HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket 08-09-2007 RegularCity of Cape Canaveral
CITY OF CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
C�� CAMV�P"
CITY HALL ANNEX
111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida
THURSDAY
August: 9, 2007
7:00 PM
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
BOARD MEMBER INTERVIEWS:
Carol Delano — Recreation Board
Hank Dinenno — Recreation Board
CONSENT AGENDA:
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of July 17, 2007.
2. City Council Special Meeting Minutes of July 31, 2007.
3. Resolution No. 2007-19; Appointing Lt. Hugh Evans as a Regular Member of the
Business and Cultural Development
CONSIDERATIONS:
4. Motion to Approve: Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Adopt A -Shore Agreement
for Manatee Sanctuary Park.
5. Motion to Approve: An Appeal of the Community Appearance Board's Decision --
Enterprise Sign.
SITE PLAN;
6. Motion to Approve: Consideration of Mermaid Key Site Plan —
140 Condominium Units and 25,800 Square Feet of Commercial.
105 Polk Avenue • Post Office Box 326 • Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326
Telephone: (321) 868-1.220 • SUNCOM: 982-1220 • FAX: (321) 868-1248
wwwmyflorida.com/cape • e-mail: ccapecanaveral@c#l.rr.com
rty-of Cape Canaveral, Florida
y ty Council Regular Meeting
August 9, 2007
Page 2 of 2
REPORTS:
1. City Manager
2. Staff
3. City Council
AUDIENCE TO BE HEARD:
Comments to be heard on items that do not appear on the agenda of this meeting.
Citizens will limit their comments to five (5) minutes. The City Council will not take any
action under the "Audience To Be Heard" section of the agenda. The Council may
schedule such items as regular agenda items and act upon them in the future.
ADJOURNMENT:
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes, the City hereby advises the public that: If a person decides
to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, that
person will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose that person may need to ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which
the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or
admission into evidence of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or
appeals not otherwise allowed by law. Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of
these proceedings should contact the City Clerk's office (868-1221) 48 hours in advance of the meeting.
CITY OF CAPE -CANAVERAL
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY ADVISORY BOARD OR COMMITTEE
Pursuant to Section 2-171, Cape Canaveral Code
City Code requires prospective and existing board members to fill out an application. City Code
also prohibits a person from serving on a City Board or Committee if that person has been
convicted of a felony, unless their civil rights have been restored.
Please complete the following in the space provided:
A. GENERAL J
pp
1. A licant Name: 6 ro I
2_ Home Address: M3 0,,i 4W
3. Home Telephone: IN - C Joy L
4. Occupation: Yb u p kl ae �l1U - e<" Lad
5. Business Telephone:^~ 0C -V' 0.2'y
a. Business Address: �d7 , C�t�{ aw t ct
71y -
B. ELIGIBILITY
The information provided in this section is for purposes of determining whether you are eligible
to serve on a City advisory board or committee.
4b. if yes to 4a, please list each:
in Brevard County?
Z(N)
1.
Are you duly registered to vote
M
2.
Have you been a resident of the City of Cape
/
Canaveral for 12 months or longer?
(Y)
✓ (N)
3a.
Have you ever been convicted or found guilty, regardless
of adjudication, of a felony in any jurisdiction? Any plea
of nolo contendere (no contest) shall be considered a
/
✓
conviction for purposes of this question.
(Y)
(N)
3b.
If yes to 3a, have your civil rights been restored?
(Y)
(N)-Z
4a.
Do you presently serve on any other City of Cape
/
Canaveral advisory board or committee?
(Y)
(N)
4b. if yes to 4a, please list each:
5. City ordinance requires that all persons applying for a
Beautification Board
City advisory board or committee must voluntarily consent
Board of Adjustment*
to a standard criminal background check before being
I
appointed to a board or committee. Do you voluntarily
initials
consent to having a standard background check
Community Appearance Board*
performed on you by the City of Cape Canaveral?
(Y)__Z (N)
6a. Are you related to a City of Cape Canaveral Council
Library Board
member by blood, adoption or marriage?
{Y} (N)
6b. If yes to 6a, please provide name(s) of person(s) and relationship to you:
C. INTERESTSIEXPERIENCE
1. Briefly state your interest in serving on a City advisory board or committee:
2. Briefly state any prior experiences in serving on any governmental board or committee:
3. Please list any specialized skills and training (e.g., architect, engineer, general
contractor, etc.) that you feel help to qualify you for membership on the desired board or
committee: Work- W k Lt WA 04&V, -Q ` rta'f EU, " (0 r c0. `�� .
�6S�-� tte3v . _._ _%[ n t _ � �e � � Ste. � S 1
4. In numerical sequence (1 = most interested), please rank which advisory board or
committee on which you wish to serve:
a.
Beautification Board
b.
Board of Adjustment*
C.
Business and Cultural Development Board
d.
Code Enforcement Board*
e_
Community Appearance Board*
f.
Construction Board of Adjustment and Appeals*
g.
Library Board
h.
Planning and Zoning Board*
L ✓
Recreation Board
j.
Other:
*Members of these boards are required to complete and file with the Supervisor of Elections a
Financial Disclosure Form upon appointment to said board and prior to July 1 of each year
following the initial appointment while still a member of said board.
Date Appointed:
Appointed by:
Board Appointed to:
Term Expires:
D. STATE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
Section 760.80, Florida Statutes, requires that the City annually submit a report to the Secretary
of State disclosing race, gender and physical disabilities of board and committee members.
Please check the appropriate boxes:
RACE
GENDER
African-American
Male
Asian -American
iri Female
✓ Hispanio-American
Not Known
Native American
Caucasian
DISABILITY
Not Known
Physically disabled
YOU HEREBY REPRESENT TO THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, UNDER PENALTIES OF
PERJURY, THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO
THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, AND THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL HAS THE
RIGHT TO RELY ON THAT INFORMATION.
YOU HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR PUBLIC
OFFICERS [SECTIONS 112.311-.326, FLORIDA STATUTES] AND THE FLORIDA
"SUNSHINE LAW" [SECTION 286.011, FLORIDA STATUTES], WHICH MAY PERTAIN TO
YOU IF YOU ARE APPOINTED TO A CITY ADVISORY BOARD OR COMMITTEE, AND 1F
APPOINTED, IT IS YOUR SOLE OBLIGATION AND DUTY TO COMPLY WITH SUCH LAWS.
PLEASE NOTE:
• Initial appointment to any City board is subject to City Council approval following a brief
interview before the City Council at a regularly scheduled meeting.
• Your application will remain effective for one year from the elate of completion.
• If you should have any questions regarding the completion of this application, please
contact the C Clerk's Ofti at (321 868-1221.
Signature: f
Date: O
Please return to: City of Cape Canaveral
Office of the City Clerk
105 Polk Avenue
Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920
CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY ADVISORY BOARD OR COMMITTEE
Pursuant to Section 2171, Cape Canaveral Code
City Code requires prospective and existing board members to fill out an application. City Code
also prohibits a person from serving on a City Board or Committee if that person has been
convicted of a felony, unless their civil rights have been restored.
Please complete the following in the space provided:
A. GENERAL
-:�1. Applicant Name: AIC4 i? L 1 k7eyr k-,) d
2. Home Address:
3. Home Telephone:
4. Occupation: -t-h e �' - o e
5. Business Telephone:
6. Business Address: �s ISS iD Yl "f ! U� G E CC:rIr�iV.
B. ELIGIBILITY
The information provided in this section is for purposes of determining whether you are eligible
to serve on a City advisory hoard or committee.
Are you duly registered to vote in Brevard County?
2. Have you been a resident of the City of Cape
Canaveral for 12 months or longer?
33. Have you ever been convicted or found guilty, regardless
of adjudication, of a felony in any jurisdiction? Any plea
of nolo contendere (no contest) shall be considered a
conviction for purposes of this question.
3b.
4a.
If yes to 3a, have your civil rights been restored?
Do you presently serve on any other City of Cape
Canaveral advisory board or committee?
4b. If yes to 4a, please list each:
(Y) L'(N)
(Y) �N)
(Y) (N)
5. City ordinance requires that all persons applying for a
City advisory board or committee must voluntarily consent
to a standard criminal background check before being
appointed to a board or committee. Do you voluntarily
consent to having a standard background check
performed on you by the City of Cape Canaveral?
6a_ Are you related to a City of Cape Canaveral Council
member by blood, adoption or marriage?
AL .
initials
(Y) '� (N)
6b. if yes to 6a, please provide name(s) of person(s) and relationship to you:
C. INTERESTS/EXPERIENCE
1.
Briefly state your interest in serving on a City advisory board or ca mittee:
2r ,,I e- i�Pm a r O�I� OJ��
l of S. <d A"we
2. Brief state any prior experiences in serving on any governmental board or committee:
3.
:11
Please list any specialized skills and training (e.g., architect, engineer, general
contractor, etc.) that you feel help to qualify you for membership on the desired board or
In numerical sequence (1 = most interested), please rank which advisory board or
committee on which you wish to serve:
a.
Beautification Board
b.
Board of Adjustment'
C.
Business and Cultural Development Board
d.
Code Enforcement Board*
e.
Community Appearance Board"
f.
Construction Board of Adjustment and Appeals"
g.
Library Board
h.
Planning and Zoning Board'
L_
Recreation Board
j.
Other:
*Members of these boards are required to complete and file with the Supervisor of Elections a
Financial Disclosure Form upon appointment to said board and prior to July 1 of each year
following the initial appointment while still a member of said board
D. STATE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
Section 760.80, Florida Statutes, requires that the City annually submit a report to the Secretary
of State disclosing race, gender and physical disabilities of board and committee members.
Please check the appropriate boxes:
RACE
GENDER
African-American
Male
Asian -American
Female
Hispanic -American
Not Known
Native American
i/ Caucasian
DISABILITY
Not Known
Physically disabled
YOU HEREBY REPRESENT TO THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, UNDER PENALTIES OF
PERJURY, THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO
THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, AND THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL HAS THE
RIGHT TO RELY ON THAT INFORMATION.
YOU HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR PUBLIC
OFFICERS [SECTIONS 112.311-.326, FLORIDA STATUTES] AND THE FLORIDA
"SUNSHINE LAW' [SECTION 286.011, FLORIDA STATUTES], WHICH MAY PERTAIN TO
YOU IF YOU ARE APPOINTED TO A CITY ADVISORY BOARD OR COMMITTEE, AND IF
APPOINTED, IT IS YOUR SOLE OBLIGATION AND DUTY TO COMPLY WITH SUCH LAWS.
PLEASE NOTE:
• Initial appointment to any City board is subject to City Council approval following a brief
interview before the City Council at a regularly scheduled meeting.
• Your application will remain effective for one year from the date of completion.
• If you should have any questions regarding tate completion of this application, please
contact the City Clerks Office at (321) 868-1221.
Signature:
Dater Q
Please return to: City of Cape Canaveral
Office of the City Cierk
105 Polis Avenue
Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920
' For Office Use Only:
Date Appointed:
Appointed by:
Board Appointed to:
Terra Expires:
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
CITY HALL ANNEX
111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida
TUESDAY
July 17, 2007
7:00 PM
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER: The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
Council Members Present:
Mayor Pro Tem
Council Member
Council Member
Mayor
Council Member
Others Present:
City Manager
City Clerk
City Treasurer
Building Official
PRESENTATIONS:
Bob Hoog
Leo Nicholas
Buzz Petsos
Rocky Randels
Shannon Roberts
Bennett Boucher
Susan Stills
Andrea Bowers
Todd Morley
Dianne Marcum
New Book: Cape Canaveral, Cocoa Beach & Florida's Space Coast Great
Destinations.
Ms. Dianne Marcum introduced herself as a Central Florida resident for 25 years and of
Cape Canaveral for 10 years_ She stated that the Brevard County area is only listed as a
footnote in travel books that led her to writing a book about the area_ Ms. Marcum
presented the book cover for the Council's viewing. She related that Countryman Press
would publish the book as part of their "Great Destinations" series which focuses on areas
that are regions of extraordinary cultural interest and natural beauty.
