Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 10 2016 BOA Agenda w Council0YOF SE�T�N HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2016 - 6:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA ALL AGENDA ITEMS MAYBE INSPECTED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA OR ON THE CITY WEBSITE Procedures for Public Input are on Back of Agenda 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. INVOCATION — Pastor Dave Newhart, St. Elizabeth's Episcopal Church 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Led by the Mayor 4. ROLL CALL 5. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS Modifications and additions require unanimous vote of City Council members 6. PROCLAMATIONS, AWARDS, BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENTS Presentations of proclamations, certificates and awards, and brief timely announcements by Council and Staff. No public input or action under this heading. 16.135 A. Employee Health, Dental, and Vision Presentation by the Gehring Group (Transmittal, PowerPoint) B. Brief Announcements i. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Tortoise Workshop — August 18 from 9:00 a.m. to noon in Council Chambers 7. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND CONVENE AS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A. Call to Order and Roll Call B. Approval of Minutes — March 23, 2016 C. Quasi -Judicial Hearings: Adopted Quasi -Judicial Public Hearing Procedures: -Chairman (Mayor) opens hearing -Attorney reads ordinance or resolution or title of item -BCA (City Council Members) disclose ex -parte communication -City Clerk swears in all who intend to provide testimony -Staff presents findings and analysis -Applicant makes presentation -BCA (Council) asks questions of the applicant and staff •Chairman (Mayor) opens the floor for anyone in favor of the request (anyone presenting factual information shall be sworn but anyone merely advocating approval need not be sworn in) -Chairman (Mayor) opens the floor for anyone opposing the request -Applicant provided opportunity to respond to issues raised by staff or public -Staff provided opportunity to summarize request -BCA (Council) deliberation and questions -Chairman (Mayor) calls for a motion -BCA (Council) Action Charles Mauti and Patricia Pezzullo, are requesting a fence to be installed on a vacant lot without an existing house, or not unified to a lot with an existing house, whereas the code requires the presence of a principal building before an accessory structure or use can be permitted. ii. StoreRight (Sebastian XIII), LLC — Mr. Shaun Puri, is requesting a 7.28 - foot setback variance from the required 20 -foot setback to allow for a 12.72 setback along the southeast property line; and a 10 -foot setback variance from the required 20 -foot setback requirement on the northwest corner of the property to allow for a 10 -foot setback. D. Adjourn Board of Adjustment Meeting 8. RECONVENE AS CITY COUNCIL 9. CONSENT AGENDA All items on the consent agenda are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of consent agenda items unless a member City Council so requests; in which event, the item will be removed and acted upon separately. If a member of the public wishes to provide input on a consent agenda item, he/she should request a Council Member to remove the item for discussion prior to start of the meeting or by raising his/her hand to be recognized. A. Approval of Minutes — July 27, 2016 Regular Meeting 16.008 B. Resolution No. R-16-21 3rd Quarter Budget Report (Transmittal, R-16-21, Report) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2015 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2016 AS PROVIDED FOR IN EXHIBIT "A"; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 10. COMMITTEE REPORTS & APPOINTMENTS City committee reports and Council Member regional committee reports. No public input or action except for City committee member nominations and appointments under this heading. 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS Procedures for legislative public hearings: • Mayor opens hearing • Attorney reads ordinance or resolution • Staff presentation • Public input • Staff summation • Mayor closes hearing • Council deliberation and action 16.030 A. Second Reading and Public Hearing of Ordinance No. 0-16-03 — Charter Amendment —Amend Section 2.03 & 4.12 (Transmittal, 0-16-03) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SCHEDULING AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2016, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING TO THE ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN THE QUESTION OF WHETHER TO AMEND SECTION 2.03, AND SECTION 4.12(a) OF THE CITY CHARTER BY CONDUCTING ELECTIONS IN EVEN NUMBERED YEARS AND PROVIDING FOUR-YEAR TERMS FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS; PROVIDING BALLOT LANGUAGE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 2 Regular City Council/BOA/CRA Meeting March 23, 2016 Page Four 7. Recess City Council Meeting and Convene as