Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06-19-2007 RegularCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL ANNEX 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida TUESDAY June 19, 2007 7:00 PM MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the meeting to order at 7 :00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Mayor Pro Tem Council Member Council Member Mayor Council Member Others Present: City Manager City Attorney City Clerk Building Official Bob Hoog Leo Nicholas Buzz Petsos Rocky Randels Shannon Roberts Bennett Boucher Anthony Garganese Susan Stills Todd Morley Mayor Randels informed the audience that the Sheriffs Office apprehended the suspect involved in a robbery earlier that day at the Coastal Gas Station. CONSENT AGENDA 1. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of .dune 5, 2007. Mayor Randels asked if any member of Council, staff or interested parties desired to remove any of the Consent Agenda items for discussion. Ms. Roberts stated that she would contact the City Clerk related to non - substantive corrections to the minutes. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tern Hoog and seconded by Mr. Petsos to Approve Consent Agenda Item No. 1. The vote on the motion carried 5 -0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. City of cape Canaveral, Florida City council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 2 of 18 CONSIDERATIONS: 2. Motion to Approve: Change Order to the North Central Ditch Stoi mwater Improvement Project. Mayor Randels stated that this change order was for a project located at Central Avenue and State Road Al A and three years ago the city went out for bid on this project for which the city received approximately $848,000 in grant funding. Mr. Ratliff stated that the total project was $545,000. Mayor Randels stated that the grants would cover the ditch and installation of culverts. Mayor Randels explained that during a final survey it was noted that while storing water, this would impact the neighboring properties. Mayor Randels explained further that Stottler, Stagg and Associates (SSA) returned with a change order to resolve a problem they encountered. Jeff Ratliff, Stormwater Administrator, stated that the original design would cause some problems for the North central Ditch project and he deferred to John Pekar of SSA for a brief explanation of the alternate plan. Mayor Randels clarified that Stottler, Stagg and Associates were not the grant writers. Mr. Ratliff reported that they attempted to make the grant application work; however, it was not feasible. Mr. Pekar explained the elements of the central Bitch project as follows: to place culverts in the ditch, to install a swale on top of the ditch, thereby allowing infiltration with pick up points treating the water in a linear fashion as it flowed around past Wendy's and out to the Indian River Lagoon. From a quality standpoint, this was the only straight run outfall of the five in the city with minimal filtration. In review, on the east side on some properties the elevations ran as low as two -feet and from four to six feet on the west side which resulted in an unbalanced situation. Mr. Pekar then explained a two-fold plan to: 1) to build up a portion of the ditch, and 2) to slide the culverts to the high side up to where the City has a piece of property of about one - quarter acre. He explained further how the water would drop into a detention pond to capture water to about 7-feet. This pond would capture about four to six tons of sediment per year that typically go out the lagoon. This would take the low side of the drainage ditch and bring it in on -grade with a by -pass for the major storms that would be culverted back to Central Blvd. Mr. Pekar stated that the culverts on the high side would take the 25 -year storm which was designed for nine -- inches of rain. The low flow would enter into this property of about 80 -by100 foot piece of property Mr. Pekar noted a 15 -inch oak on the property which, if removed, would under the City code require mitigation. Mr. Pekar stated that the design was actually better for pollutant removal. Mayor Randels clarified that the area in discussion was related to west of North Atlantic Avenue and explained how anything west of North Atlantic Avenue drains into the ditch. Mr. Pekar stated that the ditch has up to two to three feet of organic matter; however, after its removal, some material had to replace it. Mayor Pro Terri Hoog asked what mechanism would be used to clean out the retention pond. Mr. Pekar replied that they had access to the sewer line in order for city employees to provide some cleaning. He stated that it would require maintenance every three to five years. Mr. Petsos inquired City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 200' Page 3of18 about the slope. Mr. Pekar stated that due to the limited size of the land they intended to enclose the property on three sides with chain link fencing. Mr. Petsos pointed out that the slope would make maintenance more difficult. Mayor Randels asked Mr. Pekar to point out the location to the audience. Mr. Pekar pointed out that discussion included from the bottom of Central Avenue up past Rinker to the Port area. Mr. Pekar clarified that the ditch also referred to as the river was overgrown in areas and filled with organic matter. Mr. Nicholas asked if Mr. Pekar stmt intended to install the culverting the entire length of the ditch. Mr. Pekar replied that the plan was to extend the project up Central Avenue not quite half-way with the culverts as well as the pond and cleared out the rest of the way and subsequently completed dependent upon future funding. The program was a phased program. Mr. Nicholas inquired if much of the sediment came from the northern area. Mr. Pekar responded that most of the newer properties had stormwater systems. He affirmed for Mr. Nicholas that the normal flow in the canal ran from the north to south. Mr. Pekar explained that the pipes could be extended depending on the available funds; however, they cost $100 per foot and the expense was a consideration. Mr. Nicholas noted how most of the residential development occurred on the east side with warehouses on the west side and he asked if they were providing drainage retention on the west side. Mr. Pekar affirmed that drainage retention had occurred on the west side. Mr. Nicholas questioned the diversity on the east side compared to the west side and he encouraged the developing property owners to build up the bank. Mr. Pekar explained that on any City review all of the building pads were elevated up seven- to eight feet. Mr. Nicholas inquired how this was impacted by Mr. Randy May's aggregate project. Mr. Pekar replied that Mr. Mays' aggregate would flow to the west and would be treated on his property. Todd Morley, Building official, informed that a construction permit for a 15 -foot sight and sound