Added standards for the review of land development regulations by the Department. 9J-5.022 None-procedural change. lVbr~12}.1?99. < << .........,.!.~;.;.;ii;. .....,..;iHi:..;; i<i i'~~~~., ~;?V;0'; Vi;i< 2M ;i ; "cJ'.""~U'~U' v.;;':; <; <i..; 68 Added criteria for consistency of land development regulations with the 9J-5.023 None-procedural provision. 25, 2001 .; iii<;i; i,!.<c . NU".. "":";3' iiV i;; > ii ..'ii;; i < <2 .i 6'9- Defined gencrallanes 9J-5.003 Terminology not utilized None-procedural change. --- j--- None-procedural change. 70 Revised the definition of "marine wetlands." 9J-5.003 Plan references the term --- "wetlands." 71 Repeal the definition of "public facilities and services." 9J-5.003 N/A Plan uses terms in a local None-procedural change. 71- capacity. Revised procedures for monitoring, evaluating and appraising implementation oflocal 9J-5.005(7) None-procedural change. r-n-- comprehensive plans. Repealed requirements for evaluation and appraisal reports and evaluation and appraisal 9J-5.0053 N/A None-procedural change. amendments. 74 Revised concurrency management system requirements to include provisions for 9J-5.005(1) and (2) None-procedural change. l--- establishment of public school concurrency. 75 Authorized local govemments to establish multimodal transportation level of service 9J-5.0055(2)(b) and N/A - Multimodal None. standards and established requirements for multi modal transportation districts. (3)( c) transportation districts are not utilized. 76 Authorized local govcrnments to establish level of service standards for general lanes of 9J-5.0055(2)(c) Policy to be adopted in T-} of the the Florida Intrastate Highway System within urbanized areas, with the concurrence of the Transportation Element and CI-l of Departmcnt of Transportation. the CIE. 77 Provide that pulblic transit facilities are not subject to conculTency requirements. 9J-5.0055(8) NI A Public transit facility None. concurrency not addressed ~-~- in existing GOPs. Pag" 82 of156 f' V:\Projects\2004\04-00170 General Planning Svcs\EAR 2006_2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc ~'-... I Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 ~~ ~. Authorized local comprehensive plans to pennit multi-use developments ofregional impact 9J-5.0055(9) City adopted proportionate Policy to be adopted in T-l of the 78 to satisfy the transportation eoncunency requirements by payment of a proportionate fair-share mitigation Transportation Element reflective share contribution. ordinance in December of existing conditions. 2006. 7"9' Required the future land use map to show multi modal transportation district boundaries, 9J-5.006(4 ) No multi modal districts None. if established. have been established. g'O Authorized local governments to establish muItimodal transportation districts and, if 9J.5.006(6) Not utilized. None. ---,-- established, required local governments to establish design standards for such districts. 81 Required data ~Dr the Housing Element include a description of substandard dwelling 9J-5.01O(1)(c) Policy to be adopted in H-2 ofthe units and repealed the requirement that the housing inventory include a locally detennined Housing Element describing 82:-- definition of standard and substandard housing conditions. snbstandard dwellin~ units. A~thorized local governments to supplement the affordable housing needs assessment 9J-5.1O(2)(b ) None-procedural provision. with locally gencrated data and repealed the authorization for local governments to conduct their own assessment. -c-c--- Required the Intergovernmental Coordination Element to include objectives that ensure 9J-5.015(3)(b) Interlocal agreement with Objectives and policies as 83 adoption of interlocal agreements within one year of adoption of the amended School Board executed. appropriate to be adopted in IG-l of lntcrgovernmental Coordination Element and ensure intergovernmental coordination the ICE. bct\veen all affected local governments and the school board for the purpose of establishing : for"'" .. .~v. "'" /25, fOOl ..'\/',.'.. ..... i..:.i i",,'i.illii! FlAIb'. l~!(~~ '",.r ii. ;y ;>'? i ...UC!c...i ii. /C, . -s4' Required the Intergovernmental Coordination Element to include: 9J-5.015(3)(c) 0 Policies that provide procedures to identify and implement joint planning areas Only general policy Policy to be adopted in IG-3 of the for purposes of annexation, municipal incorporation and joint infrastructure language addresses ICE. serVllce areas; coordination with other entities. 0 Recognize I:ampus master plan and provide procedures for coordination of the N/A campus master development agreement; 0 Establish joint processes for collaborative planning and decision-making with Policy to be adopted in IG-3 of the other units of local government; ICE. -- Establish joint processes for collaborative planning and decision making with Policy to be adopted in IG-3 of the 0 the school board on population projections and siting of public school ICE. facilities; 0 Establish joint processes for the siting of facilities with county-wide Policy to be adopted in IG-3 of the significance; and ICE. 0 Adoption of an interlocal agreement tor school concurrency. Policy to be adopted in IG-3 of the ICE and in the proposed Public School Facilities Element. ~- Required the Capital Improvements Element to include implementation measures that Multimodal transportation Policy to be adopted in CI-l of the 85 9J-5.016(4)(a) provide a five-year financially feasible public school facilities program that demonstrates districts arc not utilized. CIE. the adopted level of service standards will be achieved and maintained and a schedule of ~-- capital improvements for multi modal transportation districts, if locally established. Required the Transportation Element analysis for multi modal transportation districts to 9J-5.019(3) Not utilized. None-optional plan provision demonstrate that community design elements win reduce vehicle miles of travel and ~- support an integrated, multi-modal transportation system. Page 83 of 156 @ V:IProjectsI2004104.00170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_20071Comp Plan12007 EAR12007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc \:~ Prepared by Miller Legg. 5/1/2007 87 Required Transportation Element objectives for multi modal transportation districts to 9J-5.019(4) Not utilized. None-optional plan provision. address provision of a safe, comfOliable and attractive pedestrian environment with 88-- convenicnt access to public transportation. Authorized local govemments to establish level of service standards for general lanes of 9J-5.019(4)(c) Not addressed Policy to be adopted in T-l ofthe the Florida Intrastate Highway System within urbanized areas, with the concurrence of the Transportation Element and CI-l of Department of Transportation. the CIE. 89 For the purpose of issuing a development order or permit, a proposed develoment may be 9J-5.0055(3)6 Not addressed. Policy to be adopted in T-3 of the deemed to have a d,e minimus impact and may not be subject to the concurrency Transportation Element. requirements of subparagraphs 9J-5.0055(3)(c)1.-4., FAC., only if all of the conditions specified in subsection 163.3180(6), F.S., are met. [Section 163.3180(6), F.S.] (J63.3J80 (6): The Legislature finds that a de minimis impact is consistent with this part. A de minimis impact is an impact that would not affect more than I percent of the maximum volume at the adopted level of service of the affected transportation faeility as determined by the local government. No impact will be de minimis if the sum of existing roadway volumes and the projected volumes from approved projects on a transportation facility would exceed I 10 percent of the maximum volume at the adopted level of service of the affected transportation facility; provided however, that an impact of a single family home on an existing lot will constitute a de minimis impact on all roadways regardless of the level of the deficiency of the roadway. Further, no impact will be de minimis ifit would exceed the adopted level-of-service standard of any affected designated hurricane evacuation routes. Each local government shall maintain sufficient records to ensure that the 11O-percent criterion is not exceeded. Each local government shall submit annually, with its updated capital improvements element, a summary of the de minimis records. If the state land planning agcncy determines that the 11O-percent criterion has been exceeded, the state land planning agency shall notify the local government of the exceedance and that no further de minimis exceptions for the applicable roadway may be granted until such time as the volume is reduced below the 110 percent. TIle local government shall provide proof of this reduction to the state land planning agency before issuing further de minimis - exceptions. ) Pag" 84 of 156 V:IProj"cts\2004104-00170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_20071Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc @ Prepared by Miller Legg - 511/2007 5.0 Special Topics 5.1 Assessment of the Future Land Use and Residential Coordination with the Brevard County School Board Chapter163.3l9l(2)(k), F.S. requires: The coordination of the comprehensive plan with existing public schools and those identified in the applicable educational facilities plan adopted pursuant to s. 1013.35. The assessment shall address, where relevant, the success or failure of the coordination of the future land use map and associated planned residential development with public schools and their capacities, as well as the joint decision making processes engaged in by the local government and the school board in regard to establishing appropriate population projections and the planning and siting of public school facilities. For those counties or municipalities that do not have a public schools interlocal agreement or public school facilities element, the assessment shall determine whether the local government continues to meet the criteria of s. 163.3177(12). If the county or municipality determines that it no longer meets the criteria, it must adopt appropriate school concurrency goals, objectives, and policies in its plan amendments pursuant to the requirements of the public school facilities element, and enter into the existing interlocal agreement required by ss. 163.3177(6)(h)2. and 163.31777 in order to fully participate in the school concurrency system. Action: The City added a voting representative to both the Land Planning Agency and the Planning and Zoning Board. Currently, for all comprehensive plan and zoning changes the City coordinates with the Brevard County School Board. A School Concurrency Element is required by December 2008. 5.2 Water Supply, Conservation and Re-Use Plans for Cape Canaveral's Projected Population Chapter 163.3191 (2)(1) requires: The extent to which the local government has been successful in identifying alternative water supply projects and traditional water supply projects, including conservation and reuse, necessary to meet the water needs identifled in s. 373.0361(2)(a) within the local government's jurisdiction. The report must evaluate the degree to which the local government has implemented the work plan for building public, private, and regional water supply facilities, including development of alternative water supplies, identified in the element as necessary to serve existing and new development. Action: According to Brevard County's EAR: SJRWMD has completed its 2005 Water Supply Plan. In this Plan, there are ten water supply development projects in Brevard County. The district states "more than enough alternative water supply development projects have been identified to meet the needs in the east-central Florida area through 2025." Sixty project options are identified in the SWSP 2005, and they include the following: Six brackish groundwater projects, six surface water projects, three seawater projects, forty-three reclaimed water projects and two agricultural projects. T>-___ Cl<!' _>:, "'''' 1 ag.:; 0"> VI IJJ VIProjects\2004\04-00170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006 _2007\Comp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR3.