Ms. Marcum stated that the book would be available at notable retail booksellers. She
informed that in the previous year over 40 million people visited Central Florida and Cape
Canaveral was one of the closest beaches to that market. Ms. Marcum also informed that
the area was well positioned as an alternative vacation spot aside from the theme parks.
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 2 of 11
Ms. Marcum pointed out that this area has some of the best beaches, lodging, and is also
near Port Canaveral.
Ms. Marcum shared that Ponce de Leon landed on the shores of Brevard County and
Canaveral was one of the oldest markers on maps and she shared how 500 years later
astronauts headed for space from nearby. She also shared that the word "astronaut' in
Greek meant star sailor, which carried relevance from Cape Canaveral's past to its
present. Ms. Marcum also related that the Indian River Lagoon estuary was one of the
most diverse and with the trend toward nature based vacations the area was again well
positioned. Ms. Marcum concluded that the book would be available in January 2008.
Ms. Roberts commended Ms. Marcum as a creative contributory member of the Business
and Cultural Development Board due in part to her executive experience with the Disney
Corporation. Ms. Roberts thanked Ms. Marcum for her efforts in that capacity for the City.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of July 3, 2007.
Ms. Roberts pointed out an omission of two words on Page 6, paragraph 3 that read,
"....the City had not gone on record with its concerns. The City Clerk would make that
correction.
2. Outdoor Entertainment Permit for the Brevard County Traveling Skate Park.
Mayor Randels informed that the Traveling Skate Park would be located on the basketball
courts at the Youth Center this year.
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog and seconded by Ms. Roberts to
Approve Consent Agenda Item No. 1 with the correction noted and Item No. 2. 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.
CONSIDERATION:
3. Motion to Approve: Cooperative Purchase and Installation of Playground
Equipment for City Park in the Amount of $108,092.87.
Robert Lefever, Acting Recreation Director, referred to the anticipated park layout that
would be separated into two sections: one for toddlers and another for adolescents. Mr.
Terry Perkins, Representative for Playmore Recreation spoke on behalf of the equipment
company and informed that Playmore also sits on the Americans with Disabilities Act
[ADA] Board.
Mr. Perkins informed that he performs up to 200 installations per year and he noted that
the company also works with the Brevard, Volusia, and Orange County School Boards.
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 3 of 11
Mr. Perkins described the equipment and replied to Mayor Randels that chestnut, green,
and beige were the chosen colors.
Mr. Perkins replied to Mayor Randels that engineered wood fiber was double -cut wood
designed as a mulch that was ADA compliant as well as durable. Mr. Perkins explained
that this was an organic surface and therefore cooler than a rubber surface. Mayor
Randels acknowledged that former Recreation Director Nancy Hanson was awarded a
State grant in previous years with the City funding a budgeted 25 percent. Mr. Perkins
replied to Mr. Petsos that the mulch was not treated.
Mr. Perkins referred to the play web and displayed a piece of the equipment which was
cable wrapped with carpet fibers that provided more flexibility than a steel frame. Mr.
Perkins informed that each piece of equipment had third party certification to meet
American Standard Testing Materials [ASTM] standards. The play web has visibility
through it for safety purposes.
Mr. Lefever replied to Mr. Petsos that part of the remaining funds would be used for
sidewalks as well as: replacing the perimeter fencing, refurbishing the pavilion, renovating
the rest rooms and landscaping and sod. Mr. Perkins affirmed to Ms. Roberts that the
equipment met ASTM standards; however, there had been some injuries as a matter of
risk.
Mr. Perkins informed that the company was installing 12 -inches of mulch on both
playgrounds and he stated that there was $12 million of liability insurance coverage on
equipment breakage from Play World and $2 million on the installation from Playmore. Mr.
Perkins pointed out that the designated signage would outline the regulations for play. Ms.
Roberts commended Mr. Lefever on his follow-up on Ms. Hanson's work to include the
Life -Trail. Mr. Perkins explained the Life Trail was a walkway with workout stations and
was historically well used.
Ms. Lee Vicidomini asked if the City would have an equipment maintenance program. Mr.
Perkins replied that visual inspections, removing glass, and tightening bolts were part of
the maintenance plan as well as how often to make inspections. Mr. Perkins stated that
Mr. Lefever would be given special tools, primer, and graffiti remover. Ms. Vicidomini also
asked if the wood mulch was termite resistant. Mr. Perkins re -stated that the wood mulch
was not treated and informed that sand was not ADA accessible and would ruin the
playground equipment. Mr. Perkins confirmed that to date there had been no problem with
the wood mulch.
Mr. Craig Stewart asked how long the wood mulch would last at 12 -inches deep. Mr.
Perkins replied that the mulch was added to from year to year due to wear and loss. Mr.
Perkins pointed out that the wood mulch was cleaner and at least three -inches of mulch
would be added every year to year and one-half.
A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to Approve the
Cooperative Purchase and Installation of Playground Equipment for City Park in the
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 4 of 11
Amount of $108,092.87. 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.
SITE PLANS:
4. Motion to Approve: Site Plan for Caribbean Vistas; James E. Morgan,
Applicant
Mayor Randels clarified the address of 220 Madison Avenue and cited the location as the
northeast comer of Poinsetta and Madison Avenue. Mayor Randels stated that the
Planning and Zoning Board approved the Site Plan with four conditions subject to a 90 -day
satisfaction.
Mr. Todd Peetz, City Planner, stated that he had the draft minutes available from the
previous Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Mr. Peetz read the Board's four
conditions into the record as: 1) assure that the front sump pump is consistent with
the water retention calculations, 2) correct the drawing to show that the sidewalks
are not a grassy area, 3) if dry detention is intended, then drainage engineering
shall be provided; however, if dry detention is not intended, change the wording on
the Site Plan to "retention" area, 4) re-examine the soil elevation around the trees
on the east side. (Developer may need to grade around the trees). Mr. Peetz added a
fifth condition: to limit to thirty-five percent lot coverage.
Mr. Daniel Coons affirmed to Mr. Nicholas that the pool had been removed and backfilled.
Mr. Peetz stated that the lot coverage calculated close to 37 percent. Ms. Roberts stated
her concern with the limited green -space.
Mr. Peetz replied to Ms. Roberts that he believed the Community Appearance Board
reviewed the project; however, he was uncertain if the Planning and Zoning Board's
review was the same material as the Community Appearance Board. Ms. Roberts stated
that she desired to see what the Community Appearance Board had reviewed. Mr. Peetz
stated and Mr. Coons confirmed that the project was townhomes. Ms. Roberts requested
to see more landscaping in future developments and also for the Council to view what was
given to the Community Appearance Board. Ms. Roberts also clarified that there were no
plans for short-term rentals with this development. Mr. Coons affirmed to Mr. Petsos that a
contiguous four -foot sidewalk was planned on both the Madison and Poinsetta sides of the
project.
A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog to
Approve the Site Plan for Caribbean with the Five Noted Conditions. 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 Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 5 of 11
5. Motion to Approve: Site Plan for Mermaid Key; Martin Greene, Applicant.
Mayor Randels related that the City Attorney recommended a Unity of Title on the south
commercial parcel and the applicant will assume the cost of a sewer force main relocation.
Mayor Randels reviewed and stated that the content of the Applicant's packet was
complete. Mr. Peetz stated that there were no inconsistencies with levels of service.
He read into the record the seven conditions for approval as recommended by the
Planning and Zoning Board: 1) The sewer line from the south commercial building
needs an easement; and the sewer line needs to be re -located to save a 20 -inch
tree; 2) the lift station pump sequence shall be changed so an alarm is activated if
the liquid level rises above the lead pump "on" level and before the liquid level
reaches the lag pump "on" level; 3) the north and south fountain details shall be re-
designed, because the present 18 -inch dimensions are incorrect; 4) provisions shall
be made for recycling containers at each dumpster site; 5) a lighting plan for the
streets and sidewalks shall be submitted and approved by the City; 6) a shared
parking easement on the north parcel shall be approved by the City; and 7) cross
access easements shall be provided on the north and south parcels.
Ms. Roberts asked if this were a condominium or a resort condominium. Mr. Peetz replied
that he reviewed the project as a condominium and he deferred to the owner, Mr. Martin
Greene, on the use of the property. Mr. Peetz replied to Ms. Roberts that staff did not
review the condominium documents since those were sent to the State. Ms. Roberts
stated how she hoped to have those documents in the future since they explain how the
condominium would operate in the City. Mr. Peetz replied that the applicant brought the
Community Appearance Board renderings to the Planning and Zoning Board. Ms. Roberts
stated for the record that this was an example of the Council receiving the same
documents as the Boards. She also recommended that the Business and Cultural
Development Board review large commercial projects that impact the business
community.
Mr. Peetz replied to Ms_ Roberts that there was no requirement to notify adjacent
properties. Mr. Peetz responded that he was not aware that the project would apply
affordable housing. Mr. Peetz replied to Ms. Roberts that no water access was indicated
in the plans. Ms. Roberts also questioned the proposed wall to which Mayor Randels
replied that Attorney Pickles could answer that question.
Ms. Roberts stated her concern with adequate green space in that the project appeared
extensively developed. Mr. Peetz replied that there were no specimen trees, trees over
24 -inches, on the site. Mr. Nicholas asked if Mr. Greene was fined or tree mitigation
required from a past tree -clearing incident. Mr. Martin Greene replied that three were
placed on public property and two on the proposed property. Ms. Roberts asked what
types of businesses were proposed for the site.
Attorney Tim Pickles of 3490 US Highway 1, Cocoa, FL, stated he would address the legal
aspect of the project and Mr. Greene would address the technical aspects. Attorney
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 6 of 11
Pickles stated that this was a proposed condominium development; however, the project
applicant could seek a resort condominium application as a grandfathered -in Site Plan
under the City's resort condominium application process_ Ms. Roberts stated for the
record that she was not aware of that intent. Attorney Pickles stated that condominium
documents were public records that were recorded in the Brevard County public records.
He stated that to create such documents at this point would be premature since the Site
Plan had not been approved. Attorney Pickles stated that any easements would be
performed; however, to do that at this time would also be pre -mature.
Attorney Pickles addressed a 20 -inch tree for mitigation in opposition to relocating an
easement. Mr. Peetz informed that the tree was too large for relocation; therefore, it would
need mitigation at a ratio of three -to -four trees. Mr. Petsos stated that the City required
mitigation in order to save trees. Mr. Martin Greene, applicant on behalf of the Mermaid
Key, LLC, addressed the Council. Mr. Greene stated that, under City code, he was
allowed to mitigate the tree if the sewer line could not be moved.
Mr. Greene clarified the foul -part plan as: the north and south residential plans and the
north and south commercial plans. He affirmed to Mr. Petsos that the proposed project
was a phased plan. Mr. Greene clarified that each building was numbered for the
purposes of obtaining Certificates of Occupancy.
Ms. Roberts asked Mr. Greene if he briefed the community with his proposed intentions on
the project. Mr. Greene stated that he had spoken with both Treasure Island and
Discovery Bay condominiums. He stated that he complied with the City's zoning
regulations. Mr. Greene replied to Ms. Roberts that he was not considering affordable
housing due to the cost of the land. Mr. Greene informed that he was aiming for high tech
businesses.
Mr. Greene replied to Mr. Nicholas that accessibility to the commercial portion on the south
side had its own driveway. He confirmed 108 residential units proposed for the north side
property. Mr. Greene replied to Mr. Nicholas that there was discussion related to a traffic
light at the end of Thurm Blvd.; however, that was a call by the Florida Department of
Transportation.
Mr. Greene replied to Ms_ Roberts that the anticipated wall was a 16 -foot, stucco wall and
he planned to give the residents of Treasure Island the opportunity to Choose the
aesthetics on their visible side of the wall. Ms. Roberts stated her concern with the wildlife
in the south portion of the canal evidenced through the City's south drainage ditch project.
Mr. Greene replied that development was controlled by the St. John's River Water
Management District and to date he had not applied any access or boardwalks into the
river. Mr. Greene informed that much of the implied greenery existing on the property was
Brazilian pepper that actually destroys most of the landscape.