barrier had been authorized for Mr. Mays' project. Mr. Nicholas expressed his concern with the lack of progress on this project. Mr. Morley stated that the permit was issued by the date specified by the Council and the permit has a six -month timeline. Ms. Roberts asked if the pond was anticipated to be full of water most of the time. Mr. Pekar affirmed to Ms. Roberts that it would with an elevation of approximately one to minus seven feet. Ms. Roberts asked if this were an opportunity for the City to add value with an aerated pond. Mr. Pekar replied that the area was actually too small for a stormwater park and was not conducive to pedestrian traffic. Ms. Roberts said that the area appeared to be developmental property and she stated that the City might want to plan ahead for potential residential development. Ms. Roberts mentioned that some of the City's retention ponds may or may not have aeration and the still water brings in other things. Mr. Pekar replied that they could run electricity from the Lift Station in order to make this happen or possibly even solar power. Mayor Randels stated that this was not in the grant and would require -- City funding. City of cape Canaveral, Florida City council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 4 of 18 Mr. Ratliff informed if the property were ever developed then they could look at developing the pond area. Ms. Roberts asked if the property would attract mosquitoes in its proposed state. Mr. Pekar replied that any enhancement to the water body would encourage the fish. Mr. Nicholas pointed out that minerals and other small fish would take care of the mosquitoes. Mr. Pekar replied to Mayor Pro Tern Hoog that a diversion structure would allow for a water table to exist at all times. Mr. Pekar stated that at Central Blvd. they were running water at elevation one. Mr. Petsos questioned Mr. Pekar about the bank elevation. Mr. Pekar replied that around the banks of the pond he anticipated up to elevation four. Mfr. Pekar explained that they would look back to the hydraulic gradients all the way back up to the north to keep the flow back to two to two and one -half to be sure that the structures and outfall were sized so that the hydraulic gradients keep the water down for the designed storms. Mayor Randels concluded that the City's storrnwater Administrator recommended the change order. Mr. Pekar explained to Mayor Pro Tern Hoog that two minimum permits were required: the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination system permit and another from St. John's River Water Management District. Mr. Pekar also stated that the engineer's would also perform the subsequent certifications after project construction. Mr. Petsos pointed out that the project had $18,000 remaining in its budget. Mr. Ratliff concluded that any additional funding could be used toward any additional construction. A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Ms. Roberts to Approve Change order to the North central Ditch storm water Improvement Project in the Amount of $3,040. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For= Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. 3. Motion to Approve: Comprehensive Plan — Evaluation and Appraisal Report -- Letter of Understanding. Mayor Randels explained how the Evaluation and Appraisal Report [EAR] preceded the City's Comprehensive Plan. Todd Peetz, City Planner, clarified that the EAR was performed every seven years. Mr. Peetz then explained the two -fold reason for the Letter of Understanding as: 1) public meetings were held in August of 2006 and January and March of 2007 and, 2) there was quite a bit of input from the public for inclusion into the Plan and the Department of Community Affairs was concerned with the community's comments. Mr. Peetz stated that items were ranked in order of concern at the City Celebration held at Manatee Sanctuary Park in March. He reported that density and height were numbers one and two; third, was shoreline erosion and dune protection; fourth was transportation and road development due the changes subsequent to development. Mr. Peetz made note that development guidelines and appearance were lower on the list although people did want the city to appear attractive. He also reported that affordable housing was lower on the list due to increased housing costs. He informed that the City had done much to provide parks and the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 5of 18 community was supportive. Mr. Peetz informed that city Hall, Town Center and mixed- use were not a high priority of the people that were questioned. Mr. Peetz listed other items such as fuel tanks, School Concurrency and Capital Improvements that were added to the letter, although not required as larger issues for the Department of Community Affairs. He informed that he could Make the comments from the public meetings available for the public's review. Mr. Peetz replied to Mayor Randels that staff was looking to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs [DCA] at the second meeting in July. He reported that the Planning and Zoning Board meeting would meet to review the front portion data analysis. Council could review the document at its second meeting in July. Once the document was transmitted in July, then DCA would review it for 60 days, the document would return some time in September with an anticipated adoption in October or early November. After adoption DCA takes 45 -to 60-days to find the City sufficient. Mr. Peetz informed that his firm hired someone who was formerly from the DCA to assist with this part of the process. After the 45 to 66 day, the City has 16- months to update the Comprehensive Plan consistent with the EAR with up to a 6 -month extension. Mr. Peetz clarified that the Future Land Use Map was an essential component of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Roberts expressed her concern that the Visioning Session, the Redevelopment Plan, �- and this work product were not integrated in the Letter of Understanding. Ms. Roberts stated that we need to know how many people participated in this, the number of comments submitted, and how they were organized to include frequency analysis according to each topic. Ms. Roberts stated that she was speaking on process and approach and something such as this reflects what the Council was representing on behalf of the community. Ms. Roberts requested ample time for deliberation and perhaps a Workshop would permit Council to review the community's input. Mr. Peetz responded to Ms. Roberts that each county and City was required to have a School Concurrency Element especially due to a school within city limits. Mr. Peetz informed that Brevard County and the Brevard County School Board were preparing a draft element and the City could follow and implement as required. Mr. Peetz explained that DCA also desired for cities and counties to adopt a Capital Improvement Element annually. He explained the problem; however, that the capital Improvement Element would occur during the Budget Hearings. Mr. Peetz stated that the key components of the Redevelopment Plan were included in the EAR but not the Letter of Understanding. Ms. Roberts stated that the document was reflective of a City as well as Council planning document. Mr. Peetz responded that the Letter of Understanding was merely to document the community participation of the public workshops. Mr. Nicholas explained how as Council continues through the Comprehensive Plan process, then more in -depth discussion would occur on specific elements. fills. Roberts stated that she desired to register her concerns and she suggested a change of process and to have more planning before arriving at this stage. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 — Page 6 of 18 Mr. Peetz stated that DCA requested the Letter of Understanding. Ms. Roberts stated that since March the Council could have had discussions and could have had reflections and time for what would to into the Letter. She wanted to go on record with her concerns. Mr. Petsos stated that the letter was inclusive of what the city residents desired to see and in July there would be more time for additional discussion from the Council. Ms. Roberts stated that she was more concerned with the exclusion of some of the comments from the community. Mr. Peetz assured that all of the comments that were registered at the public meetings would be included in the Letter. On a final note, Ms. Roberts expressed the need for one other step in the process to allow Council to review such planning documents prior to submittal. A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to Approve the Comprehensive Plan -- Evaluation and Appraisal Report — Letter of Understanding. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro ~Tern Hoog, For; Mr, Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. 4. Motion to Approve: Designation of a Voting Delegate for the Florida League of Cities Annual Conference. Mayor Randels stated that traditionally the Council sought a delegate to Grote during the League business meetings at the Florida League of Cities Annual Conference. Mayor Randels recognized that he, Mayor Pro Tenn Hoog, Mr. Petsos, and Ms. Roberts would attend the Conference. Mayor Randels nominated Mayor Pro Tem Hoog as the Voting Delegate. Mr. Nicholas asked if there were need for an Alternate. Mayor Randels responded that an Alternate was required this year. A motion was made by Mayor Randels and seconded by Mr. Petsos to Approve the Designation of a Voting Delegate for the Florida League of Cities Annual Conference Inserting the Name Bob Hoog. The vote on the motion carried 5 -0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tern Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. 5. Motion to Approve: Local option Gas Tax — Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement with Brevard County. Mayor Randels explained how this was a mechanism for the County bond funding for local roads. Mayor Randels reported that in 1988 the City received $182,090 and he clarified that the funding was used for road - related items only such as street lights, road repairs and cleaning ditches. !'Mayor Randels also reported that this year if the City agreed to the extension the City would receive $282,000. He stated that the tax was renewed in 1983, 1991, and 2001. Mayor Randels informed that this extension continued until August 31, 2037. Mayor Randels stated that this would allow the cities that opt -in to receive a portion of the six -cent gas tax. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2037 Page 7 of 18 Mr. Boucher reported that the City was projected to receive $202,000 and the County's percentage since inception was 47.14004266 percent. Mayor Randels explained that the cities received 53 percent which was divided based on each city's population and he informed that cities that did not use their funding forfeited it. Mayor Randels stated that Cape Canaveral received 3.10 percent of the municipal funding. Mr. Nicholas inquired about the 30 -year extension. Mayor Randels replied that the County was bonding for anticipated major roads. Mayor Randels informed that Mr. Roger Dobson was influential in getting the toll booths removed from the Bee Line now the Beach Line and as Mr. Nicholas stated also the Pineda Causeway. Ms. Roberts pointed out that the population was based on the City's 10,317 in population and expressed her concern that the beachside communities might not be receiving their fair share from the County due to under - representation. Mayor Randels affirmed that the 10,000 does include the seasonal residents. Mr. Boucher informed that the population census came from the University of Florida and his argument with them was that the City was not receiving full credit for services to seasonal residents; however, they would not change. Ms. Roberts stated that the City increased up to 14,000 at the height of season which was substantially over the 10,000, stated and she wanted the record to state that the City was under - represented. Mr. Nicholas questioned if the formula for calculating the percentage was State law and he suggested addressing this with the State legislature. Mr. Boucher informed that Cape Canaveral would need to gain all the cities agreement in order to male a change to how the percentage was calculated and would probably cause dissension between the beachside and mainland communities. Mr. Petsos expressed that the current Agreement did not expire until 2021 and perhaps discussion was possible prior to forwarding consent. Mr. Boucher responded that the Board of County Commissioners desired to discuss this issue at their July 1 dh meeting. Mr. Boucher stated that the County was reluctant to amend its 47 percent portion. Mr. Boucher informed that the Amendment would proceed regardless of full consent due to agreement from the larger communities. Alts. Roberts requested a Coalition of the beachside communities on issues of common concern in order to present these concerns effectively to the County. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog and seconded by Mr. Nicholas to Approve Local option Gas Tax — Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement with Brevard County. The vote on the motion carried 5 -0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. ORDINANCES: Second Public Hearin-g: S. Motion to Adopt: ordinance No. 04 -2007; Amending Chapter 'I 10, Clarifying the Intent of the R-'l, R. -2, and R -3 Residential Zoning Districts, Defining the Terms "Resort Dwelling" and "Resort Condominium" at second Reading. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 8 of 18 Attorney Garganese distributed the most recent Draft of the Ordinance dated June 18, 2007 to the Council with the amendments highlighted. Attorney Garganese stated that there were several changes to the Draft of June 14, 2007 in Pages 8, 7, and 8 and he referred to the first change: Page 0, Section 110 -332, which clarifies resort condominiums satisfying the Certificate of occupancy and zoning requirement for a hotel -motel under the City code shall be regulated as a principle use under Section 110.332, Sub- paragraph (4) hotels and motels. If it meets the hotel -motel standard of requirements, then it would not need a residential special exception. Attorney Garganese proceeded to Page 7. A Preliminary Non - conforming Certificate procedure that would establish for resort dwelling and resort condominiums that received Site Plan approval yet have not been constructed or that have already filed a Site Plan proposing resort condominiums by June 19, 2007. This one change indicates that those property owners would be required to file a $100 file fee in order to obtain that Preliminary Non - Conforming certificate. Attorney Garganese explained that there were Site Plans that have been approved for resort condominiums that were currently in existence and there was also one application of which the City was aware. Those properties were eligible for a Preliminary Certificate of Non - Conforming Status. If they succeed through the rest of the process, they would be able to have a resort condominium or resort dwelling under the Ordinance. The City was however imposing a $100 filing fee to obtain that Preliminary certificate. Ms. Roberts questioned how the $100 filing fee applied. Attorney Garganese replied that there were two different fees: 1) an existing unit required a $100 fee, and 2) those units that were not constructed were required to obtain a Preliminary Non- Conforming Certificate for $100. Then proceed through the Building Department permit process and pay an additional fee in order to get a Building Permit to build a resort condominium unit in compliance with existing building and fire codes. This would address the City's several existing Site Plans. So their additional fees would occur at a later time; however, the upfront fee would recognize those Site Plans for purposes of this Ordinance and process their request for future resort dwellings and resort condominiums. Ms. Roberts asked if each owner within existing condominiums would need to apply for this Certificate. Mr. Boucher replied that it depended upon haw they were licensed. He explained how those units under a management company would handle the fee for the units and the others that were individuals would require notification and arrangement for inspections and certificates under the Code. Ms. Roberts questioned if the City would subsequently receive one from the owner. Mr. Boucher responded that they would be constructed for that occupancy, which was resort condominiums, and if the developer keeps the units under one manager then they would either be managed singly or as a group under this provision. Ms. Roberts inquired if the $100 fee would apply to each individual unit. Mr. Boucher affirmed. Ms. Roberts then asked about how this would apply to the time - shares. Attorney Garganese explained that the $100 fee would apply per unit, not per owner and for atime -share the fee was divided among the number of owners. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 9 of 18 The units not yet constructed were subject to the Building Permit process which included inspections. Attorney Garganese proceeded to Page 8 and noted the change to sub- paragraph (i) related to the Certificate of Non - Conforming status. The intent was to assure that a person who had filed a Site Plan application but was not approved yet, the person would need to demonstrate that the application was in full force and effect in order to obtain this Non - Conforming status. The Ordinance reads, "If the site Plan was filed but not yet approved before June 19, 2007, the owner would have one -year from June 19, 2007 to obtain Site Plan approval to construct the resort dwelling units or the resort condominium units as a condition. Language was also added to state that within 30 -days of the receiving that Certificate of Occupancy for a resort dwelling or condominium unit, the applicant was required to not only get the license from the state, but also to obtain the Certificate of Non - Conforming status under the Ordinance. Mayor Randels pointed out that the changes in discussion were on Pages 8, 7, and 8. Mayor read the second sentence in section 110 -332, Item (15), for clarification, "Resort condominiums satisfying the Certificate of occupancy and zoning requirements for a hotel, motel under the City Code shall be regulated as a principle use under Section 110 - 332(4) Hotel, Motels. Attorney Garganese explained that if someone desired to be a residential unit then they would need to obtain a special Exception; however, they would need to obtain one for the C -1 zoning district which applied to the North Atlantic Avenue corridor as previously approved by Council and pursuant to the attached map. Mayor Randels referred to Page 7 of the June 18� draft and clarified that a $100 per unit fee would be charged to ensure that the unit was in compliance with building and fire codes. However, if the unit was under construction, then the expectation was to build to the existing code as it was being constructed. Attorney Garganese replied that the $100 file applied to preserve the right to build as a resort condominium or resort dwelling and obtain the Preliminary Non - Conforming Use status permit; however, subsequent building permit fees still applied. Ms. Roberts inquired about the time line and asked if Chief Dave Sargeant stated that the number of days was dependent upon the number of permits submitted. Ms. Roberts referred to the timeline and made note that 30 -days from the permit application. Attorney Garganese clarified that the one -year began from the day that an applicant filed their Notice of Intent. Ms. Roberts reviewed for clarity on the timelines. Ms. Roberts stated that there were 30- days from June 1 ! � on the filing and after those 30 days to submit the life /safety plan. Ms. Roberts questioned how long for the Fire Department's review. Chief Sargeant responded that a condominium building might take up to 00 -days to come up with a plan. Ms. Roberts stated her intent was to review the timeline in light of when the 365 days began. Ms. Roberts stated that 30 -days from June 10th everyone interested would need to submit their filing fee of intent and 30 -days from that time they would need to give the Fire Chief a life/ safety plan. Chief Sargeant replied that 365 days was left open to extension. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 10 of 18 Attorney Garganese clarified that the one -year began the day that the Notice of Intent was filed. Ms. Roberts continued review of the timeline and said after the Fire Chief reviews the life/ safety plan, and then the applicant needed to submit a detailed plan within 90-days of review. Chief Sargeant affirmed. chief Sargeant clarified that the initial 30 days was the most important period. Ms. Roberts stated her concern with persons left in an unsafe condition during the timeline process between the notice of Intent and the Life/ Safety Plan. Mayor Randels concluded that people had the first 30 days. Lamar Russell, Planning and Zoning Board, referred to the Board's notes which outlined that there was an initial 39 days, then 99 days for plans and specifications up to one -year with allowable extensions. Attorney Garganese clarified that the timeline began 30 days from the Notice of intent; however, the Notice of Intent should be filed within 39 days of the effective date of the Ordinance. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog stated that he shared Ms. Roberts' concern with the timeline. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog expressed the need for expeditious review_ chief Sargeant stated that review would depend on what was submitted. However, if a volume of plans were submitted, consequently, more time was required. Applicants would be notified that they would be required to shut down with the exception of the three allowable times for rental in any one year. Chief Sargeant however assured an effective, yet expeditious review. He replied to Mayor Pro Tem Hoog that he did not foresee the need for a full time person for these inspections. Mr. Morley added that the 90-day period was the date of the technical drawing submittal and the building and fire department review would commence; however there was ample time before the 385 day mark was met. Mr. Morley responded to Mayor Pro Tem Hoog that as long as a good faith effort was made to comply, then he and the Fire chief would want to encourage applicants by allowing for an extension. Ms. Roberts referred to Page 8 and pointed out where an owner would be shut down in operation until they were approved. Attorney Garganese replied that they may be long term rentals and not operating a resort dwelling or resort condominium without a license. Ms. Roberts wanted to ensure that anyone considering an application was aware that until they were approved and until the met the requirements, they could not be operational. Attorney Garganese stated that until they have the requisite Certificate of Occupancy that meets all the building and fire requirements and the license by the State, they cannot lawfully operate. The Section states that no one could operate unlawfully while trying to obtain licensure and Certificates of occupancy. Mayor Randels also referred to Page 8, subsection (4) and made note that as long as the owner attempts to make a good faith effort to obtain the required licensure they would need to notify the City to seek an extension. Mayor Randels proceeded to read Item No. (1) on Page 8 " If a site plan was filed, but not yet approved, before June 19, 2007, the owner shall have one (1) year from June 19, 2007 to obtain site plan approval to construct the dwelling unit(s) or condominium unit(s)." Attorney Garganese clarified that if the Site Plan application was submitted as to June 79th, they have one -year to get the Site Plan approved and then they must construct the units in compliance with the building and fire code. City of cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 11 of 18 Mayor Randels then read Item No. (iii), on Page 8. Ms. Roberts stated that there were many more changes since the June 14 Draft and she clarified as a point of order, that the Mayor was only reviewing the changes since the June 14 Draft. Mayor Randels affirmed that the Council would also review the changes since the June 5 th meeting. Attorney Garganese stated that he would express any changes since the First Reading. Ms. Roberts stated her concern to hear Council's review of any changes that occurred during the First Public Hearing and not just the changes made between the Draft of June 14 and June 18 Attorney Garganese explained how during First Reading there was discussion over those Site Plans that were already approved yet not completed. The City had such a Site Plan in which the applicant was considering a resort condominium type project. Therefore Subsection (5) was added to address just that situation in which Site Plans were approved but units have not been constructed and Site Plans that have been submitted and were in the application process but were not yet approved. Attorney Garganese explained how Subsection (8) created the procedure for where if an applicant has a Site Plan that has been approved or a Site Plan that has been filed by June 19, 2007 and the intentions were to have those units converted to a resort condominium then a Notice of Intent must be filed with City. This notice was called a Preliminary Notice of Non - Conforming status for that project and then the owner would have a certain period of time and shall be required to file the Notice of Intent with the City Manager, declared and registered the Notice of Intent to duly license the proposed condominium unit or dwelling unit as a resort dwelling or resort condominium under Chapter 809, Florida statutes, when the unit is constructed. Once the Preliminary Notice of Non - Conforming Status was issued, then a Final Certificate of Non- conforming status would be issued in order to have a resort dwelling or resort condominium. However, three conditions apply: 1) only applies to site Plans that were filed but not yet approved , 2} at the time the dwelling or condominium receives an initial Certificate of Occupancy from the Building official, the unit shall meet the building and fire code standards applicable to a resort dwelling or resort condominium, and 3) within 30 days of the certificate of occupancy, an applicant must obtain a license from the state of Florida and a Final Certificate of Non - Conforming status from the city Manager. Attorney Garganese stated that there were two special circumstances that addressed a vested rights issues: 1 ] those Site Plans that have been approved yet the units have not been constructed, and 2} those applicants that already have a site Plan submitted to build resort condominiums yet have not completed the process. This gives them an opportunity to preserve that right to have a resort condominium or resort dwelling. Attorney Garganese clarified that the provision addressed a vested rights interest expressly in this Ordinance involving site Plans that have been approved or were in the application stage. Attorney Garganese clarified that the other change established June 19, 2007 as the Effective Date. Attorney Garganese also clarified that the last change was to Page 9 of 10 which carried forward the provision and excludes of the C--1 zoning district. Mayor Randels read from section 110 --480, Rental Restrictions on Dwelling units that "it shall be City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 