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 (-~ 11. ) ~ 5.3 Evaluation of Coastal High Hazard Area Density Reduction and Property Rights Chapter 163.3191 (2)(m) requires: If any of the jurisdiction of the local government is located within the coastal high-hazard area, an evaluation of whether any past reduction in land use density impairs the property rights of current residents when redevelopment occurs, including, but not limited to, redevelopment following a natural disaster. The property rights of current residents shall be balanced with public safety considerations. The local government must identifY strategies to address redevelopment feasibility and the property rights of affected residents. These strategies may include the authorization of redevelopment up to the actual built density in existence on the property prior to the natural disaster or redevelopment. Action: The City works to discourage population away from coastal high-hazard areas through Future Land Use and zoning controls. Currently, no large scale projects have passed increasing density or intensity. The City recently discontinued allowing residential use along the AlA corridor. 5.4 Assessment of Military Installations Compatibility Chapter 163.3191(2)(n) requires: An assessment of whether the criteria adopted pursuant to s. 163.3177(6)(a) were successful in achieving compatibility with military installations. Action: While there are no military installations within Cape Canaveral, Patrick Air Force Base and the Canaveral Air Station are in the vicinity. p~~~ 0;::' ~f' 1 1;;1; ~ ...0..... uv v. .-'-' V\Projects\2004\04~OO 170 General Planning SvcslEAR 2006_2007\Cornp Plan\2007 EAR\2007 CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL EAR2.doc Prepared by Miller Legg - 5/1/2007 .------. (g) 9J-5.023 Criteria for Determining Consistency of Land Development Regulations with the Comprehensive Plan. A determination of consistency of a land development regulation with the comprehensive plan will be based upon the following: (1) Characteristics of land use and development allowed by the regulation in comparison to the land use and development proposed in the comprehensive plan. Factors which will be considered include: (a) Type ofland use; (b) Intensity and density of land use; (c) Location ofland use; (d) Extent of land use; and (e) Other aspects of development, including impact on natural resources. (2) Whether the land development regulations are compatible with the comprehensive plan, further the comprehensive plan, and implement the comprehensive plan. The term "compatible" means that the land development regulations are not in conflict with the comprehensive plan. The term "further" means that the land development regulations take action in the direction of realizing goals or policies of the comprehensive plan. (3) Whether the land development regulations include provisions that implement objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan that require implementing regulations in order to be realized, including provisions implementing the requirement that public facilities and services needed to support development shall be available concurrent with the impacts of such development. Specific Authority 163.3202(5) FS. Law Implemented 163.3194,163.3213 FS. History-New 3-21-99. r;:j) ~ Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 05-01..(J7 AGENDA Heading Discussion Item 10 No. AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: DISCUSSION: RESORT DWELLING UNITS DEPT/DIVISION: LEGISLATIVE '\(1- ~ Requested Action: i City Council discuss the regulation of resort dwelling units. #~ , --/ Summary Explanation & Background: The city attorney was directed to prepare an ordinance as follows: Prohibit resort dwelling units within the R-l, R-2 and R-3 zoning districts and establish as a principal use within the C-l commercial district. Attached exhibits: 1. Proposed Ordinance No. 19-006 2. City Attorney's Executive Summary 3. City Manager's Analysis 4. Building Official's E-Mail on the (4) Residential Occupancies 5. P&Z Board's 09-27-06 Recommendation 6. Article - Short-Term Vacation Rentals: Residential or Commercial Use? Discussion only. Exhibits Attached: Listed above. Department LEGIS LA TIVE T +-em >9< r- -. :) CD DRAFT March 27, 2007 ORDINANCE NO. 19-2006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAYI'ER 110, ZONING, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES; CLARIFYlNG THE INTENT OF THE R-I, R-2 AND R-3 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; DEFINING THE TERM "RESORT DWELLING;" PROVIDING FOR RESORT DWELLINGS AS PRINCIPAL USES IN THE C-l ZONING DISTRICT; SETTING FORTH A PROCEDURE FOR ESTABLISHING A NONCONFORMING STATUS FOR CERTAIN RESORT DWELLINGS IN THE R-I, R-2 AND R-3 ZONING DISTRICTS BASED ON CERTAIN EXISTING LICENSE AND TAX FACTORS SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR EXPIRATION OF SUCH NONCONFORMING STATUS UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; AMENDING THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO RESTATE THAT ANY RENTAL OF A DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE FOR A MINIMUM OF SEVEN (7) DAYS; PROVIDING 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 maintenance of the character of residential neighborhoods is a proper purpose of zoning. See Village of Euclid Y. Ambler Co., 272 U.S. 365 (1926); Miller v. Board of Public Works, 234 P. 381 (Cal. 1925); and WHEREAS. limitations on resort dwellings and other transient commercial uses serve a substantial governmental interest in preserving the chamcter and integrity of residential neighborhoods. See Cope v. City afCannon Beach, 855 P.2d 1083 (Or. 1993); Ewing v. City of Carmel-By~The-Sea, 286 Cal. Rptr. 382 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991); and WHEREAS, the City seeks to maintain residential zoning districts that are free from congestion and overpopulation and that promote the permanent residency of families; and WHEREAS, the City's zoning district regulations are intended to permit only those uses that are expressly provided fur under the list of principal uses and special exception uses for each zoning City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page I of 8 -- - DRAFf March 27,2007 category; and WHEREAS, all other uses not expressly provided for as a principle use or special exception are intended to be prohibited; and WHEREAS. resort dwellings are not currently expressly listed as a principle or special exception use within any zoning district; and WHEREAS, the Ci ty Council hereby finds that it is necessary to list resort dwellings within a specific zoning district in order to preserve the residential character of portions of Cape Canaveral and to protect Cape Canaveral from becoming an overwhelming transient type community; and WHEREAS, the City Council is aware of, and relies upon, case law precedent which holds that a property owner does not have a vested right in zoning ordinances and that the mere purchase of land does not create a right to rely on existing zoning. See e.g., City of Miami Beach v. 8701 Collins Ave, 77 So. 2d 428 (1954); Epifano v. Town of Indian River Shores, 379 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 4lh DCA 1979); and WHEREAS, the City Council also acknowledges that transient residential uses fall under a different occupancy classification under the Florida Building Code than other residential uses and that more stringent building and fire code requirements exists for transient residential uses for life safety reasons; and WHEREAS, the City COlUlcil also finds that in accon:lance with section 11 0-121, Cape Canaveral Code, a change in occupancy classification of a building requires that the building official conduct an inspection of the building to determine whether it complies with applicable building code requirements before issuing a new certificate of occupancy for the building based on the changed occupancy classification; and WHEREAS, while the City Council desires to afford some protections to existing licensed resort dwellings that will become nonconforming under this ordinance, the City Council seeks to balance the competing interests between existing uses and the City Council's desire to protect the residential character of Cape Canaveral consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and to protect the safety of transient occupants; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby frods that protecting the residential character of the City of Cape Canaveral and promoting permanent residency are of paramount public importance; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the best interests of the citizens of the City of Cape Canaveral to provide fur resort dwellings as an additional pemlitted use in the C-l Low City of Cape CIDIVllm OrdiDaDCC No. 19-2006 Page 2 of 8 DRAFT March 27, 2007 Density COll'l..mercial zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, hereby finds this Ordinance to be in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Cape CanaveraL 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 ofthe City Council oftbe City or Cape Canaveral. Section 2. Code Amendment. Chapter 110, Zoning, of the Code of Ordinances, City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, is hereby amended as follows (underlined type indicates additions and "t.;l,.wul type indicates deletions, while asterisks (* · .o) 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 unchanged from the language existing prior to adoption of this Ordinance): CHAPTER 110. ZONING ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 110-1. Definitions. The following words, tenDs and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: *** Resort dwellinf: shall mean any individually or collectively owned one-family. two-family. three-family. or four-family dwelling house or dwelling unit which is rented more than three (3) times in a calendar year for periods ofless than thirtv(30) days or one (1) calendar month, whicheyer is less. or which is advertised or held out to the public as a place regularly reuted for periods ofless than thirtY (30) dayS or one ( I) calendar month. whichever is less. *** ARTICLE vn. DISTRICTS City of Cape ClUlaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 3 of 8 DRAFT March 27, 2007 *** DIVISION 2. R-l LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. U()"271. Intent. The requirements for the R -1 low density residential district are intended to apply to an area of single-family unattached residential development. Lot sizes and other restrictions are intended to promote and protect a high quality of residential development free from congestion and overoopulation, to promote the permanent residency of single families and to enhance and maintain the residential character and integrity ofthe area. Sec. 110..272. Principal uses and structures. The principal uses and structures in the R-llow density residential district are as follows: Single-family dwellings. In no case shall there be more than one principal structure per lot or parcel. D...dlin& ......il.Gnt.tl:. vfk"" t:lu..u "vVGn daJs "'v plOfub~t,d. *'II* DIVISION 3. R-2 MEDIlJM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 1l()"291. Intent. The requirements for the R-2 medium density residential district are intended to apply to an area of medium density residential development with a variety of housing types. Lot sizes and other restrictions are intended to promote and protect medium density residential development maintaining an adequate amount of open space for such development. Further. the provisions herein are intended to promote areas free trom congestion and overpopulation, to promote the t>etrtianeiit residency of families and to enhance and maintain the residential character and integrity of the area. Sec. 11()..292. Principal uses and structures. In the R.2 medium density residential district, the principal uses and structures shall be: (1) Single-family dwellings; (2) Two-family dwellings; (3) Multifamily dwellings; Of City of Cape CWllveral Ordinanclt No. 19-2006 Page 4 of g - DRAFT March 27. 