Mr. Greene explained the intention of two-story townhomes with one-story flats above
them accessible by elevator. Mr. Greene stated his intention of a deep 12 foot, retention
pond in order to avoid the growth of green algae. Mr. Greene expressed his intent to use
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 47, 2007
Page 7 of 11
the right to apply as a resort condominium and the residents could decide whether or not
to use it. Mr. Greene clarified for Ms. Roberts that the new language related to housing
was "attainable," not "affordable," housing that under Housing Urban Development meant
that it qualified for Section 8 applicants. Mr. Greene stated that the price range would
begin in approximately the $350,000 price range.
Ms. Roberts pointed out that the City had not introduced the concept of "attainable"
housing and the Council had not asked developers to build with attainable housing in
mind. Ms. Roberts stated that if the City valued the service of those who work in the
community, then attainable housing should be a consideration. Attorney Pickles explained
that when a developer considers attainable housing, the City must also consider some
incentive to the developers for creating that housing.
Mr. Moe Ledeaux, President of Treasure Island Club Condominiums and Mr.Dan Marshall,
Chair of its Easement Committee, addressed the Council representing those residents and
stated that they would have wanted to be notified of the proposed project. Mr. Marshall
stated that Treasure Island Club had a perpetually exclusive easement to a recreation
area that they have maintained for 19 years. He stated that Mr. Greene's project would
impact that recreation area by the removal of a 6 -foot, wooden fence and construction of
the proposed Site Plan that would overburden, interfere and possibly destroy the existing
recreational easement.
Mr. Marshall stated that the Site Plan would directly interfere with the existing property
rights of individual owners that have individually deeded docks. Mr. Marshall related that
Mr. Greene referred their water -related concerns to the St. John's River Water
Management district. In summary, Treasure Island Club residents expressed recreation
easement, environmental, and credit issues and they requested that the Council deny the
request for the Mermaid Key LLC Site Plan until these concerns were resolved.
Mr. Marshall explained how one of the builders negotiated the recreational easement to
Treasure Island Club during a land sale. The easement was recorded in 1988. Mayor
Randels concluded that this matter was a land dispute in a civil issue. Mr. Marshall
explained that a wooden fence exists; however, Mr. Greene was proposing a concrete
wall. Mr. Marshall stated that Mermaid Key LLC purchased the land from Discovery Bay
LLC in 2004.
Attorney Pickles explained that the easement was part of an agreement as a judgment
with the prior development; however, the easement was not an exclusive easement. The
easement was reflected on the Site Plan. The easement provided what was required: four
picnic tables, a barbeque grill, and a gazebo_ The Site Plan acknowledged that the
easement exists and if the Site Plan met the City's criteria that that was subject of
approval.
Mr. Greene stated that the intention was mutual use with the existing residents with a new
and better gazebo. Mr. Greene stated Treasure Island Club would have the use of the
property for the picnic table and the gazebo. Mr. Greene replied to Attorney Garganese
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 8 of 11
that he planned to build a wall and a new gazebo to replace the existing one that was
reflected in the Site Plan.
Attorney Pickles clarified that Mr. Greene would not build anything that would obstruct the
easement area. Mr. Marshall stated a difference of the opinion between Treasure Island
Club residents and Mr. Greene's proposed project. Mayor Randels pointed out that if
there were changes to the proposed Site Plan, then the developer would need to come
before the Council again.
Ms. Janet Olsen of Treasure Island Club asked if there were an official legal definition of a
resort condominium. Attorney Garganese responded that resort condominium related to
the length occupancy. Attorney Pickles stated that this was a residential condominium
property not a mixed-use_ Attorney Garganese raised the point of life/ safety issues and
stated that additional expenditures that the developer would need to make to meet the
State requirements for life/ safety.
Ms. Roberts stated that the nature of the transient element impacted the neighboring
communities which prompted her concern over the lack of notification requirements to
adjacent properties. Attorney Pickles stated that the City's Police powers would handle
violation of City laws and stated difficulty in regulating potential behavior. He concluded
that if the Site Plan met the code, he requested that the Council approve the Site Plan.
Mr. Craig Stewart, Code Enforcement Board Member and Treasure Island Club resident
stated his concern related to the waterway and the tourist boats that enter the canal
several times per day to view the manatees. He requested to see some action to prohibit
anyone from using the canal area. Mr. Stewart informed that he was also a member of the
Space Coast Association of Realtors Environmental Committee and he expressed the
importance of protecting the environment. Mr. Stewart also stated his concem with placing
short-term dwellings in an area in which those persons would seek use of the amenities
available to the year-round residents in that location.
Mr. Greene clarified that these condominiums were not time-shares; however, he did plan
to use the right to apply as a resort condominium. Mr. Greene stated that he had not
applied to St. John's for boat docks for use of watercraft and he emphasized that he had
no intention of widening the drainage ditch based on the St. John's River Water
Management District regulations. Mr. Greene stated that he did plan to construct a wall;
however, he would make every attempt to work with the Treasure Island Club community.
Mr. Ledeaux questioned if Treasure Island Club could ask for a condition on the Site Plan
approval.
Ms. Sharon Molinari went on record to state that she did not desire to share any
expenses related to the recreation area with the Mermaid Key project.
Attorney Pickles stated that any proposed conditions would need to follow the City's
Ordinances as Mr. Greene was willing to work with the Treasure Island Club residents.
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 9 of 11
Ms. Roberts requested to table the item until she received more information related to the
lighting, discussions between Treasure Island Club and the developer, and the
development related to the intent of a resort condominium development.
A motion was made by Ms. Roberts and seconded by Mr. Nicholas to Table the Site
Plan Approval for the Mermaid Key Project. The vote on the motion carried 3-2 with
voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, Against; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos,
For; Mayor Randels, Against and Ms. Roberts, For.
Mr. Greene stated that he had nothing more to bring to the Council and he went on record
stating Mr. Nicholas as biased. Mr. Petsos requested City staff to locate Mr. Greene's
permit with St. John's Water Management District. Mr. Greene stated that he could not
obtain a permit with St. John's until he obtained approval from the City. Ms. Roberts stated
that she had looked at the application as a condominium not a resort condominium.
Ms. Janet Clement, Treasure Island Club resident, stated that she was forced to walk
over a sidewalk on State Road Al broken by the steam shovel performing the tree
clearing on Mr. Greene's property. Staff would investigate the location.
Mr. Bill Campbell asked if the City would continue to pave to Washington Avenue as well
as Church Street. Mayor Randels replied that those streets would be repaired subsequent
to the sewer force main replacement.
Ms. Joyce Hamilton asked how many people have come forward with short-term rental
applications. Mr. Boucher replied 29 resort dwelling units and 398 resort condominiums.
A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded Ms. Roberts to Extend the
Meeting to 10:30 P.M. The vote on the motion carried "with voting as follows:
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For
and Ms. Roberts, For.
REPORTS:
1. City Manager
• Mr. Boucher reported that he met with the president of Ron Jon's on his project
and he would address the City Council on August 21St.
• Mr. Boucher questioned which of the two letters the Council desired to forward
to the Port? Mayor Pro Tem Hoog related on his discussion with Mr. Ralph
Kennedy regarding the use of Jetty Park. Ms. Roberts stated that the City should
go on record with its concerns and forward a letter to all Port Commission
members. Mayor Randels pointed out that the letter to the Port Commission
expressed the purpose of opening a dialogue. Mr. Petsos recommended
amending the letter to relate to the citywide impact of their proposed project and not
just the northern part of the City. Mr. Nicholas stated his concern with the impact to
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 10 of 11
traffic. Mr. Boucher concluded that he would have the letter ready by the Sign
Code Meeting on Thursday, July 1011 for the Council Member's signatures.
• Mr. Boucher reported that the sand by-pass project was bid. The bids were within
the Army Corp of Engineers estimated prices and Canaveral Port Authority was the
project's sponsor.
• Mr. Boucher encouraged Council to read the quarterly reports in the Agenda
Packets.
• Mr. Boucher reported that the sewer force replacement main project began on
Monday, July ,I fitn
• Mr. Boucher informed that the Army Corps of Engineers required a permit from
the City to drill under the road.
• Mr. Boucher reported that his Executive Assistant, Kim McIntire, was processing
the Resort Dwelling — Resort Condominium Applications.
• Mr. Boucher informed that during the junction box project the contractor broke the
sewer force main some of which went into the drainage system at Orange and
Buchanan Avenues. The incident would be reported to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection.
2. Staff
Acting Recreation Director
• No report.
Building Official
• Mr. Morley clarified that Mr. Greene's reference to townhomes was a style;
however, under City code townhomes were individually platted lots.
• Mr. Morley informed that the City code currently did not have any parking
regulations for resort condominiums.
• Mr. Morley informed that the Fire and Building Department developed a joint
inspection checklist with references to the State code.
City Clerk
• No report.
City Attorney
Attorney Garganese informed that the City had a situation related to Mr. Hans
Saurenmann in which he would not allow the Building Official on the premises for
inspection purposes and possibly allowing an unlicensed contractor to perform the
work. The Cease and Desist Order was ignored; therefore, as of this date, the City
fled an Injunctive Relief action.
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
July 17, 2007
Page 11 of 11
3. City Council
Council Member Roberts
• Ms. Roberts stated her concem on the City Council's review of a Site Plan and
suggested a checklist. Attomey Garganese informed that the City code needed
revision with respect to Site Plan review; however, he explained that what was in
the Code was the law and amendments to the Code required a decision from the
Council.
Council Member Nicholas
Mr. Nicholas asked if the City could establish the nomenclature related to the
canal. He had heard it referred to as a canal, a ditch, or a creek. The City Manager
would seek an answer.
Council Member Petsos
• No report
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog
• No report.
Mayor Randels
• Mayor Randels pointed out that due to the City's asphalt road work the property at
8921 Presidential Court was anticipating run-off. Mayor Randels explained how
Stottler, Stagg and Associates could adjust the property with built-up grading. Mr.
Boucher informed that the property was originally built below the grade of the road.
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog also informed that impervious concrete was used. Mr. and
Mrs. Al and Lee Vicidomini explained how that type of repair was not durable in
Florida weather.
AUDIENCE TO BE HEARD:
There were no further comments.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the Chair adjourned the meeting at 10:40 P.M.
Rocky Randels, MAYOR
Susan Stills, CMC, CITY CLERK
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
CITY HALL ANNEX
111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida
TUESDAY
July 31, 2007
5.30 P.M.
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER: The Chair called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL:
Council Members Present:
Mayor Pro Tem
Bob Hoog
Council Member
Leo Nicholas
Council Member
Buzz Petsos
Mayor
Rocky Randels
Council Member
Shannon Roberts
Others Present:
City Manager Bennett Boucher
City Clerk Susan Stills
City Treasurer Andrea Bowers
Acting Public Works Director Waiter Bandish
Acting Recreation Director Robert Lefever
RESOLUTION:
1. Motion to Adopt: Resolution No. 2007-18; Tentative Proposed Millage Rate
for the Levy of Ad Valorem Taxes for FY 200712008.
Mayor Randels read Resolution No. 2007-18 in its entirety.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL OF BREVARD
COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING A TENTATIVE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE
FOR THE LEVY OF AD VALOREM TAXES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007/2008 ON
ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF CAPE
CANAVERAL, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Special Meeting
July 31, 2007
Page 2 of 4
WHEREAS, the electors approved in the 1985 referendum election the
construction, maintenance and operation of a library by ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the electors approved in the 1986 referendum election the
imposition of ad valorem taxes for beautification projects; and
WHEREAS, the electors approved in the 1990, 1994 and 2001 referendum
elections the imposition of ad valorem taxes for Fire/Rescue Services; and
WHEREAS, the electors approved in the 1990, 1994 and 2002 referendum
elections the imposition of ad valorem taxes for Police Protection; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to impose said ad valorem taxes_
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cape
Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, as follows:
Section 1. The total millage for all City operating purposes is 2.7816 mills on
the dollar of taxable value for the 2007/2008 fiscal year for the City of Cape Canaveral,
Florida. This millage is a 6.96% decrease from the rolled back rate of 2.9897.