Board of Adjustment 6:45 A. Mayor McPartlan recessed the City Council meeting and called the Board of Adjustment meeting to order at 6:45 p.m. Roll Cali: Present: Mayor Bob McPartian Council Member Andrea Coy Council Member Hill Council Member Gillmor Absent: Vice Mayor Jerome Adams (excused) B. Approval of Minutes — January 27, 2016 (Excerpt of Minutes) MOTION by Ms. Coy and SECOND by Mr. Gillmor to approve the 1/27/16 minutes passed with a voice vote of 4-0. (Adams absent) C. Quasi -Judicial Public Hearing (Staff Report, Bldg Director Memo,Coy Gillmor Photos, Maps, LaCasse Response, Application) Linda Lacasse, in Regards to Lots 4 & 5, Block 304, Sebastian Highlands Unit 13, Located at 1643 Coral Reef Street, is Requesting a Variance to Install a 288 Square Foot Shed on the Property Where There is an Existing 890 Square Foot Detached Accessory Structure, for a Combined Total of 1178 Square Feet of Accessory Building Area, Whereas the Code Allows for a Maximum of 1000 Square Feet Total The Deputy Clerk swore in all those who would provide testimony. The Planner said the homeowner brought a shed when she moved to the property, was issued a violation, did apply for a permit but due to missing information was denied. The violation was brought before the Special Magistrate for resolution but was tabled pending the Board's decision tonight. The Planner explained that there can only be one 1,000 sq. ft. structure per residence even with two or three adjoining lots; the property was bought with a structure on it that the bank turned it into a storage structure by taking out the plumbing and putting in the garage doors. The Planner went over the eight items to consider when granting a variance on page 26 and said there have been quite of few previous homeowners that had to move their accessory structure. Staff thought it wouldn't be fair to grant this variance since previous homeowners had to remove their structures. Staff asked that if the variance was granted it would apply only to the shed, if it was removed or replaced it, would have to be 1,000 sq. ft. and the applicant would provide structural informational still needed for the permit. Based on the eight items to consider on page 26, staff recommended denial. Regular City Council/BOA/CRA Meeting March 23, 2016 Page Five Ms. LaCasse said she bought the property 18 months ago and was told the structure could be an in-law apartment; the previous homeowner used it as an office/work area, with one bedroom that just needed to be completed. She was advised to make an application and there shouldn't be an issue. They were denied a permit because the structure is considered a garage as opposed to a three room cottage and they are stuck. No one spoke in favor or against the request. In response to Mr. Gillmor, there was notice sent to neighbors within a 350 mile radius in addition to a legal ad. Mr. Hill noted the structure looks like a house and the Planner said it was used as a house by the second owner (previous to Ms. LaCasse) and did go before the Special Magistrate to bring it back to garage status but that never happened and it started to accrue fines and went into foreclosure. To reduce the lien, the bank removed the plumbing, electrical, the stove, refrigerator voltage. The Planner said the applicant could split the lots and add 400-500 square feet and make it a living unit; within the City, there are some mother-in-law suite homes that have one shared entrance and are considered single family units. In response to Mr. Hill, Ms. LaCasse said she does not have any intention of adding 200 sq. ft. to make the structure livable; the bank cut the electrical wires and poured concrete down the plumbing. She would have to turn the imported shed around and make it a garage and make modifications so she would be losing her storage/workshop space. She said the original MLS listing had the property listed as a potential mother -in law -suite. Ms. Coy said it can be turned into another home but she didn't see a way to have it all. Ms. LaCasse said she would like to keep the imported shed and use the structure for a workshop and storage of antique motorcycle parts. Ms. Coy said it wasn't fair to those that applied in the past and those that might come in the future, and she couldn't see a legitimate reason for a waiver. In response to Mr. Gillmor, the Planner said there could be five 200 square foot sheds on the property totally 1,000 sq. ft. Mr. Gillmor said they could swap the 110 sq. ft. shed and be in compliance; he would be in favor granting this but limiting it to this instance. The Planner described a Planning and Zoning case where a contractor obtained approval to add onto a 1,000 sq. ft. garage provided the shed was removed but the contractor did not relay that to the homeowner who had to relocate her shed to another property. Ms. Coy said a secondary issue was that there is no paperwork documenting the imported shed was built to code. Ms. LaCasse said she submitted the shed permit from Pt. St. Lucie. The Planner said the structural information