2007 (4) Public schools. Notwithstanding the foregoing, there shall be no more than 15 dwelling uni ts per net residential acre; <U1d dw..U;n& unit .,ntzds on",.... th...... &(lye.. da,y.. AtC "'^(1."'....I) p.ohib;tcd. *** DIVISION 4. R-3 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT See. 110-311. Intent. The requirements for the R-3 medium density residential district are intended to apply to an area of medium density residential development with a variety of housing types. Lot sizes and other restrictions are intended to promote and protect medium density residential development maintaining an adequate amount of open space for such development. Further, the provisions herein are intended to promote areas free from congestion and overpopulation. to promote the permanent residency of families and to enhance and maintain the residential character and integrity of the area. See. 1l()"'312. Principal uses and structures. In the R-3 medium density residential district, the principal uses and structures shall be: (1) Single-family dwellings; (2) Two-family dwellings; (3) Multifamily dwellings; or (4) Public schools. Notwithstanding the foregoing, there shall be no more than 15 dwelling units per net residential acre; and dw..mn~ writ . ",utab oflc.ss t1\<l.u ..,."'.. dayoS at, cxp.(,s..l,r p.....h1b;tut. *** DIVISION 5. C-l LOW DENSITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT *** City of Cape ClUlaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 5 of 8 DRAFT March 27, 2007 See. 110-332. Principal uses and structures. In the C-l low density commercial district, the following uses and structures are permitted: *** (15) Resort dwellings duly licensed by the state. *** ARTICLE IX. SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS DIVISION 1. GENERALLY "''''* Sec. 110-485. Resort Dwellinl!s; nonconforminl: use status: ex>>iration. (a) Subiect to strict com>>liance with the requirements set forth in subsections (b) and ( c) of this section. any resort dwelling existing as of November 21. 2006 on real propem zoned R-l. R-2- or R-3 shall be deemed a nonconformin.g\lSe subiect to the provisions of Chapter 110. Article V. Nonconformities. of this Code. (b) In order to be considered existing as of November 21. 2006. the person claiming a nonconforming resort dwelling on real property zoned R-I. R-2. or R-3 must demonstrate that as of November 21. 2006. the resort dwellim! was licensed by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation and applicable transient rental taxes pursuant to section 212.03. Florida Statutes. have been duly Daid. Further. said person must also demonstrate that the resort dweiiing is in compliance with the certificate of occupanevrequirements set forth in section 110-121. City Code within ninety (90) daYS of the effective date of this ordinance. (c) Any person claiming that a resort dwelling should be deemed nonconforming under this section shall be required to file an application with the citY manager within thirty (30) days of the effective date oftbis ordinance. The application shall be on a form provided by the city manager and shall be for the purpose of verifying whether or not a particular resort dwelling should be deemed nonconforming under this section. The application shall be accompanied with copies of all applicable licenses. tax receipts. and certificate of occupancies which are necessary for the city manager to determine whether or not the resort dwelling should be decliil"ed a nonconforming use. In the event a person demonstrates City OrCllpC Gl!navel'l!l Ordinanco No. 19-2006 Page 6 of 8 -- DRAFT March 27, 2007 comoliance with the license and tax rCQuirements set forth in paragraph (b). but can not demonstrate comoliance with the certificate of occupancy requirements at the time the application is filed, the city manaJ1;er shall render a final decision on the application at the time the rCQuisite certificate of occupancy is filed with the city mana~er. or at the end ofthe ninety (90) day time oeriod. whichever occurs first. Upon verification that a nonconforming resort dwe1lin~ use status exists. the city manaJ1;er shall issue to the applicant a written notice of nonconfonninl!: use status for the particular resort dwelling. Upon the passing of the application deadline set forth in this subsection. all persons shall be barred from claiming nonconforming use status under this section. (d) Anv resort dwelling deemed nonconforming pursuant to this section shall lose its nonconforming status if any one (l) of the following occurs: (1) The resort dwelling use is abandoned pursuant to section 110-197 of this Code; (2) The Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation revokes the resort dwelling's license for whatever reason. or if said license should otherwise expire or lapse at any time. Sec. 110-486. Rental RestrictioDson Dwellinl! Units. It shall be unlawful for anyoerson to rent a dwelling unit for less than seven (7) consecutive days. *** Section 3. Repeal ()fPrlol' 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, are hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict. Section 4. Incorporation Into Code. This Ordinance shall be incorporated into the Cape Canaveral City Code and 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 ordinance and the City Code may be freely made. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent City of Cape Canavl'fIll Ordinance No. 19-2006 P1ie 7 of 8 DRAFT March 27, 2007 jurisdiction. whether for substantive, procedural, or any other reason, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, this _ day of ,2007. ROCKY RANDELS, Mayor A TrEST: For Against Bob Hoog - - Leo Nicholas - - Buzz l'elaol - - Rocky Randels - - SUSAN STILLS, City Clerk C. Shannon Roberts - - I- Legal Ad Published: First Reading: 2" Legal Ad published: Second Reading: Approved as to legal form and sufficiency for the City of Cape Canaveral only: ANTHONY A. GARGANESE, City Attorney City of Cape CanavcflIl Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page: 8 of 8 -- BROWN, GARGANESE, WEISS & D'AGRESTA, P.A. Attorneys at Law Debra S. Babb-Nutcher Offices in Orlando, Kissimmee, Cocoa, Vivian Cocotas Joseph E. Blitch Fi:. Lauderdale & Ta.-npa Michael O'Brien Colgan Usher L. Brown · Scott J. Oomstein Suzanne O'AgrestaO Mitchell B. Haller Anthony A. GarganeseO Katherine W. Latorre J.W. Taylor Amy J. Pitsch Jeffrey S. Weiss - - Erin J. O'Leary Catherine O. Reischmann 'Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer WIlliam E. Reischmann, Jr. "Board Certified City, County & Local Govemment Law Of Counsel March 30, 2007 Via Email Correspondence Bennett Boucher, City Manager City of Cape Canaveral 105 Polk Avenue Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 Re: Resort Dwelling Executive Summarj The City Council and Planning and Zoning have held numerous meetings and have evaluated numerous proposals regarding the regulation of vacation rentals within the City. Given the number of meetings and proposals, I felt it would be helpful to provide the following executive summary of the most recent draft ordinance, A, Purpose The proposed ordinance is a zoning regulation. It regulates the use of land within the City. The specific purpose of the proposed ordinance is as follows: 1. It adds the statutory definition of "resort dwelling" to the zoning code. Resort dwelling is a statutory term of art that will be incorporated into the City Code. Section 509.242(1)(g), Florida Statutes, provides: Resort dwelling shall mean any individually or collectively owned one-family, two-family, three-family, or four-family dwelling house or dwelling unit which is rented more than three (3) times in a calendar year for periods ofless than thirty (30) days or one (1) calendar month, whichever is less, or which is advertised or held out to the public as a place regularly rented for periods ofless than thirty (30) days or one (1) calendar month, whichever is less 225 East Robinson Street, Suite 660 . P.O. Box 2873 . Orlando. Florida 32802-2873 Orlando (407) 425-9566 Fax (407) 425.9596' Kissimmee (321) 402-0144' Cocoa (866) 425-9566' Ft. Lauderdaie (954) 670-i979 Webs!te: www.or!ando!aw,nel . Emaii: firrn@orlandolaw.net Bennett Boucher March 30, 2007 Page 2 of5 This is a difficult definition to apply. Stating it a different way may be helpful. For example, in order for a dwelling unit to be classified as a resort dwelling, the unit must: A. Be a Olle, two, three, or four family dwelling hOllse or ullit; and B. One or both of the following must be met: (1 ) The unit must be rented more than three (3) times in a calendar year and the rental period must be less than thirty (30) days or one calendar month, whichever is less; and/or (2) The unit is advertised or held out to the public as a place regularly rented for the time periods stated in (1). 2. It adds resort dwellings to the list of principle uses in the C-l zoning district. Currently, "resort dwellings" are not listed as either a principle or special exception use in any zoning district. The City Code provides that "all uses and structures not specifically or provisionally permitted [in the zoning district classifications) are prohibited." Therefore, resort dwellings are technically not an allowable use in the City. The purpose of this Ordinance is to expressly permit resort dwellings within the C-l com~mercial zoning district. Thus, resort dwellings will continue to be prohibited in every other zoning classification. B. Grandfather Existing Resort Dwellings. 1. General Background Despite the fact that resort dwellings are not technically an allowable use in the City, the City Manager has uncovered during the public hearing process the fact that the State of Florida has issued approximately seven (7) resort dwelling licenses in the City of Cape Canaveral. These resort dwellings have also apparently complied with the City Code provision that prohibits the rental of dwelling units for less than seven days. It is my understanding that these resort dwellings are not located on property that is zoned C-l. Given these facts, the Council has wrestled with the issue of grandfathering (nonconforming status) these, and perhaps other, resort dwellings operating within the City. 2. Who is Grandfathered? Upon adoption oftheproposed Ordinance, any resort dwelling located in theR-l, R-2, or R-3 zoning district '..vill be grandfathered as a nonconfonnLng use, provided: A. The resort dwelling was in existence on November 21, 2006; B. The resort dwelling was licensed by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation on November 21, 2006; Bennett Boucher March 30, 2007 Page 3 of 5 C. Applicable transient rental taxes pursuant to section 212.03, Florida Statutes, have been duly paid; and D. The resort dwelling is in compliance with the certificate of occupancy requirements set forth in section 110-121, City Code within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this ordinance. However, although it is within the council' 5 discretion to grandfather certain resort dwellings through the adoption of an ordinance, it may be questionable whether any resort dwelling currently operating within the City would meet the generally accepted legal definition of a grandfathered use. Typically, in order to be considered "grandfathered," the use must have been lawfully in existence before a change in law made them unlawful. In this case, although several resort dwellings were licensed by the State, the City Code appears to prohibit resort dwellings because they are not listed as a principle or special exception use in any zoning district. Furthermore, as explained below, resort dwellings, as a transient use, have a different occupancy classification than permanent residential dwellings under the Florida Building Code. Converting a permanent residential dwelling to a transient residential dwelling, like a resort dwelling, requires that the building official issue a new certificate occupancy. In order to receive a new certificate of occupancy, the resort dwelling must satisfy the applicable building and fire codes for transient residential dwellings. See e.g., Section 110-121, Cape Canaveral Code. It is uncertain at this time whether the existing resort dwellings which are licensed by the State are in compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Thus, if it is determined that these resort dwellings are not in compliance, it is doubtful they would technically be declared "lawfully" in existence at the time this Ordinance was adopted by the City Council. Therefore, it is debatable whether these iicensed resort dweilings would be entitled to nonconforming status under the law because they are teclmically not in compliance with the City's current zoning code and may not be in compliance with the City's certificate of occupancy requirements and Florida's Building and Fire Prevention Codes. Notwithstanding, the City Council can expressly provide nonconforming status by this Ordinance. 