Section 2. The City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, hereby
adopts and imposes a tentative proposed millage rate of .3337 mill for the
Beautification Dependent Special District, as approved in the 1986 referendum
election. This tentative proposed ad valorem tax shall be levied upon the 2007 Tax
Assessment Roll for ad valorem tax on all taxable property located within the City of
Cape Canaveral and is to be used for the City's fiscal year beginning October 1, 2007
and ending September 30, 2008.
Section 3. The City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, hereby
adopts and imposes a tentative proposed millage rate of .0453 mill for the Library
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Special Meeting
July 31, 2007
Page 3 of 4
Dependent Special District, as approved in the 1985 referendum election. This
tentative proposed ad valorem tax shall be levied upon the 2007 Tax Assessment Roll
for ad valorem tax on all taxable property located within the City of Cape Canaveral and
is to be used for the City's fiscal year beginning October 1, 2007 and ending September
30, 2008.
Section 4. The City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, hereby
adopts and imposes a tentative proposed millage rate of 0.9860 mill for Fire/Rescue
Service General Operating Millage, as approved in the 1990, 1994 and 2001
referendum elections. This tentative proposed ad valorem tax shall be levied upon the
2007 Tax Assessment Roll for ad valorem tax on all taxable property located within the
City of Cape Canaveral and is to be used for the City's fiscal year beginning October 1,
2007 and ending September 30, 2008_
Section 5. The City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, hereby
adopts and imposes a tentative proposed millage rate of 1.4166 mills for Police
Protection General Operating Millage, as approved in the 1990, 1994 and 2002
referendum elections. This tentative proposed ad valorem tax shall be levied upon the
2007 Tax Assessment Roll for ad valorem tax on all taxable property located within the
City of Cape Canaveral and is to be used for the City's fiscal year beginning October
1, 2007 and ending September 30, 2008.
Section 6. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its
adoption.
ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County,
Florida, this 31st day of Jam, 2007.
City of Cape Canaveral, Florida
City Council Special Meeting
July 31, 2007
Page 4 of 4
Mayor Randels pointed out that the City Treasurer included the Ad Valorem Tax history
and the Assessed Property Values and Ad Valorem Millage in the packet. Ms. Bowers
explained to Ms. Roberts how she calculated for the roll back rate. Mayor Randels
reminded that the millage decision could be overridden by a super -majority vote.
Ms. Bowers stated that the Library Ad Valorem was not adequate for the increased
insurance premium and the City would need to transfer from Reserves for that payment.
Ms. Bowers replied to Mr. Petsos that Reserve Funds were historically used for one-
time Capital. Ms. Bowers concluded that at this point the Library Ad Valorem would not
continue to cover its operating expenses; however, that was a decision for the Council.
Ms. Roberts asked if the Council was allowed to reallocate differently among the four Ad
Valorem rates. Ms. Bowers replied that the State did allow for a re -allocation. Mr.
Nicholas pointed out how any discussion related to re -allocation might lead to the
appearance of sacrificing the needs of one service over another. Ms. Roberts stated
that she brought up the point for discussion purposes only.
There was no public comment.
A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog to
Adopt Resolution No. 2007-18 to Establish the Tentative Proposed Millage Rate
for the Levy of Ad Valorem Taxes for FY 200712008. 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.
Rocky Randels, MAYOR
Susan Stills, CMC, City Clerk
Meeting Type: Regular
Meeting Date: OM9-07
AGENDA
Heading
Consent
Item
3
No.
Exhibits Attached:
AGENDA REPORT
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2007-19, APPOINTING A REGULAR MEMBER TO THE
BUSINESS & CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD
DEPT/DIVISION: LEGISLATIVE
Requested Action:
City Council consider the adoption of Resolution No. 2007-19 appointing Lt. Hugh Evans as a regular
member of the Business & Cultural Development Board.
Summary Explanation & Background:
Term will expire on June 1, 2010.
I recommend approval.
Exhibits Attached:
Resolution No. 2007-19
City Manager's_01fee
Department LEGISLATIVE
cape -n my c admin\cou Z\meeting\2007\08-09-07\2007-19.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-19
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, BREVARD COUNTY,
FLORIDA; APPOINTING A REGULAR MEMBER TO THE BUSINESS AND
CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL,
FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, has established by
Code Section 22-27, the Business and Cultural Development Board; and
WHEREAS, it is now incumbent upon the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral to
appoint a Second Alternate member to said Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cape
Canaveral, Florida, as follows:
SECTION 1. Lieutenant Hugh Evans is hereby appointed as a Regular Member of the
Business & Cultural Development Board of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, with a term to
expire on June 1, 2010.
SECTION 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, this go' day
of August, 2007.
Rocky Randels, MAYOR
ATTEST: FOR AGAINST
Bob Hoog
Leo Nicholas
Susan Stills, CITY CLERK Buzz Petsos
Rocky Randels
Shannon Roberts
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Anthony Garganese, CITY ATTORNEY
K:ICityClklResolutions\BOARDS1Appointments120071B&CD 2007-15 Regular Hughes.doc
City of Cape Canaveral
Business & Cultural Development Board
105 Palk Ave., PO Box 328
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920
July 19, 2007
ncil
City Atty. _
Pulp. Works Cir.
Dil
City of Cape Canaveral, fellow members, honorable mayor & city council & staff;
It has been a great honor & enriching experience to be on a board to serve
the greater good of the City of Cape Canaveral. I don't really want to relieve
myself of this duty, however I have come to a cross road, I may either chose to
be a citizen & stay to secure a professional career that certainly will require my
full attention ...or be forced to relocate. As many of the talented members of our
board are retired or employed ... I have yet to pay full attention to my (till 65 year
plan) of reestablishing a latten career. I was clearly premature in committing &
accepting this post. If I were to serve on the board with less than my full attention
it would be a disservice.
I could be partial, and this was the only board 1 opted for... but I feel the
efforts of the business & cultural development board are a vital contribution to the
VISION of what Cape Canaveral is, will & most certainly may be. I am choosing
the lesser of two goods, to remain a citizen of a unique & rich heritage of a small
corner of the world, I am thankful to call home. Unfortunately 1 must chose to pay
attention to the aspect of home. I will be more than happy to offer some volunteer
hours post my getting on my feet in some capacity. I apologize for a commitment
to something I knew uncertain at the time, but I have no regrets. I look forward to
the fruition of all the great plans we as the "redevelopment team" 07 have outline.
Respectfully,
Alison Spiesman
p.s. If I may, I will share the recent cards printed to continue to promote our city.
C/
Meeting Type: Regular
Meeting Date: 0"9-07
AGENDA
Heading
Consideration
Item
4
No.
Exhibits Attached:
AGENDA REPORT
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN ADOPT -A-
SHORE AGREEMENT FOR MANATEE PARK
DEPT/DIVISION: LEGISLATIVE
Requested Action:
City Council authorize Mayor Randels to execute an Adopt -A -Shore Agreement for Manatee Park,
designating the Residence Inn by Marriott as the sponsor.
Summary Explanation & Background:
This is a Keep Brevard Beautiful program. The term is for one year and can be renewed.
I recommend approval.
Exhibits Attached:
KBB Letter dated 7-17-07; Adopt -A -Shore Agreement
City Manager's Office
Department LEGISLATIVE
e-nt\kim\m encs\admin\council\meeting\2007\06-09-07\adoptshore.doc
Board of Directors
Ozella Bowvles
Patti Buchanan
Jo Compton
Ronald Cook
Dave Copp
Tom Daley
y, 2007
j7 July,
Duane DeFreese
Bill Ellis
Stephen Ellis
Bill Frederick
Mr. Rocky Randels _
Virginia Gaylor
Mayor
George Geletko
Judge Jack Griesbaum
p O Box 308.
Marg Hatina
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0308
Michael Hazlett
Tony Hernandez III
Pat Hogan
Dear Mr. Randels,
Debra Jenkins
Ede Luedke
Jack Masson
Enclosed please find a Litter Removal Agreement between Keep Brevard
Joe Matheny
Beautiful, Inc. and the Residence Inn by Marriott who have adopted the
Lillie McGhee
Manatee Park in Cape Canaveral through the Keep Brevard Beautiful, Inc.
Sherry McMaster
Bill Nichols
Adopt -A -Shore Program.
Lee Palmer
John Porter
Please review the agreement, and, if it is acceptable, return a signed copy of
Rocky Randels
Loren Rapport
each to me. If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you for your
Tommy Redmond
cooperation.
Arleen Rice
Leonard Sanderson, A
Jay Schenck
Sincerely,
Sandy Sharpe
Laurie Smirl
b
Robert Springer
Roger Travis
Barb, Verrato
Tom Wasdin
Environmental Programs Coordinator
Executive Director
Larry S Weber
Deputy Executive Director
Pat Brown
1620 Adamson Road
Cocoa, FL 32926 yt
321-631-0501
Fax 321-631-2840
vnvw.keepbr evar dbearrtifrrl. cora
KEEP
AMERIC4
BEAtMi.,
FROM KEEP BREVARD BEAUTIFUL_ (MON)JUN 25 2007 9:29/3T. 9:29/No.6661106044 P 2
Keep Brevard Beautiful, Inc.
Adopt -A -Shore Program
Litter Removal Agreement
Qvw
This Agreement, made and entered Into #his���` Oay of � a�
� by and between Keep Brevard
Beautiful, Inc„ hereinafter called KBB, the property owner Coge [fin nt4 hereinafter called PROPERTY
OWNER; the adopting SPONSORS; R u A i.,jc L kv'Jhereinafter called the SPONSOR, and the
CLEANUP TEAM; SAME
WITNESSETH: j�
WHEREAS, the following described property, shoreline Uem _a`j I'Var o ee f Qr k,, _ in
CA0,a, Carnyer&R has been identified for purposes of a litter reduction program.
WHEREAS, the property owner is authorized to contract with the private sector for performance of its
duties; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature through the Solid Waste Management Act of 1988 (F. S. 403.4131,
Section 55(i) has encouraged the implementation of litter removal programs such as Adopt -A -Shore.
WHEREAS, the SPONSOR is desirous of adopting the listed segment of shoreline property for the
purposes of litter removal,
NOW, THEREFORE, for the good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows:
I.
A. KEEP BREVARD BEAUTIFUL., ING., Shell:
1. Coordinate and administer the Adopt -A -Shore Program.
2. Provide sponsors with Program Guidelines and procedures, orientation and training,
recognition and incentives.
3. Arrange for installation of a sign at the designated cleanup site.
B. The PROPERTY OWNER shall;
1. Grant cleanup teams access to the property for litter reduction purposes.
2. Permit the installation of a sign at the designated cleanup site.
C. The SPONSOR and CLEANUP TEAM Shall.
1. Adopt a segment of shoreline for regular cleanups (a minimum of one per quarter).
2. Perform litter removal in strict compliance accordance with the safety requirements provided
by KBB as outlined in program guidelines.
3. Dispose of bagged trash properly (including separation of recyclable materials, if practical).
4. Provide adequate adult supervision H youths are involved in cleanup.
S. Appoint an adult Adopt -A -Shore representative of the SPONSOKFEEAM.
8. Complete and -send report forms to KBB within 10 days of cleanup.
7. Notify KBB of cleanup dates at least 7 days prior to cleanup.
S. Protect and respect all property and natural resources.
All parties of this agreement shall follow the Adopt -A -Shore Guidelines and Procedures established by
KBB.
The SPONSOR and CLEANUP TEAM covenant and agree that they will indemnify and hold harmless
the PROPERTY OWNER, KEEP BREVARD BEAUTIFUL, INC„ and its officers, agents and employees
from any claim, loss, damage, cost, charge or expense arising out of any act, action,
neglect or omission by the SPONSOR or CLEANUP TEAM during the performance of the agreement,
whether direct or indirect, and whether to any person or property to which the PROPERTY OWNER or
said parties may be subject, except that neither SPONSOR, CLEANUP TEAM nor any of their
members shall be liable under this provision for any damages arising out of injury or damage to
persons or property directly caused or resuiting from the sole negligence of the PROPERTY OWNER,
KBB, and its officers, employees or agents. This section does not constitute a waiver of any party's
FROM KEEP BREVARD BEAUTIFUL
(MON)JUN 25 2007 9:29/8T. 9:29/No.6661106044 P 3
sovereign immunity.