12 of 18 unlawful for any person to rent a dwelling unit for less than seven (7) consecutive days in any zoning district excluding the C -1 zoning district. Mr. Boucher informed that when the Certificate of Non - Conforming Status was filed it would be recorded with the Brevard County Clerk of court and attached to the property. Ms. Roberts referred to Page 2, the last WHEREAS clause and made note of the last sentence in which Mayor Randels stated for the record to strike the letter "s" from dwellings. Ms. Roberts asked if the practice of "exchange" related to time - shares was addressed. Ms_ Roberts referred to the previous meeting in which Mr. John Grandlich of the Ron ,ion Cape Caribe Resort stated that the owners have the right to use it, exchange it, or rent it. Mayor Randels pointed out that the previous meeting minutes state that the Association was licensed under Florida statutes Chapter 721. Mr. Grandlich informed that an exchange was not a rental in that there was no transfer of money. Attorney oarganese explained that a time -share operating under its legal business practice allowed for the exchange practice. Ms. Roberts expressed that there might be other opportunities for the use of the exchange practice such as with a residence and explained how this was also a form of transient use. Ms. Roberts pointed out that this question arose from the community as it related to the use of international exchanges. Mr. Petsos replied that he did not think there were enough interest to reach a threshold to become a resort dwelling and if residences were exchanged it was usually for more than a month at one time. Ms. Roberts suggested a depiction of the timeline for the community. Mayor Randels referred to the depiction as submitted from the Planning and Zoning Board in the packet. Mayor Randels read ordinance No. 04 --2007 by title. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 110, ZONING, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES; CLARIFYING THE INTENT OF THE R -1, R -2 AND R -3 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; DEFINING THE TERM "RESORT DWELLING; "DEFINING THE TERM "'RESORT CONDOMINIUM;" PROVIDLNG FOR THE LOCATION AND REGULATION OF RESORT DWELLINGS AND CONDOMINIUMS UNDER CONDITIONS STATED HEREIN; AMENDING THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO RESTATE THAT ANY RENTAL OF A DWELLING UNIT SHALT- BE FOR A MINIMUM OF SEVEN (7) DADS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCORPORATION INTO THE CODE; SEVERABILITY; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Ms. Helen Filkins stated that this was a sad day for her since 33 years ago the City voted to become low density, residential community. Ms. Filkins expressed hove she watched the Miami community change over time due to resort dwellings. She explained that the Ordinance was a how -to document for renting out residences. Ms. Filkins explained that the document WHEREAS clauses were contradictory in their attempt to retain a residential City but procedural on how to rent residences. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog stated that he was opposed to resort rentals; however, a few people invested in their home to rent those homes until their retirements with rights to their property. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog expressed City of cape Canaveral, Florida City council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 13 of 18 the preference to adopt an ordinance that was defensible. Ms. Filkins expressed that no one had the right because they did not present this to the people first. Mayor Randels explained that the ordinance would prohibit resort dwellings and resort condominiums in the R -1, R -2, and R -3 zoning districts. Ms. Filkins emphasized that the people voted for a low density, small town. Mayor Randels pointed out that the residents successfully voted for low density, height restrictions, and residential along the ocean and the river. Ms. Filkins thanked the Council for the opportunity to express her view. Mr. Kohn Bennett, of 1000 Shorewood Drive stated that the Council clarified its intent at the previous meeting related to approved site Plans. Mr. Bennett pointed out that once an applicant obtains the certificate of occupancy for the new building, there were 30 days to obtain the state license and for the city Manager to sign his license. Mr. Bennett pointed out how he had no control over the state licensing time period. Mr. Bennett offered language for Sub-paragraph 5 and suggested a grace period under the third sub -point (iii). "and judiciously pursue his license within that time period." Ms. Roberts stated that the owner was required to obtain the requisite license; however, she stated her concern with a time frame to reasonably obtain the licensing. Mr. Bennett pointed out that he would also need a signature on the Final certificate from the city Manager. Discussion concluded and agreed on a change of language to a "60 --day" provision to obtain a I icense from the Department of Business and Professional Regulation. DIMS. sandy Trudeau of Merritt Island and owner of three resort dwelling properties in Cape Canaveral thanked the Council for the grandfathering provision; however, Ms. Trudeau expressed that two of her properties would be subject to closure due to the Ordinance. chief Sargeant clarified that the State found her in violation. However, Ms. Trudeau's properties would remain closed until she was found conforming and met the requirements. Ms. Trudeau informed that she was in possession of signed rental agreements. chief Sargeant emphasized that once the applicant officially applied, they were officially notifying that they were non - conforming. At that point in time, per the Ordinance, those units could not be rented for more than three tunes in a year for seven days. They would have to go to long - terra rental until they comply with the law. Ms. Trudeau informed that the state told her that she needed egress from the third floor, unless she could get a letter of waiver from the City. Mayor Randels asked Ms. Trudeau if she could meet with the Building official, the Fire Chief and the state Representative to resolve her issue. Ms. Trudeau requested a special amendment for her circumstance. Attorney Garganese clarified that Ms. Trudeau was asking the council to waive the building code requirement for her situation and he advised the council against such an action that was in direct contradiction to the building code requirements for life/ safety. Ms. Trudeau explained how she was subject to financial losses and potential litigation due to breaches of contract. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog stated that her third story was not in compliance with the law. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog stated that he was not in support of any waivers and stated that she had a right and it was up to her to - use that right. council members expressed their disapproval with Ms. Trudeau's request. Council members explained that the previous amendment was made for un-- constructed City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 14 of 18 units. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog requested for staff to be expeditious in their review. Ms. Roberts expressed how what was fair and equitable would apply to any and all applicants. Attorney Garganese referred to Page 9, in Section 110 -486 related to Section 110 -332 (4) and requested to exclude "hotels and motels ". 1'tlls. Roberts stated that she read the provision as more being restrictive. Discussion followed on the intent of the City Attorney's proposed change. Mr. Bennett painted out that resort condominiums were a new definition:, kept in C -'1, and they should be able to operate daily within the intent of C -'I zoning with a resort condominium license. Mr. Bennett expressed agreement with the restriction for residences on a lot in the C -1 zoning district; however, he agreed with Ms. Roberts on the overly restrictive aspect of the City Attorney's proposed change. Ms. Roberts called for a Point of Order to hear the City Attorney's intention. Attorney Garganese clarified that it was not his desire to add a provision to the practice of a less than 7-day rental in any other zoning district outside of C -1 zoning. Mr. Petsos stated that he preferred to see the Ordinance remain as submitted. Mr. Nicholas referred to the zoning map and noted the amount of commercial zoning on the west side of North Atlantic Avenue. Mr. Boucher clarified that after the Ordinance was adopted a resort dwelling or resort condominiums could permit daily rental use as long as they met the same requirements as a hotel or motel in the C -1 zoning district. A motion was made by Ms. Roberts and seconded by Mr. Petsos to extend the meeting until 10:30 P.M. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tern Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. Mr. Boucher advised Council to have the Planning and zoning Board review the smaller units. Council decided to vote on the City Attorney's amendment. The City Attorney recommended striking the language, "excluding the C -1 zoning district," and inserting, "excluding hotels - motels." under section 332, Sub - paragraph (4), Hotels- Motels. Mr. Boucher clarified that this would maintain the status quo in the C -1 zoning. Mr. Bennett stated that the amendment would not allow the newly defined resort condominium to operate as a commercial activity. Mr. Boucher referred to Page 6 and read how a resort condominium was permitted to operate. Attorney Garganese found suitable language to make the amendment. Attorney Garganese stated that the amendment could be connected to a permitted use. Ms. Roberts clarified that at a later time the Planning and Zoning Board would address transient apartments, rooms, and bed and breakfasts. An amendment was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to the main motion to change the number of days from "30-days" to "60- days" on Page 8, item 5, Paragraph 5, Roman Numeral Iii, for which the owner would be required to obtain licensure from the Department of Business and Professional Regulations. The note on the motion carved 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tern Moog, For= Mfr. Nicholas, For; Mfrs Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. City of cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 15 of 18 An amendment to the main motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog to Amend Page 9, Section 110 -488 to read, "it shah be unlawful for any person to rent a dwelling unit for less than seven (7) consecutive days in any zoning district, excluding hotels - motels under Section 332, Sub- paragraph (4) and Resort Condominiums in the C -1 Zoning District." The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Fern Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, Fors Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to Adopt Ordinance No. 04 -2007 as amended at second Reading. The vote on the motion carried 5 -0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. Ms. Roberts proposed to shift the sequence of the Discussion items out of respect for those audience members who were waiting to be heard. The Chair, hearing no other approval, decided that there was no support to change the order and the meeting continued with the next discussion item. DISCUSSION: 7. Florida cities of Excellence Awards — Nominations. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog considered a nomination for Mr. Bennett Boucher as City Manager of the Year stating that he has been a City employee for 22 years. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog also nominated Mayor 'Randels as Mayor of the Year for his 10 years as Mayor of his 20 years tenure. Ms. Roberts requested to also consider several other employees in the various nominating categories: Andrea Bowers in Finance, Todd Morley as Building Official, Duree Alexander as Employee of the Year, Jeff Ratliff as well as Robert Lefever. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog cautioned on too many nominations from the same City coming to the selection committee. Mayor Randels expressed to submit the City Manager's name only. Mr. Petsos agreed with the Mayor to nominate one person. Mr. Boucher thanked the council for the nomination. A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog to Nominate city Manager, Bennett Boucher at the Florida cities of Excellence Awards. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and lolls. Roberts, For. A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to extend the meeting to 1 0:45 P.M. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 16 of 18 8. Administrative Appeals Related to the Zoning Code of ordinances. Rev. Ms. Roberts thanked the audience members who remained to discuss this issue. She explained how the current process does not allow for City Council's input prior to or subsequent to a Board of Adjustment Hearing. Ms. Roberts stated that the process also did not allow for the community input during a Hearing. Ms. Roberts expressed how the City Council serves as the Board of Adjustment in other municipalities and she proposed that suggestion to the Council. Ms. Roberts explained how as the Appeal process stands in her understanding an Appeal of the Building Official proceeds from the Board of Adjustment then to the Planning and Zoning Board and back to the Board of Adjustment at the time of Appeal. Ms. Roberts proposed for the Council to consider participating in the Appeals process or to consider eliminating the Board of Adjustment and having City Council assume that capacity. Ms. Roberts stated that there was no system of checks and balances in the existing process or for community input. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog asked the City Manager why the Council served as the Board of Adjustment in the past and under what circumstance did that change. Mr. Boucher responded that Municipal Horne Rule might have allowed for the existing Board of Adjustment to remain after 1 972. No Council prior to this one considered assuming those duties. Mr. Boucher replied that the Council had the authority to serve as the Board of Adjustment. Attorney Garganese affirmed that in other cities the Council takes that authority. Mr. Petsos expressed that he always felt that City Council should make the final decision. Mayor Pro Tern Hoog stated that he did not desire to eliminate the Board; however, he would agree to participate in the process. Mr. Nicholas stated that the Board had expertise in the Zoning Code area. He expressed to retain the Board's expertise; however, the City Council would serve in the Appeals. Ms. Roberts responded to Mayor Pro Tem Hoog's implication of additional meetings that she did not believe the number of additional meetings would present a burden. She re- stated her concern that the process did not allow for community input. Ms. Roberts explained how if it were decided that the Board of Adjustment process did not allow for public comment except to a limited extent, then the impacted community did have a right to be heard by the Council. Ms. Roberts stated that the current process favors the applicant and did not favor the community at large. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog stated that the most recent hearing was established as a court hearing which was the forum of an Appeal and therefore, public comment was limited. Ms. Roberts replied that in this case in terms of appealing the decision of the Building official in the interest of the public good and the broader community in support of the ordinances changes previously made, the Building Official made his decision based on an incredible amount of community care and concern. However, that input was minimally heard. Such concerns were raised before the most recent meeting. Ms. Roberts expressed how the community in which she resides was appalled that City Council did not participate in the Appeals process. Ms. Roberts asked if the way the Board of Adjustment operates was in conformance with the City's own code. Attorney Garganese affirmed that it did. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog City of cape Canaveral, Florida City council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 17 of 18 responded that the Appeals process was specific to one subject only. Mr. Petsos requested to have the staff review some options such as: 1 ) whether the Council desired to serve as the Board of Adjustment, or 2} whether the Council would use them as an Advisory Board and have the final decision rest with the Council. Attorney Garganese stated that "pursuant to city Code Section 110-33 once the Board renders a final Appeal,, it would proceed to the circuit court." Attorney Garganese explained the condition of why the result of the overturned Appeal would place an issue before the Planning and zoning Board. Ms. Roberts emphasized that she desired for the impacted parties to also have the right of Appeals and she preferred for the Council to assume the duties of the Board of Adjustment. She did not think that the amount of business was significantly burdensome. Attorney Garganese explained the three options as: 1 ) the Board of Adjustment could maintain their authority, 2} city council could assume that authority, or 3) or the city Council could serve as an Appellate body to hear any Appeals from the Board of Adjustment. In addition, the council could also eliminate all and obtain a special Hearings Master. Ms. Roberts emphasized how with regard to hearing Appeals that the community, those impacted parties, have the right to be heard. Discussion followed on how to include City Council in the Appeals process. Attorney Garganese reported that in another city the Board of Adjustment serves in a recommending capacity to the Council. Mr. Nicholas suggested returning to a Workshop meeting for discussion purposes and the Regular meeting serving for taking action purposes. Mr. Russell stated that the purpose of the Boards were to alleviate some of the Council's work. He explained how this might also drive away members committed to their work. Mr. Russell stated that Advisory Board members reside into the community also. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog stated that the Council removed some of the Planning and zoning Board's authority in their review process which affected the Board's performance. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog stated how he was in favor of being an Appellate Board to the Board of Adjustment but not to eliminate a Board. He explained to Ms. Roberts that the one meeting that she focused on was an Appellate Hearing. As a point of order, Mayor Randels concluded to have staff review the options related to the Board of Adjustment. on a final note, Mr. Russell stated that the when the council removed power from the Boards, they remove the leverage for the Board to perform their job. Ms. Ruth Anders expressed agreement with Ms. Roberts. Ms. Anders submitted a letter to City council related to the Board of Adjustment's decision. Ms. Anders stated that her committee had obtained a legal opinion from the city Attorney in Order for citizens to gain a right to be heard. Ms. Anders stated that the Board of Adjustment's final decision should be "void ab initio." Ms. Anders concluded that the Board's action had no legal validity at any time. Mr. Werner Crewe submitted a letter to the City Council referencing Administrative Appeals related to the zoning Code of ordinances Board of Adjustment of June 14, 2007. In summary, Mr. Crewe addressed the council and stated that the Board of City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting June 19, 2007 Page 18 of 18 1 Adjustment provided a disgraceful performance under the Chairmanship of Mr. Earl McMillin. Mr. Grewe read his letter to the Council which reviewed the points of how the meeting was unbalanced allowing for Attorney Torpy to speak at great length, how the other Board members had nothing to say during the meeting, how Mr. Torpy's presentation provided a distorted view of how the tank farm evolved and finally how former Mayor Joy Salamone had not been in favor of additional storage tanks. r � Ms. Annie Tannenbaum stated that the development was different at the time of the tank farm development. Ms. Tannenbaum also questioned the background of the Board of Adjustment Members. REPORTS: Due to the lateness of the hour, there were no reports. AUDIENCE TO BE HEARD: There were no further comments from the audience. ADJOURNMENT: There lei adjourned meeting� � er business, the Chair ad�oumed the meetin at 11:30 P.M. Rocky Randels MAYOR Susah,. ° �_., r C, Cl CLERK ti