3. Who Authorizes Grandfathered Status? Under the Ordinance, the City Manager must authorize a resort dwelling being declared a nonconforming use. The proposed Ordinance provides a procedure for eligible resort dwellings to receive such a declaration. Particularly: A. An application must be submitted within thirty (30) days of the adoption of the Ordinance; B. The application shall be accompanied with copies of all applicable licenses, tax receipts, and certificate of occupa..T1cies which are necessary for the City Manager to determine whether or not the resort dwelling should be declared a nonconforming use. Bennett Boucher March 30, 2007 Page 4 of5 If the applicant demonstrates compliance with the nonconforming status requirements, the City Manager shall issue a written notice of such status. Any person seeking nonconfonning status after the thirty (30) day time period will be barred from seeking nonconforming status. 4. Can Grandfathered Status Be Terminated? If nonconforming status is granted by the City Manager, it may be terminated if: A. The resort dwelling use is abandoned under the nonconforming use section ofthe City Code; or B. The State of Florida revokes the resort dwelling's license or the license expires or lapses. C. Other Technical Amendments. The proposed Ordinance also: 1. Restates the Minimum Seven (7) Day Rental Requirement In The Supplemental Zoning Regulations. A new section 110-486 is created that provides, "It shall be unlawful for any person to rent a dwelling unit for less than seven (7) consecutive days." Because this provision will be codified in the supplemental zoning regulations, the seven day minium rental requirement will apply to a dwelling unit in any zoning district, including resort dwellings. 2. Clarifies the Intent and Purpose of the R-l, R-2, and R-3 Zoning Districts. The following language will be added to the R-l, R-2, and R-3 zoning districts to declare that the districts are intended to be "free from congestion and overpopulation, to promote the permanent residency of single families and to enhance and maintain the residential character and integrity of the area." D. Other Policy Considerations. 1. The North American Industry Classification System, United States, 2002 Edition, classifies "Lessors of Residential Buildings and Dwellings" (531110) as an industry comprised of "establishments primarily engaged in acting as lessors of buildings used as residences or dwellings, such as single-family homes, apartment buildings, and town homes. Included in this industry are owner-lessors and establishments renting real estate and then acting as lessors in subleasing it to others. The establishments in this industry may manage the property themselves or have another estabiishment manage it for them." Bennett Boucher March 30, 2007 Page 5 of5 Therefore, it appears that resort dwellings should be categorized as an industry, not a residential use. 2. Section 110-121, Cape Canaveral Code provides: No building or structure shall be used or occupied, and no change in the existing occupancy classification of a building or structure or portion thereof shall be made until the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy therefor. Issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall not be construed as an approval of a violation of the provisions of the city code or any other applicable law. If issuance of such certificate is refused, the building official shall state such refusal in writing with the reason. A temporary certificate of occupancy may be issued by the building official for a period not exceeding six months during alterations or partial occupancy of a building pending its completion, provided that such temporary certificate may require such conditions and safeguards as will protect the safety of the occupants and the public. According to the building official, a resort dwelling is a transient residential type use classification under the Florida Building Code. It does not have the same use classification as a permanent residential use. In other words, in accordance with section 110-121, if a property owner converted, or sought to convert, a permanent residential use to a transient residential use, like a resort dwelling, the property must be inspected to ensure that the dwelling complies with the applicable provisions ofthe Florida Building and Fire Prevention Codes and a new certificate of occupancy will need to be issued ifthe dwelling were in compliance. Consequently, suhstantial1ife safety issues are at issue whenever a permanent residential dwelling is converted to a transient residential dwelling. Again, it is unclear at this time whether the existing resort dwellings, whether licensed by the State or not, have been properly inspected to determine compliance with applicable building and fire codes. Should the City Council decide to grandfather the resort dwellings already licensed by the State, the proposed ordinance will require that the resort dwelling seek, and receive, from the City a new certificate of occupancy under the transient residential use classification set forth in the Florida Building Code. lfthe resort dwelling can not comply with the building and fire codes within that time period, the resort dwelling will not be grandfathered. I look forward to discussing this matter more fully at the City Council meeting. / Antho ------- arganese City Attorney City Manager's Office Memo Too Mayor & City Couool Membe~' From: Bennett Boucher, City Manag ._1;) CC: Planning & Zoning Board Me ers Date: 01/0512007 Re: Resort Dwelling - Analysis of Comprehensive plan and Land Development regulations. I recently completed a review and analysis of the Comprehensive plan and Land Development regulations and the following are my findings. The comprehensive plan housing element deals mostly with affordable housing by encouraging it and other types of housing. If resort dwellings were an official permitted use, this could take housing inventory out of the market. The comprehensive plan future land use element deals mostly with protecting the residential character of the residential zoning districts. The City currently does not define - resort dwelling in our Land Development Regulations, (LOR's). These are the definitions in the City LOR code describe residential uses; Dwelling, multiple-family, means a residential building designed for or occupied by three or more families, with the;: number of families in residence not exceeding the number of dwelling units provided. Dwelling, .'lingle-family, means a detached residential dwelling lmit other than a mohile home, designed for and occupied by one family. 1 -". . Dwelling. two-family. means a detached residential building containing two dwelling units, designed lor occupancy by not more than two families. Dwelling unit or living unit means one room or rooms connected together, constituting a separate independent housekeeping establishment for owner occupancy, for rent or lease. aiid physically separated from any other rooms or dwelling units which may be in the same stnlcture and containing independent cooking and sleeping facilities. Family means a person or a group of persons related to each other by blood or marriage or a group of not more than four adults who are not necessarily so related, living together under one roof as a single household unit. Residential district means that area set aside primarily for use as low and medium density residential housing. Sec. 110-272. Principal uses and structures. The principal uses and structures in the R-1 low density residential district are as follows: Single-family dwellings. In no case shall there be more than one principal structure per lot or parcel. Dwelling unit rentals of less than seven days are prohibited. (Code 1981, S 637.03) Sec. 110-275. Prohibited uses and structures. In the R~1 low density residential district, all uses not specifically or provisionally permitted in this division and any use not in keeping with the single-family residential character of the district, including two-family and multiple-family dwellings, townhouses and mobile home parks, are prohibited. (Code 1981, ~ 637.09) Sec. 110-292. Principal uses and structures. In the R-2 medium density residential district, the principal uses and structures shall be: (1 ) Single-family dwellings; (2) Two-family dwellings; (3) Multifamily dwellings; or (4) Public schools. Notwithstanding the foregoing, there shall be no more than 15 dwelling units per net residential acre, and dwelling unit rentals of less than seven days are expressly prohibited. (Code 1981, ~ 637.17; Ord. No. 17-96. ~ 1, 10-1-96) . Page 2 Sec. 110-295. Prohibited uses and structures. In the R-2 medium density residential district, all uses and structures not specificaiiy or provisionaiiy permitted in this division are prohibited. (Code 1981, ~ 637.23) Sec. 110-312. Principal uses and structures. In the R-3 medium density residential district, the principal uses and structures shall be: (1) Single-family dwellings; (2) Two-family dwellings; (3) Multifamily dwellings; or (4) Public schools. Notwithstanding the foregoing, there shall be no more than 15 dwelling units per net residential acre, and dwelling unit rentals of less than seven days are expressly prohibited. (Code 1981, S 637.31; Ord. No. 17-96,92,10-1-96) Sec. 110-315. Prohibited uses and structures. In the R~3 medium density residential district, all uses and structures not specifically or provisionally permitted in this division are prohibited. (Code 1981, ~ 637.37) After you review the above, resort dwelling as defined by the State below, is not a permitted use in any of the City's residential districts. The state of Florida defines resort dwelling as - a resort dwelling is any individually or collectively owned one-family, two-family, three-family, or four-family dwelling house or dwellillg Llllit Which is rented more than three times in a calendar year for periods of less than 30 days or 1 calendar month, whichever is less, or which is advertised or held out to the public as a place regularly rented for periods of less then 30 days or 1 calendar month, whichever Is less. Additionally, (this is an important