Ill.
This agreement shall remain in effect for a one-year period . This agreement may be renewed annually
upon request, with the agreement of all parties. Any Party may terminate this agreement for any
reason upon thirty (30) days notice to the other two parties.
IV.
The SPONSOR, PROPERTY OWNER, and KBB shall provide current addresses to each other and
any notices mailed to such addresses shall be effective under the terms of this agreement.
V.
This agreement is non -transferable and non -assignable in whole or in part without written consent of
the PROPERTY OWNER and KBB,
Yl.
The designated representative of KEEP BREVARD BEAUTIFUL, INC, shall decide all questions,
difficulties and disputes of any nature whatsoever that may arise under or by reason of this agreement,
the prosecution or fulfillment of the services hereunder and the character, quality, amount and value
thereof and his/her decisions upon all claims, questions and disputes shall be final and conclusive upon
the parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed, the day and
year first written above. They certify that they are familiar with the information contained in this
agreement and that theypossess the authority to execute this agreement. d
NAME OF SPONSOR di -5L(-4 I -S15
�T�►J
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE; C
TITLE! P S5k 5k 5 T, 4s..:;Z, 6 C".} tzar` MAtjfi Vz_ Date:
NAME OF CLEANUP TEAM: K." 10 i,.. -JCL (fj^' 3\1 M auz2,41-1—
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE; l -.-
TITLE: s " = t..1 Ul_ Date: 4 , 32 -40?
NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER;
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE:
TITLE: Date:
KEEP BREVARD BEAUTIFUL, INC.
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: VA7U'Z
TITLE; Environmental Programs Coordinator: Date: G /9-,2oo 7
Meeting Type: Regular
Meeting Date: 0"-07
AGENDA
Heading
Consideration
]tem
5
No.
2. City Code Section 22-46 - Appeals and Review
AGENDA REPORT
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: APPEAL OF COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD
DECISION ON REQUEST NO. 07-25, SIGN FOR ENTERPRSE RENT A CAR
DEPT/DIVISION: LEGISLATIVE
Requested Action:
City Council review and consider the appeal request made by Shannon Roberts of the Community Appearance
Board's approval on 07-16-07 of the sign for Enterprise Rent A Car.
Summary Explanation & Background:
Items included:
1. Shannon Roberts email of 07-24-07 requesting the appeal
2. City Code Section 22-46 - Appeals and Review
3. Draft minutes of the 07-16-07 Community Appearance Board of Request No. 07-25
4. Applicant's application
City Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Chapter 22-46 of the City code.
Exhibits Attached:
City Manager's!Tee
Department LEGISLATIVE
cape -n m m admin\co il\meeting\2007\08-09-07\07-25.doc
Pagw I of 1
Joy Lombardi
From: C. Shannon Roberts [csroberts@cfl.rr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 3:31 PM
To: stills-cape@cfl.rr.com
Cc: Todd Morley; lombardi-cape@cfl.rr.com
Subject: Appeal of Community Appearance Board Decision, July 16, 2007
Ms. Susan Stills
City Clerk
City of Cape Canaveral
Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920
Dear Ms. Stills:
In accordance with the City of Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, Chapter 22, Section 22-46, the purpose of
this correspondence is to request reconsideration of the Community Appearance Board's decision, July 16,
2007, regarding the proposed Enterprise rental car pole sign on AIA in the City of Cape Canaveral.
I understand that the Community Appearance Board was not made aware of several corporate alternatives +to
the proposed sign that might be more in keeping with our City's goals for appearance.
At the Community Appearance Board's meeting on Monday, July 16, 2007, the Board was made aware by the
applicant of a few Enterprise corporate options for the sign, which did not include a vertical sign. Since then, it
has come to our attention that there are several Enterprise vertical sign options which are available which
would be more compatible with the City's appearance goals, rather than the 3' x 15' sign which was decided
upon.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. If you have any questions or need additional information,
please feet free to contact me at: 321-784-3334, 321-615-1855 (cell), or csroberts cfl.rr.com.
Sincerely,
Shannon Roberts
703 Solana Shores Drive, #501
Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920
07/24/2007
ARTICLE III. COMMUNITY APPEARANCE REVIEW Page 1 of 1
Sec. 22-46. Appeals and review.
Any person(s) or the city aggrieved by a final decision rendered by the community appearance
board may appeal the decision to the city council in accordance with the following procedures. The
filing of an appeal under this section stays the action of the community appearance board until a
decision by the city council is rendered.
(a) The aggrieved party may, not later than ten calendar days after receiving notice of
final action by the community appearance board, file with the city clerk a written request
for an appeals hearing before the city council.
(b) If a written request is filed within the ten-day limit and as otherwise provided above,
the city council shall consider the request. The city council shall hear and make a
determination on the appeal within 30 days from the date the written request for an
appeal is received by the city clerk. The applicant shall be provided notice of the city
council hearing at least seven days prior to the council hearing.
(c) The city council shall hear and consider evidence offered by any interested person
to determine whether the community appearance board properly denied an application
for approval in accordance with the City Code and city comprehensive plan. The forma[
rules of evidence do not apply.
(d) The city council shall grant or deny the appeal by majority vote in accordance with
the council's quorum requirements contained in the City Charter. Failure to reach a
majority vote will result in denial of the appeal. Any dispute of fact must be decided on
the basis of a competent and substantial evidence. The decision of the city council is
final.
(e) Judicial review of any final decision under this article shall be available only after the
administrative procedures and remedies set forth in this section have been exhausted.
(Ord. No. 16-95, § 2, 12-19-95; Ord. No. 39-2003, § 2, 11-18-03)
http://Iibraryl.municode.com/mce/DocView/12642/l/89/92 8/2/2007
Community Appearance Board
Meeting Minutes
July 16, 2007
Page 2
3. Request No. 07-25 --- Sign (Enterprise Rent-A-Car)--- 6211 N. Atlantic Ave. — Carlos J.
Montanez, Applicant.
Carlos Montanez, representative for Enterprise Rent-A-Car, presented the submittal and
photos for the Board's review. Mr. Montanez stated that the proposed wall signs were
intended to represent a wrap around sign and should be considered one. Mr. Montanez
further stated that the proposed pole sign would be 4' x 20', not to exceed 30' in height,
and set back 6 feet from the property line. He explained that the old d sign would be
removed when the new pole sign is installed.
Following the review of the submittal and photographs, it
that there was too much signage for the property and
surrounding properties. Following discussion, the
choose between one of the two wall signs or if pp
postponed until the next meeting pending a revised r
of the Board
lent with the
L if he could
Kauest to be
Cindy Sherrod, representative for Enterp --Car,�ted to keep the sign on the
east side of the building and extending {st
north fascia band blacAwithand grthe Board to approve thenorth side of the builallowwhite and green decollow th
ussio
Ms. Jensen, to approve Request No. 07-25 with the
carried unanimously.
south, the entire length
with the height��
Motion
changes
There being
Approved on this
Joy Lombardi
Board Secretary
day of
h) e so and to be able to paint the
d 'pes. It was the consensus o£
ing ch ges: deny the signage from the
y the fascia to be painted black with the
ast side wall sign to be extended to the
ce the size of the ground sign to 3' x 15'
followed.
the meeting adjourned at 7:09 P.M.
Randy Wasserman
Chairperson
IIIYA
E
�F
CA
r
v,0
a
S, v
n n
r
a T�
tLA o
z
r r
L
o-0
D�
(;i Q
�m
mo
�>
z�
�O
0
`c
D
D � �
n
m
COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD
APPLICATION & GENERAL INFORMATION
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Type of Request: 511 -
Date Submitted: i 0 01
imp
Project Name (if Applicable): �n { r
Project Address:
Legal Description: Section Township aS ,
Range 3 F Lot(s) d G ) Block
ParceN - ou)m-0- oba�. c�
Subdivision:
Name(s) of Property Owner(s): �JaVAe-VIAV161,
Owner(s) Address: b"S cssc u r � cz c �r 31
Phone#: �alli sy � -99 L Fax#:
Applicant Name:A`T
Applicant Address:
Phone#: 90) - 3-)3 Fax#:
(Office Use Only)
Is application complete: (/e No
If no, date application returned to applicant:
Date/Time Board will consider request:. vl
Application Fee: t 3 Fee Pai /No
Application Revie ed by:�
Date Reviewed: 09
-3-01 0706'07 15".07 03406 PLU PLU
001�tlex
435.00
F
> .�
C4
,.°
a=te
0._
Xa)
cm
��ao
�o
y T
� L Q
L
=t
0-0 O.O'
Im E 0
Cam
N
� ., CL
m �
L
R 0
O
E+
r
0
=`r'•Cq
3
=
•� U
S -c
_
co
tm
W
01-1 G1
CD
"'
N y
LL
N'��,
-ci �
•� 0 d �
a ZO
0 ... U
O m
m M. O
O= t O
O
z O
WLL W =
C'} mom-
L
U
r
N
M
'a
F
CL
MI
R3 R3
W
RZ
Ml R3
CON
E2
OWN Cl Ml
Cl�C Q Qin
l
M!'RI
i�
ClR2
Q Cl Rx Ra
ClNTRA4 BLVD W CE RAL BLVD
RX
Q z SW
Cl R2
Cl R2 R2 ,r 1
CON =l ti Cl R2 o R3 ,
R2 92
� Q R2 a
x pug gy PUB
PU8
R3 � Q Q Cl � R2
CDN ru lC�a��
R2 R2 �
Cl
CDH
R2 R3
R3 RZ R2 R3
Cl IL2
R3 Cl El R2 Rz ❑�
R3
BANANA RIVER 092 ���Q s3 ATLANTIC OCEAN
ETSI �� f R2 R3�
BR91- fnn pm pUo A2 R2 R3
BR4� ¢ ��Q a R3
83
� 000
C2 o00 R3
BERID
PROPOSED « 0r--IF7/
FUTURE LAND USE
Cl COMMERCIAL
C2 COMMERCIAL/MANUFACTURING
M1 INDUSTRIAL
R1 RESIDENTIAL
R2 RESIDENTIAL
R3 RESIDENTIAL
PUB PUBLIC/RECREATION r
CON CONSERVATION AREA
A ARCHAELOGICAL SITE
1V yp E
V s
y� 1
SCALE: s
0 500 ICD O wteiuOeEnE
CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL
LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Figure 7-3
mai I[A-
Ivey, Harris & Walls, Inc.
RAIPE�10 • FJ+BeEF110 .lA1m�CAPE /W4EIB�t!
XB Nm 00401 *RIE: *,-a..
y4aw�wfuoy�uynvxI au��.yny6
i
� ~ � Al � Qr
Adl&
1P
INN MM
--,--.:--�, �„ ��, r
_ ,_w
C
Meeting Type: Regular
Meeting Date: 08-09-07
AGENDA
Heading
Site Plan
[tem
6
No.
dedication of the proposed relocated sewer main easement, as well as design and installation change orders for
AGENDA REPORT
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: MERMAID KEY SITE PLAN - 140 CONDOMINIUM UNITS
AND 25,800 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL
DEPTIDIVISION: GROWTH MANAGEMENTIP&Z
Requested Action:
City Council review and consider the approval of the Mermaid Key Site Plan - 140 condominium units and
25,800 square feet of commercial, as recommended by the Planning & Zoning Board, with seven conditions.
Summary Explanation & Background:
I want to suggest the following additional conditions: (1) the Unity of Title be prepared and executed on the
south commercial parcel and (2) all costs associated with the vacation of the existing sewer easement and the
dedication of the proposed relocated sewer main easement, as well as design and installation change orders for
the force main replacement project, be borne by the applicant.
Per Section 110-223(1), all conditions must be satisfied within 90 days of City Council's approval of the site
plan.
Apparently, the St. Johns River Water Management District has classified the pond area of the Mermaid Key
Site Plan as wetlands. Per Section 106-31, Mitigation - The approved mitigation plan shall become part of the
approved site plan. As of this date, I have no approved mitigation plan from the applicant; I have asked for
it.