would still need to be obtained to receive a Sebastian permit. Chairman McPartlan asked if the lots weren't united, could they put a 1,000 sq. ft. shed on each lot. The Planner said the code requires there be a principal residential structure to have a shed, so to split the lots there would have to be a house on the second lot. Ms. Coy confirmed the remedy would be to finish the structure as a house. The Planner said the applicant could bring the structure up to 1,200 sq. ft. under air and add a garage. Regular City Council/BOA/CRA Meeting March 23, 2016 Page Six Mr. Hill said his first thought is to deny, but his second thought was whether they could have same shed at half the size, and if it would make a difference in the look of property. He said this is a unique situation where the applicant acquired something other than what they thought; the Board could consider this an extenuating circumstance and the approval could stay with this owner. MOTION by Chairman McPartlan and SECOND by Mr. Hill to grant the variance given the pictures of the property, letters were sent out and no one has complained, with the provision that the variance be for the shed only, receiving the building permits and making sure everything is up to code. In response to Ms. Coy, Ms. LaCasse said the motorcycles they rebuild and repair in the workshop are just a hobby. Roll Call: Ayes: Coy, Gillmor, Hill, McPartlan Nays: None Absent: Adams Passed: 4-0 Mr. LaCasse, 1643 Coral Reef, asked if Council would like him to change out the hardy board to stucco. Mr. Hill responded the conditions were stated with the variance. D. Mayor McPartlan adjourned the Board of Adjustment meeting at 7:23 p.m. -4<D 8. Convene as Community Redevelopment Agency A. Cali to Order and Roll Call Roll Call: CRA Members Present Mayor Bob McPartlan Council Member Andrea Coy Council Member Hill Council Member Gillmor City Council Member Absent: Vice Mayor Jerome Adams (excused) B. Approval of Minutes — February 24. 2016 (Excerpt of Minutes) MOTION by Ms. Coy and SECOND by Mayor McPartlan to approve the February 24, 2016 minutes. Roll Call: Ayes: Coy, Gillmor, Hill, McPartlan Nays: None Absent: Adams Passed: 4-0 MOF SEBASTIAN HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND Community Development Department Variance Application - Staff Report 1. Project Name: Fence on Undeveloped Vacant Lot 2. Requested Action: Variance requested from Section 54-2-7.5(a) of the Sebastian Land Development Code to allow a fence to be installed on a vacant lot without an existing house, or not unified to a lot with an existing house, whereas the code requires the presence of a principal building before an accessory structure or use can be permitted. 3. Project Location a. Address: 469 Georgia Boulevard b. Legal: Lot 14, Block 490, Sebastian Highlands Unit 15 C. Parcel: 31-39-07-00001-4900-00014.0 4. Project Owner: Charles Mauti & Patricia Pezzullo 438 Georgia Boulevard Sebastian, Florida 32958 772-205-9448 5. Project Surveyor: Thomas Cecrle, P.L.S. Cecrle Land Surveying, Inc. 10749 Highway U.S. 1, Suite A Sebastian, Florida 32958 772-388-0520 6. Project Description: a. Narrative of proposed action: Charles Mauti is requesting a variance to allow a fence to be erected around a portion of the perimeter of the subject vacant lot. Additionally, he is requesting to install an irrigation pump and temporary electrical service for proposed landscaping. Per staff's conversations with the applicant, there are no immediate plans to construct a house at this time. (See Exhibits A — Variance Application and B — Letter to City Manager). b. C. d. Based on the following definitions from the Land Development Code (LDC), and non-compliance with Section 54-2-7.5(a), the fence permit application was denied for his vacant lot because it does not have an existing house, nor is the subject lot unified with one that does: Section 54-2-7.5(a) Presence of principal building required. No accessory structure shall be constructed or placed upon a lot until the construction of a principal structure has been started and no accessory structure shall be used unless the principal structure has received a certificate of occupancy. Structure. Anything constructed or erected with a fired location on the ground, or attached to something having or requiring a fixed location on the ground. Structures shall include buildings, mobile homes, walls, Anm and signs, paving, sidewalks, utility transmission towers, and other similar improvements. Accessory Structure. A structure which is customarily associated with, subordinate in size, and incidental in use to the principal structure and located on the same site. Examples are tool sheds and garages. Mr. Mauti is seeking a variance from the Land Development Code to install accessory structures — a fence, irrigation pump, and temporary electrical service — and trees without the required presence of a principal building. Current Zoning: RS -10 (Single -Family Residential) Adjacent Properties: Site Characteristics (1) Total Acreage: .23 acres (2) Current