point) you can rent a unit for a week or longer under the current code and not trip the State's definition of a "resort dwelling" and be a conforming use. This can occur when the frequency of the rental does not meet or exceed the State's definition. . Page 3 If you rented a unit that tripped the State's definition of a "resort dwelling" then you are in violation of the City's code because this use is not defined or listed as a principal use in the R-1 f R-2 and R-3 zoning districts. If the City were allow "resort dwellings" as a permitted use, I believe there would be comprehensive plan consistency issues that would have to be addressed in order to allow this type of use within the City's residential districts. . Page 4 t'age 1 ot 1 Bennett Boucher From: Todd Morley [morley-cape@cfl.rr.comJ Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 20074:24 PM To: 'Bennett Boucher'; 'Anthony Garganese'; 'Bob Haag'; 'Buzz Petsos'; 'C. Shannon Roberts'; 'Leo Nicholas'; 'Rocky Randels' ee: dsargeant@ccvfd.org Subject: RE: resort dwelling Hello everyone. The Florida Building Code breaks down residential occupancies into 4 categories (Rl. R2. R3 &R4). We have to be careful not to confuse these with our City zoning classifications - a very different issue. R 1 is transient residential (less than 30 days). R2 is permanent residential (more than 30 days) and multi-family R3 is permanent residential (more than 30 days) and one or t\vo-family R4 is residential care/assisted living facilities for not more than 16 occupants. If a property owner wishes to change from one occupancy classification to another. both the Building Code and the City Ordinance (Sec. I 10-121) require a that person apply for and obtain a pennit for a change of occupancy classification. A permit and inspections will be required. A Certificate of Occupancy must be obtained for the new use. There are occupant load compliance issues. R2 and R3 permit one occupant for every 200 s.f. That means a 3.000 s.f. transient residential unit could have IS occupants. If a property achieves a Change of Occupancy Classification to R I. then the fire code allows one occupant tor eve!}' 150 s.f. That means a 3.000 s.f. transient residential unit could have 20 occupants. There are 25% more people and they are transient. So this becomes a more intense use as far as life safety. When changing to a new. more "life-safety-intense" occupancy classification (i.e. from R3 to R 1 ). the building code specifies that a number of improvements must be made to protect life safety. Among the requirements the Fire Dept. and Building Dept. are currently reviewing are provisions for a fire protection system. a fire alarm system. separation requirements. egress modifications. plumbing facilities and ADA modifications. There will also be zoning code compliance issues (i.e. parking spaces and sewer impact fees). rlllet you know more tonight. -Todd 3/20/2007 City of Cape Canaveral Date: October 10. 2006 To: Bennett Boucher. City Manager Susan Stills, City Clerk From: Baa McNeely. Chairperson. Planning & Zoning Board Re: Recommendation to Citv Council , Proposed Ordinance No. 19-2006 Clarifying The Intent Of The R-1, R-2, and R-3 Regulations Residential Zoning Districts - --..---- ---- At the Planning & Zoning Board meeting, held on September 27. 2006, by a vote of three for and two against. the Board recommended approval of the above referenced proposed ordinance. Please schedule this item for an upcoming City Council meeting. 105 Polk Avenue · Post Office Bolt 326 · Cape Canavera.!, FL 32910-0326 Teiephone: (320 868-1222 · ST.Jt~COM; 982-1222 " FAX: (521) 868.1247 www.m;yflorida.comlcapc · c:mail: ccapoca.n.avcra.i@d1.rr.com PLANNING & ZONING BOARD Page 1 of 4 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES ~ SEPTEMBER 27, 2006 A Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board was held on September 27, 2006, at the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida. Chairperson Bea McNeely called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The Secretary called the roll. MEMBERS PRESl=NT Bea McNeely Chairperson Lamar Russell Vice Chairperson John Fredrickson Donald Dunn Harry Pearson John Johanson 1 st Alternate OTHERMRESENT Duree Alexander Acting Secretary Todd Peetz City Planner Kate Latorre Assistant City Attorney Bennett Boucher City Manager Robert Hoog Mayor Pro Tern Buzz Petsos Council Member NEW BUSiNESS: ... 1. 8RRrov~of Meeting Minutes: Septemper 13, 2006. Motion by Donald Dunn, seconded by Harry Pearson, to approve the meeting minutes of September 13, 2006. Vote on the motion carried unanimously. p 2. Review and Recommendation to City Council Re: Proposed Ordinance Regarding Vacation l~ Rentals - Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney. Todd Peetz, City Planner, gave an overview of the agenda item. He explained that the agenda item was discussed several months ago and most of the issues had been resolved at that time. The item was put on hold to see the outcome of the Brevard County lawsuit regarding short term rentals. However, at the last City Council meeting the Council requested staff move forward with the item. ~ Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney, explained that this ordinance had been revised based on City Council recommendations to prohibit vacation rentals for less than ninety (90) days in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 residential zoning districts. She stated that the Brevard County lawsuit was in the beginning stages and that no significant ruling had been made which would provide any type of guidance. Consequently the Council requested that staff move forward and prepare the ordinance. Chairperson McNeely asked if the City Council had any specific recommendations. http://www.myflorida.comlcape/Archived%20MinuteslP &ZI2006/09- 2 7 -06.htm 4/23/2007 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD Page 2 of4 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2006 Page 2 Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney responded that the City Council's specific instructions were to prohibit vacation rentals in all residential zoning districts for single family dwellings or multiple family dwellings with four (4) or less units for periods of less than ninety (90) consecutive calendar days, which would exclude larger condominiums and apartment complexes. She stated that the intent of each zoning district was amended to further explain and promote the City's intent for permanent residency of families in these districts; the ordinance specifically prohibits what staff has defined as "transient commercial use" in these zoning districts and has been added to the definition section of Chapter 110; to avoid conflict, the sentence "dwelling unit rentals of less than seven days are expressly prohibited" has been stricken from the R-1, R-2 and R-3 residential zoning districts. Bea McNealy, Chairperson asked if there was a provision for penalties in the ordinance. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney responded that there was no provision in this particular ordinance; however, she asked that the Board consider a period of time for existing rentals to come into compliance. There was open discussion by the board members regarding the ninety (90) day time limit recommended in the proposed ordinance; the issues of short term rentals in regards to noise, parking and number of people residing in the units for short periods of time; and the effect on the long term residents. Donald Dunn asked how Brevard County and other municipalities are regulating the amount of time allowed for short term rentals. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney responded that she believed the County is limiting the short term rentals to sixty (60) or ninety (90) days and that the State pre-empts local regulation to a certain extent. She stated that due to the numerous concerns presented to City Council that the intent of this particular amount of time is to eliminate some of the problems that are associated with the short term rentals as previously discussed. There was open discussion by the board members regarding permitting requirements for existing short term rentals; fire inspections; and owner contact information being posted in the rental units. John Johanson asked if City staff had reviewed other City's ordinances regarding short term rentals. Todd Peetz, City Planner stated staff had reviewed a dozen or more ordinances ranging from three (3) days to thirty (30) days, with some jurisdictions prohibiting short term rentals altogether. http://www.myflorida.com/cape/Archived%20Minutes/P &Z/2006/09- 27 -06 .htm 4/23/2007 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD Page 3 of4 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2006 Page 3 Timothy Levensaler, 419 Jackson Avenue, Cape Canaveral, stated he is opposed to the new ordinance. He owns properties that are short term rentals in the City and has obtained all the required licenses to operate his business. The problems that have been addressed by the board, such as noise, number of people and parking; he has addressed with his tenants and surrounding neighbors. He stated that he has posted his personal contact information in all his rental units and resides at one of the short term rental properties. He stated that he felt the only problem may be parking. Burt Patrick, prior City Manager addressed compliance with the current zoning ordinance which allows pre-existing uses to be grandfathered and asked that the board consider grandfathering the existing uses. Todd Peetz, City Planner stated that a time amortization schedule would be created to amortize those uses so that they would not have a grandfathering ability. Bill Correnti, 8774 Live Oak Ct., Cape Canaveral, stated that he is opposed to the new ordinance; he believes that long term residents are more of a problem than the short term renters; and that short term renters are not the same as transient rentals. Kate Latorre, Assistant City Attorney provided a definition for transient rentals. Annie Tenenbaum, 8194 Lake Drive, Unit 306, Cape Canaveral, stated her concerns regarding not allowing short term rentals. Shannon Roberts, 703 Solana Shores Drive, Unit 505, Cape Canaveral, stated her concerns regarding the short term rentals; the noise factor when short term rentals are introduced into a quiet residential area; difficultly in dealing with weekly renters whose concerns are here only to ~ have fun; consideration of time shares which are different from condominium associations. Motion by Bea McNeely, seconded by Lamar Russell that the board recommend approval of the draft Ordinance to the City Council with the condition that an amortization period be added for existing agreements to expire in one (1) year. Discussion followed regarding regulating noise; number of people; enforcement; type of amortization schedule. Members voted as follows: Donald Dunn, for; John Fredrickson, against; Bea McNeely, for; Harry Pearson, against; and Lamar Russell, for. Motion passed three to two. OPEN DISCUSSION Bea McNeely, Chairperson opened the floor for discussion. http://www.myflorida.com/cape/Archived%20Minutes/P &2/2006109- 2 7 -06 .htm 4/23/2007 j?cf-b (? /) b j-d1- 0.. ORDINANCE NO. 19-2006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 110, ZONING, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES; CLARIFYING THE INTENT OF THE R-I, R-2 ANu R-3 RESIDENrlAL ZONING DISTRICTS; DEFINING THE TERM "TRANSIENT COMMERCIAL USE;" PROHIBITING TRANSIENT COMMERCIAL USES IN THE R-l, R-2 AND R-3 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICfS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS OR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS WITH FOUR (4) OR LESS UNITS FOR PERIODS OF LESS THAN NINETY (90) CONSECUTIVE CALENDAR DAYS; ESTABLISHING AN AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE FOR TRANSIENT COMMERCIAL USES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS WHICH WERE IN EXISTENCE, LICENSED BY THE STATE AND PAID APPLICABLE STATE TRANSffiNT RENTAL TAXES BY DATE CERTAIN AS SET FORTH IN TIllS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR EXTENSIONS; MAKING CONFORMING AND MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 110, ZONING; PROVIDING 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 vm, of the State Constitution, to exercise any power for municipal pwposes, except when expressly prohibited by law; and WHEREAS, the maintenance of the character of residential neighborhoods is a proper purpose of zoning. See Village of Euclid v. Ambler Co., 272 US. 365 (1926); Miller v. Board of Public Works, 234 P. 381 (Cal. 1925); llI1d WHEREAS, limitations on transient commercial uses of residential dwelling units serve a substantial governmental interest in preserving the character and integrity of residential neighborhoods. See Cope v. City of Cannon Beach, 855 P.2d 1083 (Or. 1993); Ewing v. City of Carmel-By-The-Sea, 286 Cal. Rptr. 382 (Cal Ct. App. 1991); and WHEREAS, the City seeks to maintain residential zoning districts that arc free from congestion and overpopulation and that promote the permanent residency of families; and WHEREAS, the City Council has consider"..d and relied upon, in pa.rt, studies entitled A Rezoning Study, prepared by Tuttle-Annfield-Wagner dated May 2,2005 and Brevard County Economic Analysis of Residential Rezoning Draft Report, prepared by Tindale-Oliver & Associates, City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 1 of 8 rd-b 7'-.27-VG Inc. dated May 2005 for purposes of determining a reasonable time period, formula and procedure for amortizing nonconforming transient commercial uses; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, hereby finds this Ordinance to be in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Cape Canaveral. 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, Zoning, of the Code of Ordinances, City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, is hereby amended as follows (underlined type indicates additions and ;:)tl:ilocont 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 unchanged from L'1e lan.guage existL."1g prior to adoption of this Ordinance): CRAPTER 110. ZONING ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 110-1. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases. when used in this chapter. shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: *** Transient commercial use means the rental or use of a residential dwelling unit as a bed and breakfast. hostel. hotel. inn. lodge. motel. resort or other transient lodging uses for compensation. money. rent. or other bariained for consideration j!iven in return for occupancy. possession or use of the dwelling unit. *** ARTICLE vn. DISTRICTS *** DIVISION 2. R-t LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 2 of 8 .0; l,. J - 9-27- DG: Sec. 110-271. IntenL The requirements for the R-Ilow density residential district are intended to apply to an area of single-family unattached residential development. Lot sizes and other restrictions are intended to promote and protect a high quality of residential development free from con~estion and ove1l'o-pulation. to promote the permanent residency of single families and to enhance and maintain the residential character and integrity of the area. *** See. 110-275. Prohibited uses and structures. ill The transient commercial use of a sin~le-familv dwelling for less than ninety (90) consecutive calendar days is prohibited. However. any dwelling beinl1 utilized as a transient commercial use. which was in existence and licensed by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants ofthe Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation on (INSERT DA TE) and that has paid applicable transient rental taxes pursuant to section 212.03. Florida Statutes. shall be subiect to the amortization provision in section 110-485 of this Code. ill In t!l.. R-l Iv w d"n~.it)' l,-!>.id"nt.icrl d:i.~lIj...t, ail All other uses not specifically or provisionally permitted in this division and any use not in keeping with the single-family residential character of the district, including two-family and multiple-family dwellings, townhouses and mobile homes parks, are prohibited. *** DIVISION 3. R-2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 110-291. Intent. The requirements for the R-2 medium density residential district are intended to apply to an area of medi urn density residential development with a variety of housing types. Lot sizes a..'1d other restrictions are intended to promote and protect medium density residential development maintaining an adequate amount of open space for such development. Further. the orovisions herein are intended to promote areas free from congestion and oveq>opulation. to promote the pennanent residency of families and to enhance and maintain the residential character and inte~rity of the area. *** Sec. 110-295. Prohibited uses and structures. W The transient commercial use~ a single-family dwelling or a multiple-family dwellin~ with four (4) units or less for a period ofless than ninety (90) consecutive calendar days is prohibited. However. any dweIIine: being utilized as a transient commercial use. City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 3 of 8 rr/-b c . ' 7 -.2?~CJ.b which was in existence and licensed by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida DeJ>artment of Business and Professional Regulation on (INSERT DATE) and that has paid ~pplicable transient rental taxes pursuant to section 212.03. Florida Statutes. shall be subject to the amortization provision in section 110-485 of this Code, M Dwelline unit rentals ofless than seven (7) days shall be prohibited in multi-family structures of five (5) units or more. ~ Iu the R-Z UJ"Jiulll detJ;,!t)' i",;,id\...llLiaf di;,tJi(,l, afl All other uses and structures not specifically or provisionally permitted in this division are prohibited. *** DIVISION 4. R.3 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec.l10-311.Inten~ The requirements for the R-3 medium density residential district are intended to apply to an area of medium density residential development wit.~ a variety of housing types. Lot sizes and oLher restrictions are intended to promote and protect medium density residential development maintaining an adequate amount of open space for such development. Further. the provisions herein are intended to promote areas free from congestion and overpopulation. to promote the permanent residency of families and to enhance and maintain the residential character and inte&fity of the area. *** Sec. 110-315. Prohibited uses and structures. {ill The transient commercial use of a single-family dwelling or a multiple-family dwelling with four (4) units or less for a period of less than ninety (90) consecutive calendar days is prohibited. However. any dwelling being utilized as a transient commercial use. which was in existence and licensed by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Re~ulation on (INSERT DATE) and that has paid applicable transient rental taxes pursuant to section 212.03. Florida Statutes. shall be subiect to the amortization Drovision in section 110-485 of this Code. M Dwelling unit rentals of less than seven (7) days shall be prohibited in multi-family structures of five (5) units or more. ~ In lhe, R-J fi.cdiulYi dwsil) J",;,ld"uliaf Ji~tJ:kt, all All other uses and structures not specifically or provisionally permitted in this division are prohibited. *** City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 4 of 8 /, tJjJ-- b 7' /;2 '/ /ab ARTICLE IX. SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS DIVISION 1. GENERALLY *** Sec. 110-485. DweIlin~: transient commercial use: amortization schedule: extensions. liU. Any dwe1lin~ which is subiect to this section shall cease operatin~ as transient commercial uses within one (1) year from (INSERT DATE), and shall thereafter be used in a manner consistent with the zoning district applicable to the property where the dwellinl: is located. .all. Owners of any dwel1in~ which is eligible for amortization under this section shall provide written proof of state license and oayment of ap.,plicable state transient rental taxes. (U Extensions. ill Owners of dwellings subiect to this section who cannot reasonably recover their allowable unrecoverable costs within one ( I) year after (INSERT DATE) may file a written request for an extension on the grounds that the one (1) year atnortization period is insufficient with respect to an individual transient commercial use. Such extension request shall be filed with the City Manager within ninety (90) days from (INSERT DATE), Failure to file a request for an extension within said time period shan bar the filin~ of an extension. aL The amortization period is to be determined by (INSERT DECISION MAKING BODY /PERSON) using the following formula: Allowable unrecoverable costs divided by annual transient commercial use income equals the number of amortization years. or fraction thereof. ill- The owner of the dwelling has the burden of proof by preponderance of the evidence to present sufficient documentation evidencing the values for allowable unrecoverable costs and estimated annual income. ffi Allowable unrecoverable costs means thosy c;osts that are specifically related to managing a transient commercial use. Allowable unrecoverable costs must be costs incurred for the sole use in the transient commercial use. Such costs include but are not limited to: costs associated with state licensure (safety signs. fire extin~ishers. etc.): kitchenware (silverware. pots. pans. dishes. etc): linens and bedding (tablecloths. sheets. pillows. etc) and furniture (beds. couches. chairs. etc). Such costs must have accrued within five (5) years before the effective date of this ordinance. Additionally. such costs must be de.,preciated 20 percent (20%) per year. City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 5 of 8 Yd-b 1'-d/-':)/; ill. Allowable unrecoverable costs does not mean costs that add value to the property despite its use. Such ineligible costs include but are not limited to: roofing repairs: landscaping. including paving: pools. hot tubs and iacuzzis. room expansions: remodeling: and air conditioning systems. !.Ql. Annual transient commercial use income means the income received from rents of the transient commercial use minus expenses incurred solely for operation of the transient commercial use. Expenses for oJ'Crating the transient commercial use include but are not limited to: mortgage interest for actual rental periods: commission to a rental a~ent: utilities. ordinary maintenance (not major repair): and cleaning services. Expenses not directly related to the operation of the transient commercial use such as mortgage interest for non-rental periods are not to be included in the calculation of transient commercial use income. ill In determining the amortization period. the (INSERT DECISION MAKING BODY /PERSON) shall consider any bona fide contracts entered into before (INSERT DATE) for violation with the Impairment of Contracts Clause. Article I. Section I 0 of the Florida Constitution and adiust the amortization period to lawfully address the term of the existin~ contract. *** Section 3. Conforming Amendments. The following conforming amendments are made to Chapter lID, Zoning, of the Code of Ordinances, City of Cape Canaveral, Florida (underlined type indicates additions and 6h~keout 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 unchanged from the language existing prior to adoption of this Ordinance): CHAPTER 110. ZONING *** ARTICLE vn. DISTRICTS *** DIVISION 2. R-l LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS *** Sec. 110-272. Principal uses and structures. The principal uses and structures in the R-llow density residential district are as follows: City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 6 of 8 r.J- b 1-dJ-C(~ Single-family dwellings. In no case shall there be more than one principal structure per lot or parcel. Dwdl~t1g nu;t ~",n:t,,15 of 1<:.1\1\ that1 1>{,,(,11 da)'!. l1le pluhlbitcd. *** DIVISION. 