Exhibits Attached:
(1) P&Z Recommendation Memo, (2) Site Plan Applications, (3) City Planner's Report, (4) Staff
Comments, (5) Site Plan - hand out, (6) St. Johns review comments, (7) Chapter 106 of the City
Code, (8) Letter from Consolidated Environmental. Engineering and (9) Elevations of Project - hand
out
City M s Office
Department GROWTH MGMT/P&Z
r
cape -nt\kim\ ents\admin\council\meeting\2007\08-09-07\mermaidkey.doc
Date: June 28, 2007
To: Bennett Boucher, City Manager
Susan Stills, City Cleric
From: Bea McNeely, Chairperson, Planning & Zoning Board
Re: Recommendation to City Council
Mermaid Key
Site Plan
At the Planning & Zoning Board meeting held on June 27, 2007, the Board
reviewed and held discussion regarding the proposed site plan for Mermaid Key.
During discussion, it was noted that the developer may need a unity of title
agreement to join the properties; and the city attorney advised that the sewer
easements would need to be vacated and approved by the City.
Martin Green, developer, presented architectural renderings of the project. He
advised that the Community Appearance Board reviewed the project in March,
2007 and approved the project, as presented.
Following discussion, by a unanimous vote, the Board recommended approval of
the site plan to the City Council, with the following conditions:
• The sewer line from the south commercial building needs an easement;
and the sewer line needs to be relocated to save a 20" tree.
• The lift station pump sequence shall be changed so an alarm is activated
if the liquid level rises above the lead pump "on" level and before the liquid
level reaches the lag pump "on" level.
• The north and south fountain details shall be redesigned, because the
present 18" dimensions are incorrect.
• Provisions shall be made for recycling containers at each dumpster site.
• A lighting plan for the streets and sidewalks shall be submitted and
approved by the City.
• A shared parking easement on the north parcel shall be approved by the
City.
• Cross access easements shall be provided on the north and south
parcels.
Please schedule this recommendation for an upcoming City Council meeting.
From:01TY CAPE CAhVERAL BLDi �EPT321 868 1247 02/08f200. X0:49 #119 P.001/008
CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL
SITE PLAN PAYMENT RECEIPT
Project Name: I - M(If J
RESIDENTIAL:,
1 2 & 3 Residential Units ....................TOTAL: $37.50
----_w_ _ is .....................
Total # of Units?
(4) or more Residential Units $50.00 (1st (4) Units),
$50.00
-
Plus Uzuts 0 $7.50 per unit $ ��
COMMERCIAL:
150 per acre of land, or portion thereof.
Acres X $150
TOTAL: ...............
SITE PLAN EXTENSION...................................................TOTAL:............,..,$x,,50.00
SITE PLAN RESUBMISSION: $0 % of original fee ......... TOTAL: ..............$
DEPOSIT TOWARDS REVIEW FEES:
_.. RESIDENTIAL:...__-_. I. to 4 -•[Traits- ............... ...... $700 . 00----___ _.. __. _..
Over 4 Units to 50 Liruts.................. $1,800.00
Over 50 Units ox Hotel/Motel ........ $2,800.00 _
COMMERCIAL: Up to 4 Acres...... I .......... $1,800mV
Over 4 up to 8 Acres.....$2,300.00
Over 8 Acres - Review fee to be established after pare -
application meeting based on hourly rates estimated in Exhibit A of City
Engineer contract.
A.
Total Acres: " �17
Office Use Ordy. Escmw Account # 1-202`2400 — —_ — �C 1.� CV
.. f
TOTAL, REVIEW DEPOSIT RECEIVED: ------------
TOTAL SITIE PLAN SUBMITTAL FEE RECEIVED: $
PAID RECEIPT NO. DATE RECV'D
DeyO,si� 4 q, bOO. Da POP, ? i�� —,
.q'OW. 4005A31t5loi tucvd � I-67
600,cJzoj � _ -1-75. --rn0)err i R "f1��'07 J
-� ? � . .� � 3� SGS s.-��-�� � j `, .�•,
FROM :CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL FAX NO. :321 868 1247 Jan. 12 2805 11:37AM P1
CITY OP CAPE CA NAVERAL
SITE PLAN PAYMENT RECEIPT
Project Name: Greene Building - S.K. A -1-A
RESIDENTIAL:
ONt77 ,
1, z & 3 Residential Units .............................................TOTAL: $37.50
Total # of Units?
(4) or more Residential Units $50.00 (1st (4) Units), 50.00
Plus Urtits 0 $7.50 per unit $
Total: $
COMMERCIAL•
$150 per acre of Iand, or portion thereof
1.08 Acres X $150 TOTAL: ............... $-
300.QQ
SITE PLAN EXTENSION •...... ...........T
................................. OTAL:................$150.00
SITE PLAN RESUf3MI5S.iON: 50% of Original fee .......TOTAL:........
DEPOSIT WARDS REVIEW FEES:
RESIDENTIAL: 1 to 4 Units .....................
. $700.00
Over 4 Units to 50 Units .................. $1,800.00
Over 50 Units or Hotel/Motel ........ $2,800 .00
COMMERCIAL: Up to 4 Acres.......... �
Over 4 up to 8 Acres.... 42j300.00
Over 8 Acres - Review fee to be established after pre -
application meeting based on hourly rates estimated in Exhibit A of City
Engineer contract.
Total Acres: 1.08 ac.
Office Use Only: Escrow Account # 1-202.240Q
TOTAL REVIEW DEPOSIT RECEIVED:
TOTAI, SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL FEE RECEIVED:
PAID RECEIPT NO. DATE_ RECV'D _
0 5sra 2
30c), CO
-- q�ftler Leif 5j31IDl
tcoo
From:CITY CAPE CANAVERAL BLDG. DEPT321 868 1247
02/08/2007 00:50 #119 P.003/008
FEB: .
PROJZCT NiAyFE:
LEG; DESCRIpTIO�i,:
DRESS:
�,/G /ni�
PEaOi7E i�iBER: �J�>' 7'9
ll -A.1 -IE UE RCjUTECT/E-,-GL's-Z.ER:
' PPLICA—N-T. S S7GtiA727
OW -.N -ER Op, A )ENT
)s
City of Cape Canaveral
Site Plan
Mermaid Key
Applicant: Mermaid Key, LLC
Location: Range: 37 Township: 24 Section: 15
Total Acreage: North Parcel 7.59 +/- Acres, Residential (7.283 ac),
Commercial (0.307)
South Parcel 3.52 +I- Acres, Residential (2.45 ac),
Commercial (1.07)
Permitted 15 DU per acre:
Proposed Number of Units:
Proposed Density:
Current Future Land Use:
Current Zoning:
North. Parcel —109 units
South Parcel — 36 units
North Parcel —108
South Parcel - 32
North Parcel — 14.8 DU/AC
South Parcel — 13.1 DU/AC
Residential R-3 / Commercial C-1
Residential R-3 / Commercial C-1
Description:
The applicant proposes to build 140, condo units and 25,776 square feet of office, retail
and restaurant space on two parcels totaling approximately 11.11 acres of land. The
maximum proposed heiglits for the proposed structures is 45 feet. The subject site is
located south of Thurm Boulevard and west of State Rout A -1-A.
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
North
I South
East
West
Zoning
C-1 Commercial
R-3 Residential
C-1 Commercial
R-3 Residential
Comp PIan
C -I Commercial
R-3 Residential
C4 Commercial
R-3 Residential
Existing
Commercial /
Multi Family /
.. Commercial
Single Family
Conditions
Blarney 67 INC
Condos
Residential /
Discovery Bay
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
AIA is operating at Level of Service "A" with 283 available peak hour trips between
North City Limits to Central Blvd. AIA from Central Blvd to North Atlantic has a level
of Service is "A" with 325 excess trips. The residential portion of the site could generate
91 weekday PM peak hour trips. A more complete traffic study is required at the time of
site plan submittal to realize the potential commercial/office trip generation..
The City of Cape Canaveral provides .wastewater treatment. The wastewater treatment
capacity is 1.8 miIIion 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 140
households, X's 118; the projected demand for the proposed development is
approximately 38,822 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. At 264 X's 140 households; the projected demand for the proposed project is
36,960 gallons per day of potable water. 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 Canaveral Complex, gently undulating (Ca) soil type. Canaveral Complex
consists of nearly level and gently sloping soils that are mixtures of sand and shell
fragments. 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 population at 2.35 person per unit at 140 units is 333 potential new persons to the
City.
Memorandum
To: Todd Morley, Building Official
From: Todd Peetz, City Planner
Date: June 18, 2007
Re: Mermaid Key Site Plan
I have reviewed the Mermaid Key Site Plan and have the following
comments;
1. Please provide permit for vacation of the 10' wide sewer easement
when available.
2. It appears that the latest submitted site plan depicts a change on
the 6' deck on the commercial building located on the south parcel
(Sheet (2 of 5 of the South Parcel Landscaping plan). With the
recent change, the deck now appears to encroach 2 '/2 feet into the
front setback from A -1-A. This encroachment issue shall be
addressed during the building permitting process.
The following conditions of approval shall be applied to the subject site:
a) A shared parking access easement shall be granted for
overflow parking of the commercial use, into the residential
parking area of the condo units. The shared parking access
easement shall apply to both the north parcel.
b) A cross access easement shall be granted for the both north
and south parcels. The easement will allow access from
State Route A -1-A through the commercial portion of the
south parcel so that access may be gained to the residential
portion of the site.
If you have any questions, or need further information please feel free to
contact me at 407-629-8880.
1 -&V 1 VL 4
Todd Peetz
From: John Cunningham Dcuriningham@ccvfd.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 10:45 AM
To: Todd Peetz
Subject: Re: Mermaid Key (5th site Plan) .
Todd,
We have reviewed the site pan and have no comments at this time.
Under Florida Statute 668.6076, email addresses are public records. If you do not want your
email address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail
to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing.
This message contains information which may be privileged, confidential, or otherwise
protected from disclosure and is intended only for the individual(s) named. If you are not an
addressee; any disclosure, copy, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is
prohibited.
If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the sender by reply e--
mail and destroy the original message and all copies.
Messages sent to and from us may be monitored.
(V -1e)
6/20/2007
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Peetz
City Planner
FROM: Jeff Ratliff
Stormwater Administrator
City of Cape Canaveral
868-1240
DATE: 06/18/07
RE: Mermaid Key — St" Submittal
Public Works staff has reviewed the referenced site plan and has no continents. Previous
stormwater and sanitary sewer easement issues have been addressed in this version of the site
plan.
06/19f2007 20:30
June 20, 2007
321--783-7565
Mr. Todd Peetz
Miller -Legg & Associates
631 South Orlando Avenue
Suite 200
Winter Park, FL 32789
RE: Site Plan - Mermaid Key - Review #5
SSA Job No. 05-0025, Task 046-1004
Dear Mr. Peetz:
5TOTTLER
SSA has reviewed the above -referenced project and based on our review, SSA
recommends said plan for City approval.
PAGE 02
This review does not relieve thla applicant from other local, state, and federal agencies
having jurisdiction over the project site. Should you have any questlons regarding this
letter, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Stottler Stagg & Associates
Architects, Engineers, Planners, Inc.
John A. Pekar, PE
Sr. Vice President - City Engineer
City Engineer's Review Fee For Review #5 - $190.00
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.
SIbTILER STAGG & ASSaCIATFS ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS, INC,
8680 North Atlantic Avenue P. O. Box 1630 C C
aPe enaveral. Florida 32920 Tel 321-783.1320 Fax 3214M,7065
J:.CiSPLiF�ni llC�sPEymerme4dkey revfew5APPRONE.doe uC#AAC006329 #EH0600762 #LB000600
k
St.
River
Water Management District
Kirby B. Green Ill, E.. ' a Director • J&n R. W*k, Assistant EMUU" DiM= - )hike 5�ayton, Deputy Facacutive DsMM
John Jumanna, Palm Bay Service Center Director, Regulatory
525 Community College Parkway S.E. - Palm Bay, FL 32908 - (321) 984-4940
February 14, 2007
CERTIFIED NO. 7006 0100 0002 4962 530.1
Richard J. Kern, P.E.
R.K. Engineering
385 Pineda Court, Suite 200
Melbourne, FL 32440
Re: Mermaid Key
Application No. 40-009-109402-1
(Please reference the above number on_an_y_submit
Dear Mr. Kern:
The 5t. Johns River Water Management District has received your Standard Environmental
Resource Permit application. Upon preliminary review of the proposed project, the following
technical information is required to sufficiently review the possible impacts the project may have
on the surrounding area. This information is being requested pursuant to the authority vested in
the St. Johns River Water Management District under subsection 373.413(2), Florida Statutes
(F. S.), and sections 40C-4.101 and 40C-4.301, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.).
1. Please submit three copies of draft Articles of Incorporation and Declaration of
Covenants and Restrictions, which establish the entity to be responsible for the
operation and maintenance of the proposed stormwater management system.
Please incorporate the District's recommended language in the requested
documents. These documents will be reviewed and you will be notified whether they
are acceptable for recording. Please be advised, these documents must be received
and approved prior to permit issuance. [40C-42.027 (4), F.A.C.]
2. Please submit a topographic survey signed and sealed by a Professional Land
Surveyor, registered in the State of Florida. The application packet submitted on
,July 26, 2006 did not include a survey with the sign and seal of the Professional
Land Surveyor. [40C42.025 (10), F.A.C.]
3. Please provide an additional fifty percent of the required treatment volume and
permanent pool volume for direct discharge to Outstanding Florida Waters. 140C-
42.026 (4) (k), F.A.C.]
4. The Stormwater Management Report lists Appendix C as the Soils Investigation.
Appendix C appears to be omitted from the report. Please submit the geotechnical
report associated with this project. [40C-42.023, F.A.C.]
GOVERNING BOARD
Duane ottenstraer, r MMAN Ometrias D. Long, WE GlA WM1 R. Clay Albright, SEGRErAw David G. Graham. TF EwIPER
ANCKSOWUE APOPU FAST LAKMER JACKSONW-LE
W. Michael Branch Jeff K. Jennings yYfi 'yam Kerr Ann 7. Macre Cat"ine A. Walker
FERNANDFA MAN MAM AND MELa0URNE BEACH SUNW- A:7AVO M SPRMS
5. The Stormwater Management Report lists Appendix B as the Pre -Development
ICPR Models (Mermaid Key South). This entire section of the report appears to
have been omitted from the report. Please include this information in the next
submittal. 140C-42.023, F.A.C.]
6. Please summarize all wetlands and surface waters within the project boundaries,
and all proposed work within wetlands and other surface waters on Table is
Weiland and Other Surface Wafer Summary of Section E of the ERP application.
Please also complete Table 2: Project On -Site Mitigation or Table 3: Project Off -Site
Mitigation for mitigation proposed under this application. [40C-4.101, F.AC]
7. On your plans and a recent aerial photograph please clearly show the limits and
acreages of all wetlands and other surface waters within the project boundaries, and
clearly show all proposed work in wetlands or other surface waters. The limits of
work in wetlands or other surface waters should be delineated by cross -hatching,
shading, or similar notation. [40C-4.301(1), 40C -4.302(1)(a), F.A.C. and 12.0, A.H.]
8. District stats conducted an initial site review on February 7, 2007 with Dan Mestayer
and Tim Scott from Consolidated Environmental Engineer, Inc and Mike lltiller,
project contractor. The purpose for the inspection was to review the current site
conditions, and to determine if impacts proposed to the onsite pond would require
mitigation. Please note that unless the pond qualified for the criteria described
under Section 12.2.2.2 of the Applicant's Landbook, impacts to this system would
require compliance with all of the environmental review criteria in Section 12.0 A.H.
Based on a review of aerial photographs, it appears that this pond was originally
constructed through wetlands. In addition, the pond is currently functioning as an
open water system with a dense sawgrass fringe. Please be advised that if the project
will result in impacts to this system, you must demonstrate satisfaction of the
applicable criteria for Elimination and Reduction of Impacts (Section 12.2.1),
Secondary and Cumulative Impacts (Sections 12.2.7 and 12.2.8, respectively), and
provide appropriate mitigation to offset any unavoidable adverse impacts to wetland
functions. [40C-4.301(1), 40C-4.302, F.A.C. and Section 12.0, A.H.]
9. During the initial site review, it was determined that the project consists of onsite
wetlands (mangrove fringe) and other surface waters (sawgrass pond), which have
not been previously delineated. After the wetlands and other surface waters within
the project area have been delineated, please contact Elois Lindsey at (321) 576-6618
to schedule a site visit. The purpose for the site visit will be to assess the functions
and boundaries of all wetlands and other surface waters within the project area.
PIease be advised that, upon District approval of the wetland lines, the boundaries
of wetlands must be surveyed. [40C-4.301(1.), 40C -4.302(1)(x), F.A.C. and 12.0, A.H.]
10. Please provide the following additional details on the construction plans [40C -
4.301M, 4OC-4.302, F.A.C.]:
a. Clearly show the limits of the existing bulkbead/seawall along the shoreline
and the location(s) for any newly proposed seawall.
b. Provide appropriate cross-sections of any work proposed within or adjacent
to the shoreline wetland, and for any work proposed within the existing pond.
c. Please clearly show the limits of the decorative wall along the southern
property boundary. On the western end, will the wall stop at the top of bank
of the shoreline, or extend through the shoreline?
d. Please provide additional details on the erosion control plans that
demonstrate that the project will not result in a discharge of turbid water
offsite. Staff recommends the use of separate cells within the settling basin
and hay bales on the south side prior to discharge. On the north side, staff
recommends hay bales and/or an upland cut sodded swale to capture
sediments from pond #1 prior to discharging into the canal. In addition, staff
recommends that additional floating turbidity barriers be utilized in the
canal to trap sediments prior to discharge offsite. This or another method is
necessary to demonstrate that the project will not result in impacts to the
water quality of the canal and nearby Aquatic Preserve.
11. It appears that the current project design does not provide adequate upland buffers
adjacent to the shoreline wetlands. The lack of adequate upland buffers has the
potential to result in additional secondary impacts to these wetlands that may
require mitigation. In order to demonstrate that the project will not result in
additional secondary impacts to the shoreline wetlands, we recommend the following
(or similar) design changes [12.2.7, A.H.j:
a. Where possible, provide an upland buffer with a minimum width of 15 feet,
and an average width of 25 feet. Please note that staff previously confirmed
that this site had been cleared without the proper regulatory permits. Since
staff was not able to assess the quality of the upland buffers prior to the
clearing activity, staff will require that any disturbed upland buffers be
restored.
b. Provide adequately detailed cross sections of proposed upland buffers.
c. If, after satisfying the criteria for elimination and reduction of impacts, it is
not possible to provide a minimum 15 -foot, average 25 -foot upland buffer,
please provide a buffer of a maximum width that is feasible and provide
appropriate plantings of transitional or upland vegetation in areas as wide as
feasible on the fill slopes adjacent to or encroaching into wetlands.
d. If possible, please provide for swales between the development and the
shoreline wetlands to treat stormwater runoff prior to discharge into the
wetlands. Please provide adequately detailed cross sections of such areas.
12. Please note that the applicant must provide reasonable assurance that the shoreline
wetlands and associated upland buffer will not be adversely impacted by incidental
encroachment or secondary activities (trimming, etc) which might compromise the
wetland value. Please describe the methods that you propose to implement to satisfy
this requirement_ District staff recommends that both shorelines be placed under a
conservation easement and that informational signs be installed along the shoreline
every 100 feet advising residents of the preserved area. Additional information may
be required upon review of your response. 112.3.5, A.H.]
13. The environmental report submitted with the application was prepared in
September, 2003 by Bussen-Mayer Engineering Group, and does not include the
southern portion of the proposed project area. In addition, site conditions have
changed since the report was prepared. Please provide an updated environmental
assessment report, prepared by a qualified environmental consultant, and that is
consistent with the criteria described under Section 12.0 of the Applicant's
Handbook and Section 62.345, F.A.C. The report should include a current, detailed
description of all wetlands, other surface waters, and uplands within the project
boundaries. This description must address the habitat types, the dominant
vegetative species, types and degree of invasion by nuisance species, underlying
soils, hydrological characteristics, wildlife observed during a recent wildlife survey
and reasonably expected to utilize the wetlands (including listed species) and overall
habitat functions and quality of the wetlands in relation to the surrounding on-site
and off-site wetlands, surface waters, upland buffers, and other land uses. [40C-
4.301(1), 40C-4.302(l)(a), F.A.C. and 12.0, A.H.]
14. What is the intended use of the existing dock? Are any modifications to the existing
dock proposed? Are any new docks or piers proposed along the canal? Please
provide details and copies of any permits obtained for the existing dock, and
provide adequate details for any newly proposed structures along the canal. [40C-
4.301(i)(d), F.A.C., 12.2.1, and 12.3.5, A.H.]
15. Please be advised that a copy of your application has been sent to the Division of
Historical Resources to determine whether your project is located in the vicinity of a
registered archaeological site. The District is awaiting comments in which we may
request additional information based on the Division's recommendations. If your
project is determined to be located in the vicinity of archaeological or historical
resources, you must provide assurances to demonstrate that the archaeological or
historic site will be avoided and the project will not result in adverse impacts to
archaeological resources or historical properties. j40C-4.302(1)(a) 6., F.A.C.,
12.2.3(f) and 12.2.7(c), A.H.]
Note: Your project, as currently designed, will result in impacts to wetlands that, according
to the criteria in Chapter 12 of the Applicant's Handbook, require mitigation. Your
current application does not include a mitigation plan to offset these impacts. In order for
staff to recommend approval of your application, please provide an appropriate mitigation
proposal, in accordance with Section 12.3 in the Applicant's Handbook, that adequately
offsets the loss of wetland functions due to the proposed impacts.
Note: The proposed activities will include outfall pipes into a canal that is utilized by
manatees. Please note that District staff has solicited comments from the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission regarding the potential impact that the project could
have on manatees. Additional information may be required upon receipt of comments from
their office. Please also note that any additional work proposed in the canal will require
review by their office.
Note: If staff determines that the project will result in more than 1.0 acre of impacts to
wetlands or other surface waters, the project will be upgraded to the status of an Individual
Environmental Resource Permit. If the project is upgraded to an Individual ERP, an
additional application fee will be required and the project will require review and approval
by the District's governing board.
Please be aware, that suggestions or other direction provided by District staff are offered to assist
applicants in complying with District rules. However, applicants bear the burden of
demonstrating that their application meets the applicable rule requirements. Although District
staff may provide suggestions to applicants that would allow staff to recommend approval of an
application to the District Governing Board or senior staff, the,inal decision regarding the
issuance or denial of a permit is up to the District Governing Board or senior staff. Applicants
are hereby advised that the Governing Board and senior staff are not bound by previous
statements or recommendations of District staff regarding an application.
If the applicant wishes to dispute the necessity for any information requested on an application
form or in a letter requesting additional information, he or she may, pursuant to section 373.4141,
F.S., request that District staff process the application without the requested information. If the
applicant is then unsatisfied with the District's decision regarding issuance or denial of the
application, the applicant may request a section 120.569, F -S., hearing pursuant to chapter 28-106
and section 40C-1.1007, F.A. C.
Please be advised, pursuant to subsection 40C-1.1005, F.A. C., the applicant shall have 120 days
from receipt of a request for additional information regarding a permit or license application
undergoing review by the District to submit that information to the District. if an applicant
requires more than 120 days in which to complete an application, the applicant may notify the
District in writing of the circumstances and for good cause shown, the application shall beheld in
active status for additional periods commensurate with the good cause shown. Any application
which has not been completed by the applicant within the given time period following a request
for additional information by the District shall be recommended for denial at the next regularly
scheduled Board meeting. Denial of an application due to failure to submit requested additional
information shall be a denial without prejudice to the applicant's right to file a new application.
In addition, no construction shall begin on the proposed project until a permit is issued by the St.