3. R-2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT *** Sec. 110-292. Principal uses and structures. In the R-2 medium density residential district, the principal uses and structures shall be: (1) Single-family dwellings; (2) Two-family dwellings; (3) Multifamily dwellings; or (4) Public schools. Notwithstanding the foregoing, there shall be no more than 15 dwelling units per net residential acre-; aud J~cmno uHit .",uW1> vf k"" than !.(,.cn days ale. "'APi",,,!.I)' pwhiLit"d. *** DIVISION 4. R-3 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT *** Sec. 110-312. Principal uses and structures. In the R-3 medium density residential district, the principal uses and structures shall be: (1) Single-family dwellings; (2) Two-family dwellings; (3) Multifamily dwellings; or (4) Public schools. Notwithstanding the foregoing, there shall be no more than 15 dwelling units per net residential acre, .:wd dwdliJig u,lit i(,iil.a:b vf 1",,,,5 thall1\even day! M,-, ,-,."pH_hI)' fhv1,lLited. City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 7 of 8 /) J/ d-- 2- e /} /) _ '-) / :; -- d- /- vt' Section 4. 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, are hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict. Section 5. Incorporation Into Code. This Ordinance shall be incorporated into the Cape Canaveral City Code and 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 ordinance and the City Code may be freely made. Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, whether for substantive, procedural, or any other reason, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, this _ day of ,2006. ROCKY RANDELS, Mayor ATTEST: For Against Burt Bruns Bob Hoog _ Leo Nicholas SUSAN STILLS, City Clerk Rocky Rande1s Buzz Petsos First Reading: Legal Ad published: Second Reading: Approved as to legal form and sufficiency for the City of Cape Canaveral only: ANTHONY A. GARGANESE, City Attorney City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 19-2006 Page 8 of 8 ~\ U!J Application for Resort Dwelling Amortization Pursuant to City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance 19-2006 Resort Dwelling Address: OWner Name: Owner's Mailing Address: " Contact Phone Number: ;j,:iij;;ti,~~~' 'w,- ~g:LW~~,^. .i!l:f;o;,~~~~~',-.~:~\!'~:':~:": ;;:~'.l: i*'~n~;.':t),~~t'~fi' DBPR License #:~~~,D~~..Jd~ed: (att h copy) .,~~;~m\$"'i'":~~}'::)c:2,~.~;!I;'" ac :,~~~i:j7/;;t):~~,. :':'<- :::':2,'<!,~im~~~ftkl{1i?~i{ti;-., . .(3lli~;:~1;;;,~ ,;1~j~\~{~~j!'!?~'1)~~(~~r[~~i;;)" . . Ji,:,v!" Sales Tax Certificate #. \.~';$:~~:~,~d.i~ssuea,,,,,':"""F:,,,,;;;;Z$.,~:,(+;!,j;:, (attach copy) :i:i;;)W~~~'~~J~~~1;;:" ":\,i~~,~?{~~' Are you requesting an impairment of contracts adjustm~~~E~'@f:', NO;~:;,x!;' (If yes please attach copies of the contracts) ;,;~21;r:;;~:g;,;il:'f:~~~ii1M:i' ~it;,~ ~~;t~:1iF~#;pltJ,w,~i,~~ Amortization Ado . troent RE1I'ffl~ii'ftd1 ;:1~i\9W!:U'}1;'j: ,. ."~~~{~~~t~ Total Allowable Unrecoverable Costs from ~_f' ....... ':;~ets ("COS.t$~;~r As defined In section 110-485(c)(4J, City Code. .1,'ti":J"// . k~:,!I;ilI~,~~i~*; .., Please state the number of worksheets att ." """ :'~~:.~~~;;~1lJ!~)liji" (;:~~r~~'~ . .,.:~'.~~:~{'~' :'-'-':?it~J~t~~~':1{~]~!lrn;~;j~- Total Rents Received Annualized (.Rentsftk1":;"'~"'$I;i;i;;ii 'if.t*'b1t~i~;\~~$iW As defined in section 110-48!S(c)(6J, City C~, \~1~:? A9.I~,.e~! '~"/ Please attached documents relied c?t:i~r~etermine$;';ili,)e,mo~rlt~~~J .. ,_ . ...n__~ 'li1!~~'~:'...",~, 'lp1::.:,~;,;.;~~~):5{ How many supponmg doc;um(jm~,ate:~ttalJlIr;;d,1"'k1,1i'11~1~j!*\t;" -#~;~j:~~~l~:;"':~\;a)~~:~W~ Total Allowable ~xpenses ~~~~~~'" As defined In section 11D-48S(c)(6), CftiltM,,,w..,.:,,,,,, "':-';:;,:.: , . ;Y~r:~;':;'::!:':;":' ':;,>~~,~~:,,_ Adjusted from'f,~~;~r,~~heets ,~~ft): ._::f~>,;~::'-1.tt.. :~1~~~~!:;~:' ';:>;iY~ir~:j,~~~::,:_;._ ~~::1~~~;r~.~:4!~~li;~!: Please stClt.{f};fi1bf1t!~.~lleets atPi_~;!~, !dt'jt~~h5~;"" 't(:';~:~l;lii'~*:!, '~;~'f2:T;: :~fJi~li~*iii' Amortizaft~_~rmula in years or fraction of years: ~,~j::;i;~W::::_ .:;~~~.:t>~h _ .~:~*~:~~~;~ COSt5€1:if));!:1J1,ji ) divided';~JnRents ( ) minus Expenses ( )) . "'r .'&;{~~:~;<l,;~j'" .........<'.,'),.'}S equals Ail1~~Q7Reriod ( ;!,;;ii~ ), 'J;~1~E~.~~~~;ii~iilil';' .<,; . . ;;j";;';~~Yv;V~W'~:-~,Y' I hereby certi~~tthe information contained in this application is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.' Date: Signature Printed Name 1 Applicant must prove by preponderance of the evidence, @- ZOIY/H MARCH 2002 AMERICAN II PLANNING ASSOCIATION Short-Term Vacation Rentals: Residential or Commercial Use? By Nate Hutcheson What happens when people live and 3::<~vacation in the same town, where vacation homes and permanent homes al'e often side by side? . . . A survey of almost 40 tourist- oriented communities was taken for this issue o/Zoning News. A mericans love to vacation as much as they love their The dynamics vary from one [Own to the next, bur the issue vacation desrinations, and demographers have noticed. seems to grow more contentious as more vacationers and year- New migration parrerns into some of the fastest growing round residents live next to one another. A survey of almost 40 communities in the country-resort towns-suggeSt that many tourist-oriented communities was taken for this issue of Zoning people are telocating to the places that wete once just summer News in order to shed light on this increasingly vexing land-use or weekend getaways. According to Peter Wolf, author of Hot phenomenon. Towm, "A new species of American is on the move: not, as in the Relevance and Research Background past, the needy, bur the comfortable, well-educated, and weIl- trained; not the Job seekers ilnd risk rakers. but those vr"irh In 2001, }1.PA.'s Planning "-4,,,dvisorf S~r.;ice recorded an increase leisure, choices, ~nd the wherewithal to seck OUt the best.ff By in the number of inquiries about planning for and regulating Wolfs estimates, this migration includes anywhere from shorr-term rental properties in residential areas-panicularly 700,000 to 1.6 million people per year. The strong 1990s single-family districts. The survey revealed that a significant economy brought a wave of second-home purchases as percentage experienced an increase in conllicts between these investments and family retreats. Resort areas-coastal, and adjacent land uses. \Vbile some have recemly drafted mountain, and lakeside-have what these trendsetters want: ordinances to address the shon-term rental problem, others arc natural beauty, fresh air, and recreation. Communities with such still in the process of doing so or have expressed the need for amenities arc prime candidates for conflicts in land-use change, and because resort communities have different attitudes planning. toward tourism, each approaches the issue in a different way. What happens when people live and vacation in the same town, where vacation homes and permanent homes are often Impacts side by side? Regulations that govern shorr-term rentals in The impact of a short-term vacationer compared with year-round residential districts are getting more attention as planners and residents can be significant. Seasonal populations live and work residents notice that these vacation homes can have a much in the community, and thus become somewhat integrated. greater impact on the communiry than those that house year- Naturally, they increase demands on infrastructure and services. round residents. Angry neighbors say short-term rentals look Impacts associated .with shan-term vacadoners, howevcr, are like single-family homes bur function more like commercial more nuisa...flce rdarcd. ofren generating noise ar!d light pollution. uses. The crux of the matter for planners is finding a balance Generally, the shorrer the stay, the less inclined one might be [0 between the interests of year-round, seasonal, and vacationing respect neighbor diplomacy. Late-night music and merrymaking, people while considering the effects on property rights, floodlights, garbage taken out to the street on off days, dogs ar economic vitality, and the sanctity of residential neighborhoods. large, illegal parking, and negligent property maintenance are (33) ..J<o.../ ~ garden-variety complaints often cited by annoyed neighbors. Politics Neighbors, planners, and property owners point to the Planners admit to a dilemma: Many property owners rely on correlation between such problems and length of stay for the the rem streams and spending dollars generated by rental property. In other words: the shorrer the stay, the higher vacationers, but locals want to pteserve their neighborhood's the impact. The stereotypical "weekend warriorD-trying to pack residential character. Furthermore, business owners would the most fun into the least amount of time-will invariably prefer to see an expansion of the local vacation lodging generate more trips to the score or beach, keep later hours, and market. When property owners are unwilling to forfeit create a greater disruption with iight and noise. Seill, for some cenain rights, leAving them at odds with neighbors who \vant communities, the concern is not so much the negative impacts as the relative quietude expected in a single-family the lack of community involvement typical of transients. neighborhood, what should be done? Affordable Housing Indeed, people "vote with their feetD when choosing vacation destinations or a permanent home, so politicians try to appease A more insidious problem with short-term rentals is their impact the greatest number of constitUents. Invariably, residents will on housing coSts. When property owners decide to increase their threaten to abandon a once-beloved community or resorr locale if "rent stream" with shorr-term rental agreements rather than renting a house on the beach or settling into a neighborhood renting by the season or year, they essentially "squeeze" the means an endless stream of nuisances from disruptive vacationers. (Above, teft) Short-term rmtals i71 Ship Bottom. New Jersey. Paved Yllrrh and C;USJjil~ nu.mbers of iicbirk; at J/;ort..