Johns River Water Management District. This is pursuant to subsection 40C-4.041(1), F.A.C.,
which states in relevant part, "... unless expressly exempt an individual or general environmental
resource permit must be obtained from the District under chapters 40C-4, 40C-40, 40C-42, 40C-
44 or 40C-400, F.A.C. prior to the construction, alteration, operation, maintenance, removal or
abandonment of any dam, impoundment, reservoir, appurtenant work or works...".
If you have any questions, please contact Elois Lindsey at (321) 676-6618 or Greg Pincelli at
(321) 409-2107.
Sincerely.
�ILI 7K
Elois Lindsey, R story Scientist U
Department of Water Resources
Greg Pincelli—,Zngineer
Department of Water Resources
cc: PDS/RAIL, John Juilianna, Susan Moor, Fariborz Zanganeh
Martin Greene - Mermaid Key, LLC
6500 N. Atlantic Ave, Ste. C
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920
Dan Mestayer - Consolidated Environmental Engineering, Inc.
245 East Drive, Ste. 103
Melbourne, FL 32904
ARTICLE II. WETLANDS PROTECTION*
ARTICLE 11. WETLANDS PROTECTION*
*Cross references: Code enforcement, § 2-246 et seq.; planning, ch. 58.
State law references: Protection of wetlands, F.S. § 403.99 et seq.
Sec. 106-26. Definitions.
Page 1 of 4
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Best management practices means those practices as developed by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, state department of agriculture or other appropriate agency.
Forestry means the science, application and practice of controlling the establishment,
composition and growth of forests through sound management techniques, based upon the
management objectives of the owner.
Isolated wetlands means wetlands which are not hydrologically connected to a surface water
body and which may only be inundated on a seasonal basis. Included would be perched wetlands,
among others.
Mitigation means actions taken to offset the adverse effects of the loss of wetlands.
Release means any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging,
injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping or disposing of hazardous materials, including the abandonment
or discarding of barrels, containers or other receptacles containing hazardous materials, into the
environment, in such a manner as to endanger the public health, safety or welfare or the environment
or in violation of any federal, state or local law, including rules or regulations.
Waters -edge wetlands means wetlands which have a surface water connection to a surface
water body. Any canal, ditch, swale, channel, culvert, pipe, stream, river, slough or other water body will
be considered a surface water connection. It is not essential that the water flow be uniform or
uninterrupted. Water from natural springs will be classified as surface water if it emanates from the
spring onto the earth's surface.
Wetland boundary means the boundary of a wetland as determined by the criteria contained in
the Management and Storage of Surface Waters Handbook of the St. Johns River Water Management
District.
Wetland function means that characteristic of a wetland determined by its ability to provide:
(1) A diversity of habitat and food sources for aquatic and wetland -dependent species,
for the threatened and endangered species and for species of special concern;
(2) Flood storage capacity;
(3) For the protection of downstream and offshore water resources from siltation and
pollution; or
(4) For the stabilization of the water table.
Wetlands means hydrologically sensitive areas identified by being inundated or saturated by
surface water or groundwater with a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps,
http://libraryl.municode.com/mcc/DocView/12642/l/250/252 8/2/2007
ARTICLE II. WETLANDS PROTECTION* Page 2 of 4
marshes, bogs and similar areas.
(Code 1981, § 667.03)
Cross references: Definitions and rules of construction generally, § 1-2.
Sec. 906-27. Purpose and intent.
It is the purpose and intent of this article to protect, preserve and enhance, where feasible, the
natural functions of wetlands within the city. It is also the intent of this article to apply the standards for
development in this article in and adjacent to wetlands.
(Code 1981, § 667.01)
Sec. 106-28. Development requiring site plan or subdivision plat.
The following shall apply to development requiring a site plan or a subdivision plat in or adjacent
to wetlands:
(1) Wetlands which require a St. Johns River Water Management District permit are
exempt from subsections (2), (3), (4) and (5) of this section.
(2) During the review of development plans, the building official, the city engineer or
other city agents shall use the national wetlands inventory maps, the county soil survey,
aerial photography, applicant -provided information or other applicable data to determine
the existence of wetlands on or adjacent to the site.
(3) If these materials indicate that wetlands may exist on or adjacent to the property, a
site inspection will be performed by the city engineer or a qualified subcontractor to
determine if wetlands are present and, if so, the wetlands boundaries.
(4) Based on this assessment, the city engineer shall make recommendations for
development within or adjacent to the wetlands and for required mitigation, if any,
consistent with this article.
(5) The building official, city engineer or other city agents shall conduct a site visit with
the developer or developer's representative and locate the wetlands boundaries or will
provide the developer with a photocopy of an aerial photograph or map of the area with
the wetlands boundaries clearly marked, whichever is available. The city will not provide
a survey of the wetlands boundaries.
(Code 1981, § 667.05)
Sec. 106-29. Permitted uses.
(a) The following uses shall be permitted, provided they do not adversely affect the functions of
wetlands within the city:
(1) Agricultural and forestry operations utilizing best management practices.
(2) Recreation.
(3) Fish and wildlife management.
(4) Open space.
(b) As an alternative to filling, isolated wetlands may be utilized within the surface water
management system of a project as approved by the city.
http:l/Iibraryl.municode.com/mcc/DocView/12642/l/250/252 8/2/2007
ARTICLE II. WETLANDS PROTECTION*
Page 3 of 4
(c) Maximum residential density within all waters -edge wetlands and isolated wetlands larger
than one acre shall be one dwelling unit per 2 112 acres.
(d) All subdivision plats and multi -family residential plans shall be reviewed by the building
official or the city engineer to determine utilization or protection of wetlands during plat or site
plan review.
(e) Any allowed filling of wetlands shall be limited to the structural building area requirements,
the 100 -year flood elevation requirement for first floor elevations and a single primary access to
the on-site structures. The amount of fill and the extent of the filled area shall be the minimum
required to accomplish these purposes.
(f) Any person or developer submitting a site plan or subdivision plat for review pursuant to this
article shall submit the site plan or subdivision plat to the St. Johns River Water Management
District for concurrency evaluation of the impact of the site plan or subdivision plat on wetlands.
No building permit or development permit shall be issued unless the St. Johns River
Management District has made a determination in the concurrency evaluation process that the
proposed development does not require a St. Johns River Water Management District permit
and that the proposed development does not cause a loss of wetlands in the city. If a proposed
development will cause a loss of wetlands in the city, the St. Johns River Water Management
District shall make a determination that proposed mitigation meets the requirements of section
106-31, before any building permit or development permit shall be issued.
(Code 1981, § 667.07; Ord. No. 4-92, § 2, 5-5-92)
State law references: Dredge and fill regulations, permits, F.S. § 403.801 et seq.
Sec. 106-30. Prohibited uses.
(a) All development, except as provided in section 106-29, shall be prohibited in wetlands
unless:
(1) Access to the water is required through waters -edge wetlands;
(2) The activity has no feasible alternative location;
(3) The activity does not impair the function of the wetland; or
(4) The activity enhances the function of the wetland.
(b) Commercial and industrial uses shall not be permitted in wetlands.
(c) Disposal of solid or liquid wastes and applying or storing pesticides and herbicides shall be
prohibited in any wetland.
(d) Public facilities shall not be located within wetlands unless the following conditions apply:
(1) The facilities are water -dependent, such as mosquito control facilities;
(2) The facilities are water -related, such as boat ramps, docks or surface water
management facilities;
(3) The facilities are not adversely affected by periodic flooding or standing water;
(4) The building structures are floodproofed and located above the 100 -year flood
elevation or removed from the floodplain by appropriately constructed dikes or levees; or
(5) The facilities are found to be in the public interest and there is no feasible
alternative location.
(Code 1981, § 667.09)
http://libraryl.municode.com/mcc/DocView/12642/11250/252 8/2/2007
ARTICLE II. WETLANDS PROTECTION*
Sec. 106-31. Mitigation.
Page 4 of 4
Any development in wetlands shall provide for the replacement of lost wetlands caused by the
project. Mitigation shall occur at a ratio of two units of replacement wetlands for each one unit or
fraction thereof of lost wetlands (a 2:1 ratio). Mitigation should generally be in-kind and on-site;
however, alternative wetland community types and mitigation sites may, at the sole option of the city,
be considered in lieu of in-kind and on-site mitigation if the latter is not a practical option. If mitigation
inthis manner is not feasible, then such practices as land banking and wetland enhancement may be
considered. All such proposed mitigation shall be reviewed and approved by the city engineer prior to
the issuance of a development order for the project. The approved mitigation plan shall become a part
of the approved site plan or subdivision plat. Mitigation methods, as delineated in the Management and
Storage of Surface Waters Handbook of the St. Johns River Water Management District, shall be used,
as appropriate.
(Code 1981, § 667.11)
http://Iibraryl.municode.com/mee/DoeView/12642/l/250/252 $1212007
r% i% U IC/ r {mt J1lL-JU-LUUt L1'IU11J IU• JU
FROM :CONSOLIDATED ENVIRONMENTAL ENG FAX NO. :3219519667
Consolidated
Environmental
Engineering
Biologist-Chelnists-Engineers-Archaeofogists-Contractors
July 30, 2007
Mr. Martin Crreene
Greene international
5604 N. Atlantic Avenue
Cocoa Beach, FT. 32931
RE: Mermaid Key
Dear Mr. Greene,
JLr7Jr9UUr
r. UUL
Jul. 30 2007 11:01AM P2
245 East Drive Suite 103
Melbourne. F1.. 32904
Phone: (321) 951-3830
I.�ax: (322 1) 951-9667
e-mail: ceeinc@belIsouth.net
welt page: hit ://ceefl.com
Certified Building Contractor
License Number— CBC 1253487
Following are the proposals to the St. Johns River Water Management District detailing the removal of
the nuisance species and the mitigation for the impacts to the shoreline mangroves in the Ibrm of a
planting plan.
Regarding the mangroves on-site and theix proposed disposition, T have created an inventory of the
foliage that currently exists along the banks of the drainage canal. Enclosed are summaries of the north
side and south side shorelines. These summaries show the inventory of the existing foliage on the
shoreline including both the mangroves and the Nuisance species (Survey Data).
7 -he recommended actions are define as removal of the nuisance species using chait7 saw acid hand
cutting; followedby pulling the debris into the uplands for disposal. 35% of the mangroves are to be
left as is. !hese are indicated by the "No Trim" designation. 65% of the mangroves are eligible for
trimming. Trimming will be conducted in accordance with the 1996 Mangrove Trimming and
Preservation Act.
For mitigation, sixty-one (6 1) one -gallon n,.aingroves are proposed; twenty-eight (28) on the north side
and thirty-three (33) on the south side. This represents one (1) tree per Fifteen (15) feet ofexposed
shoreline. These will be planted during year I aad monitored for 80% survivorship for an additional
three (3) years. The mangroves will be a mixture of lied, Black ftnd White, based on availability. The
mangroves are to be planted consistent with the elevation of the existing mangroves oji. the shoreline.
Rh UOLCJ 1 1144 JUL-JV-LUU I kI'IVI$ j 1 1 . LJ JL 1 7J r ] U U I r, VUL
FROM :CONSOLIDATED ENUIRONMENTAL ENS FAX NO. :3219519667 Jul. 38 2007 11:22AM P2
d d
The amount of nuisance species identified during the survey can be summarized as follows. On the
south side, the shoreline is 537 feet long. 50 feet is impacted by mangroves or 9.3% and 487 feet is
impacted by nuisance species or 90.7%. On the north side the shoreline is 721 feet long. 307 feet is
impacted by mangroves or 42.5% and 414 feet is impacted by nuisance species.
This will result in a much improved shoreline free from non-native/nuisance vegetation. Furthermore,
no docks, piers or other water access points are proposed for the devel.poment, nor will the canal he
modified or impacted during the construction of Mermaid Key. The existing wetland shoreline will
remain as a buffer between the upland development and the existing drainage canal.
This summarizes our proposed impacts to the shore of the drainage canal and th.e proposed mitigation
for these impacts.
Vm
ely,
yr
Senior Scienti