-tmn rmtat houses are a ,0mm071 ,omplai7lt of neighbors. Believt it or "ot, time aT< the fronts of tl" house:. (Above, right) Most sbort-ten71 rmters are lmaware of garbage col/eaion s,bedu/es. (Left) Boat and rureation vehicle parki7lg is 071 I/llp/easa7lt sight jOr ndghbors 171 this Monroe COllI/I)'. Florida. lIdghborhood. supply of housing, pushing up the demand and, subsequently, Residents of Monroe County, Florida, put the issue on a ballot, the cost. Ty Simrosky, planning director for Key West, Florida, narrowly deciding-51 to 49 percent-against allowing shorr- sa)'s, "It's another means of financing the acquisirion of local term remals in improved subdivisions (single-family districts). housing by non-local people and it fuels speculation in a rising Subdivisions retained the right to yote on the issue separately. housing market." Simrosky explains that by allowing shon-term Health, Safety, and General Welfare rentals, invesrors can cover the carrying costs of a house for a year or twO while the property appreciates in value and then sell it for Historically. property owners in resort communities could rem a a healthy profit. Simrosky also says that while long-term home, regardless of the duration of the stay, by claiming that the homebuyers are srrongly opposed to shorr-term rentals in a house was not used "primarily for commercial purposes." \Vhat prospective neighborhood, investment buyers are less inclined [Q this really meant was that the structure could not be used for care if a neighboring property is a short-rerm rental. This can such purposes for more than 50 percent of the year. Howe\'er, create a snowball effect that eventually replaces year-round planners claim that approach is difficult to monitor and easy to neighborhood residents with vacationers. abuse. Most feel zoning codes and a licensing system oIfer a Communities most affected by a housing shorrage are those bener solution despite the time and expense required for with businesses that rely on lower-paying service and [Qurism administering and enforcing new regulations. jobs. High housing costs have pushed many workers out of the Most of the surveyed communiries deal with short-term communir'f' even beyond commuting distance. Simrosky also rentals through the zoning code. Imperial Beach, California, speculates that there are workers being bused in from the justifies its interim short-term rental ordinance with a purpose Florida mainland to sleep in bunk-house conditions JUSt [Q work and intent that states "there is a current and immediate rhrfOar [0 for three- or four-day periods in Key \"V'est. the public health. safety, or wd&re of irs citizens by owners or their agents renting or selling units for periods of thirry _~4 2 (S;D ~ Permllled Regulate Spedl1s Number 01 Number Shorl-Term Ordinance CanseMive 01 TImes Ulense Year Legal Community Rentals ProvIsions' Term Used Days' Per Year By Zone Required Adopted Challenges Aspen, CO No ;..;..; IIC' : 'Yei lIo Boone, lIC "Ho" BUTiingio~, vi 'Ho' (ape Co(W: Ho (orme~by:the-Soa,CA " "yeS "yeS " Tio~ienl 30 'Prnhiblled 1975 Commordol Use (ocoa Beaclt;Ft" "yei Yel . Tiansle~tLOd~in~ 30 " 3" "Yos 2000 CoIshesler; vi . 110 Eogie (Ouflly: (0 Yes "pei/PUDi Imperiol Beach, CA Yes YOI Short.lonnRo~lai 30 Prohlbltod Yes 2001 Yes 1~loinorodo, FL . Yes "Ye; Vosailan Renlol " " 28 "Ye; " Yes Key" Well, 'n " "Yos 'yei " Tianiienl tDdglng" 30 " 1998 Yes KiaWoh ls~nd, SC "Dr~flI~9 " 5hort.leim"Re~lai 30 "Yos "Yoi In diO!I" Maggie Yo:Uor, lie " Ho Monchester, VI Ha Maralhan; FL' "Yei "Yes VQc~ian Renlel 30 "Yei "Yo"s " 2000 Melbourne Beoch, cA "yeS No Resort Ihvolling 30 yeS i.\e~odno (ouniy, iA " Yes "liD TronsieRI Hobilolian 30 Yes 19B7 Monroe (Qun!,!, FL " Yes Yos 30 Yes Yes Yes/U1held Monterey, U Yes 110 Short.lo"rm" Prohibited Residonliol Ronlal 30 Mllshgon; Mi "Yei 110 or" "Yei 110 Myrtlo BeOch, S( "Yos 'yeS Transienl 30 "Yos "Yei Auommadalion "onlucket; 1M No " . " . . . . Yes Ocean a~, MD . 110 Pasto (ou~ty; F( 'Yei 'Yos " sbori'lerm'Re~tgi 30 " j Yei "Yei 1999 Soro, ME "yeS "Yes " S~ncil Renlol " " 4"monlhs " Prohibllod Yos Doiiy Renlo! i Son"Juon Ci.uilli WA "Yoi "Yos "Trons'enl " 30 \998 A((ommlidnlion/ Rosidenre/Gueslhouso Sonibol, Fi Yei 'Ye; : R~o:rl Hou~ln~ 3D yeS 'YM " 200i Sonia (rui, cA 1I0/rronsil 1984 "O((uponry Tox Sh,rHerm Renlal Sougolurk, MI 110 Souih Hoven.MI Yes Yes Shori.l~rm i "Yei 110 "No' lryIellln~ Unil Slowe, VI ;;; . Slurgeon Bay, WI HoIrransn .f Orwponry Tox Yes " VomitoD R~nl~1 Yeil f Sult.von's Islond, I( Yes 28 Yos ;- Tell~ride, CO" " . Yos . Sho~'I~nn' . 30 " XI " 1992 .. . Oy.'ol.ling Unil . I Traverie city)l 110 , . . . . . . 4 VoU; CO " " . "liD" z , Yochali, OR Yes YaS " Tio~ie~1 Renlal 30 "Allowed j~ Yes 1992 f oU Zones ,. I This matrix is not exh-;.usth'c, EYer)' reasonable: anempt was m:lde to achieve o.cCUr.lC}' ::md thoroughness, but ,..!i:lotions in ordinance: hmgu<1ge. format, ;md local pnctice ma.de ;. "t:ompl~c" m:mix impossible:.. Thus. it is meant only;u: a quick reference guide for readers of this article. The shan-term rental S\U"'cy c:voh'ed 3S it w;u; being ,enauttcd. so not Olij questions were: ,"ked ui1iformlj' or of ~-err SIJ~' participant.. 1. This indtc:ltd :m)" se-aian of the code that is dedic.:lted to snan-term Tenta-b, such as interim ordinmccs or amendments. :. U"iisUilgf: Vi-titS from cede: to !;ode in ~~rm5 of how they .:specify ~ time period. 'Where a month or four weeks WaJ; used as the length of the term. 30 d:::lYs is the defiluIt fdiponse. 3. Communit)' preferred not be me:znianecl b}. name:. 4. Decision made by subdivision bylaw;;. 5. STRs nQt permitted by righrin .mr of the !-on~. 6. In mOSt resuicd\'e districtS. thc=y arc pemined to rent three tima or ["...cr pcr )"Qr for ;1 IOQ.\ of 30 ~)'s or less. --=--~ 3 -- I'lC'\ f -," I \.~ -...1./ promoting tourism may be more permissive, allowing them in To avoid a takings challenge, communities that have recently restricted districtS, while others will diligemly protect residential enacted more restrictive codes also have included an amortization diStricts. In the most restrictive communities, short-term rentals may schedule that phases OUt shorr-term rental properties. Islamorada be prohibited outright in residential districts. Monroe County, allows twO years for amorrization and Imperial Beach is proposing Florida. prohibits them unless a majority of homeowners vote them five-year amortization. Sullivan's Island. South Carolina. requires into a subdivision. Communities may permit shorr-term rentals as a proof of use as a shorr-term remal during the previous 12-month conditional use or allow them only when rented fewer than four period rO reduce the number of rental properties. Those that lapse times each year. are not eligible for future licensing. Conditional Uses and Licensing Enforcement \XThether shorr-rerm renrals are allowed by right or as a conditional Detection of problem rentals c:an occur either from complaining use, additional requirements to benefit both the occupants and neighbors or a dedicated municipal enforcement Staff. Penalty neighbors are recommended. For example, operating a shorr-term fines range from $100 a day in Saco, Maine, to $500 for each day rental may require physical inspection to determine the safety of the of violarion in Kiawah Island, South Carolina. Other penalties structure from hazards such as nre and over occupancy. Other include denied permit renewals, permit revocation. or requirements might include posting a "notice to occupant" misdemeanor citations. Fines are a comparatively small expense reminding visitors of mandarory evacuation in case of a hurricane (in for property owners whose short-term rentals generate healthy prone areas) or a "code of conduct" for the neighborhood. which returns, so some owners virtually ignore the restrictions. says might list regularions for occupancy, parking, boat dockage, fines, or Monroe County planner Marlene Conway. Saco requires helpful informarion such as garbage and recycling pick-up. Both property owners ro renew permits annually. A hisroty of should be printed in a large fane and prominently displayed. complaints is kept on file and those with more than tWO recorded Regulating by Ratio complaints will not be issued a permir for the coming year. Administering a shorr-term rental ordinance burdens both the Mendocino County. California, sewed on an acceptable ratio of budger and scaff. Issuing permits and code enforcement rakes short-rerm rental properties to year-round residents: Locals deemed time and money. Permit or licensing fees and taxes on short-term 13 year-round resident houses to one shorr-term rental house lodging can offset r.~ese expenses. Fees vary from a fixed amount rolerable. The community requires operating permits for shorr-term to a sliding scale based on the percent of income generared per rental properties. An additional vacation rental permit is issued for calendar year-both of which usually amount to $100 to $200. every 13 new residential units. The number of permits is finite but In States that grant local governments the authority to taX this siting is srill flexible. To maintain an orderly and Fair distribution of type of land use, the raxes for the lodging fee can range from four permits, the county does not allow them to be sold or transferred. percent on the low end to seven percent in Deschutcs County. The county considers shorr-term renrals a commercial use. allowing Oregon. Santa Cruz, California, taxes 10 percent. additional shon-rerm renrals as part of a 50/50 mix of commercial Conclusion and long-term rcsidential dwelling unitS in mixed-use disrricts. Legal Challenges Technology, telecommuting. and lifesryle priorities will continue to fuel the infiltration of newcomers into reson communities Legal challenges will invariably arise in neighborhoods where with long-established residents. For these and other reasons, the homeowners enjoying rhe comforts of a quiet back yard are populations of traditional get-away destinations will stlrge and suddenly interrupred by noise or light from an adjacem shorr- change. bringing wirh them increased pressure to adapt to new term rental property. Places with restrictions on short-rerm rentals people and new land-use challenges. Deciding whether shorr- such as Key West and Imperial Beach have faced legal challenges, term rentals are commercial or residenrialland uses is an \vhich may indude vestingt consistency \viu'1 the comprehensive important first step in addressing the issue. Perhaps the zoning plan, definition of Family, and allowable rime for amortization. code is the best defense in preserving the tranquility that made However. anecdotal evidence suggests that the longer an such places attractive in the first place. ordinance has been in place, the more accepted it is. Most of the Selected ordinances from the shorr-term rentals survey are planners interviewed for this article were confident in the available to Zoning News subscribers. Please contact Michael defensibility of their shorr-term rental ordinances. Davidson, Co-editor, Zoning News, American Planning Mitigation and Amortization Association, 122 South Michigan Avenue. Suite 1600. Chicago. IL 60603. or e-mail mdavidson@planning.org. Some of the mitigation rools used to offset the impacts of shorr- term rentals include having a 24-hour conract person or management service, vehicle registration, and shorr-term rental Lnin: NnuJ is :a monthly nC'wslettcf published b)' the Americln Pl~nnin! Anocution. medallions-a sign or badge on the front of the home identifying Sub"riptiom: ;:UC" available: for 560 (U.S.) OV1d $82 (foreign). \"VI. hul Farmer. AlCP. ct,uth~ Dirctton WHli;m R. Klein. AleI'. Oirc::ctor of Res arch. the residence as a vacation property, the name of the management Lning Nnus is produced:u APA. Jim Sthw>lb. Aler. and Michael Daviwon. E.dilou; Bury Bain. company, and a contact person. The use of medallions is widely Ncr, H ~ther umpbdl, Fay Dolnit:k. Nate Hutch~n. 50lnj~y Jeer. Ala. Mc~n Loois. Alef'. criricized because critics say they invite thieves and vandals. Such Marya Morris, AlCI', R.c:ponersi Sherrie MatthcWli, Auilunt Editor; Lisa Banon. Design and P,,,d,,,,,,,.. mitigation measures are typically paid for and provided by the Cop)'ri!-l'll C2002 by American Pb.nning Auodation, J 22 S. Mi'h~~n ..\n., S\Jitc 1600, property owner as a condition of receiving an operating permit. Cniago, It 60603. The Amerian Ph.nning Association also hu 0 ces..;1t 1776 Muuchuu:m Other measures. such as increasing code enforcement staff-as is r\.v:.. N,W.. W;uh!ngtQfl, DC 20036: w'ww.pl;J,.Jlning.o'l All righu tel~rvcd. ~D P;U'l of th~~ pu?U~ti?" m;11 b~ rcp~ut:C:d. or .utiliu:d in ;mr, fefm or .h)' done in Key \Vest-Dr bolstering visitor awareness through otny m~ns. electronn: or mecnanlCll. tliCiudmg phvtiXvp;nng. r:codmg. or by ;!!'!)' !nf~Hm;lUQn signage to politely inform them of the neighborhood's quier stonge and rctricY.l1 s.yncm. Y,;thOUE pumiuion in \\'T"iting from tnc Amcrian Pl;mnins Associ<ltion. residential character may be paid for wirh tax revenue generated Prinu:d on reC)'clcd paper, including 50~iO% recycled fiber @ from shorr-term rental properties. :.nd to'~ poStl::onsumer WiUIC. 6 /~.~, ( 0c;J . -I. . \ "--^-"/ -.../