Land Use(s): vacant (3) Water Service: public water (4) Sanitary Sewer Service: septic system 2 Zoning Current Land Use Future Land Use North: C-512 commercial C-512 East: RS -10 residence LDR South RS -10 residence LDR West: RS -10 residence LDR Site Characteristics (1) Total Acreage: .23 acres (2) Current Land Use(s): vacant (3) Water Service: public water (4) Sanitary Sewer Service: septic system 2 Staff Comments: Shortly before Mr. Mauti purchased the vacant lot at 469 Georgia Boulevard in February 2016, the previous owner had vegetation on his vacant lot removed without a required Nuisance Abatement permit (per Resolution R-08-14, see Exhibit C — Resolution R-08- 14), a grubbing permit, nor a land clearing permit (which is only issued for permitted, conditional, or special uses for the zoning district and not for clearing of vacant lots not intended for development) per Sec. 54-3-14.7 of the Land Development Code. No formal complaint or case has been registered for this lot as a nuisance. The lot was cut beyond the five foot allowance per R-08-14 for Nuisance Abatement. Subsequently, the lot was left with a small patch of vegetation in the middle, pepper tree debris and mulch left piled, and a considerable amount of existing junk and garbage now uncovered near the back of the parcel. (See Exhibit D — Photos of Existing Conditions) Staff visited the site and opines that the nuisance cut-back was extreme and has visually affected the aesthetics of this section of Georgia Boulevard. This subject lot is adjacent to the commercial alley, and could be very prone to illegal dumping. Mr. Mauti is requesting to erect a fence around a portion of the perimeter of the lot to prevent potential trespassing and dumping, complete the land clearing the patch of vegetation in the middle of the lot, and install new landscaping with an irrigation pump and temporary electrical service. Staff has analyzed the variance request based on the city codes. The attached Board Criteria for Determining Variances outlines the staff findings. 8. Board Criteria for Determining Variances: See attached analysis. Mr. Mauti has also provided an analysis attached to his application that explains his reasoning in support of the variance. (See Exhibit E) 9. Staff Recommendation: After analysis of the variance criteria, staff recommends approval of the applicant's request to allow a partial fence to be erected on the property, along with completion of the land clearing, planting of additional trees, installation of an irrigation pump and temporary electrical service with the following conditions: 3 • A land clearing permit must be obtained, including all requirements set forth in Sec.54-3-14.7 of the Land Development Code; • Protected trees are to remain on site or mitigated; • The property must be sodded and not remain bare soil or mulch • Use of the property is restricted to the variance requests until such time the lot is unified to another lot with a principal structure, or a house permit is applied for. • Outside storage or parking of any kind on the lot is prohibited. 10. Board Action: Conduct quasi-judicial hearing to consider the requested variance. 0U � Pr aired by E BOARD CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING VARIANCES Section 54-1-2.5 In order to authorize any variance from the terms of the land development regulations, the Board of Adjustment must use the following criteria for approving or denying a variance: a. Existence of special conditions or circumstances. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district. Meets Standard Yes No ❑ Through the actions of the previous owner, the property was given an extreme "nuisance abatement" cutback without proper permitting, leaving the lot unsightly with Brazilian pepper trees and mulch and exposing illegal dumping on the parcel. The property is adjacent to a commercially alley along its rear. b. Conditions not created by applicant. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Meets Standard Yes (3' No ❑ Although the lot was purchased in its present condition by the applicant, the cutback was through the actions of the previous owner and contractor. Additionally, the dumping on the property was not done by the applicant. The applicant did not create the existing conditions. C. Special privileges not conferred. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. Meets Standard Yes ❑ No / Mr. Mauti's property does not have the presence of a principal structure. Other residential property owners have had to join their vacant lots to their house lots through a recorded Unity of Title document to have fence, shed, and landclearing permits issued. City Ma ages Offjc.. JUL - 1 2016 To: Joe Griffin, Town Manager City Of Sebastian 1225 Main Street Sebastian. FI. 32978 Re: Exclusionary Ordinance Dear Mr. Griffin: EXHIBIT B 438 Georgia Blvd. Sebastian, FL 32958 Mailing Address: PO Box 782129 Sebastian, FL 32978 June 29, 2016 On June 27, 2016, 1 visited the Building and Code Department with the intent of obtaining a permit to install a 6 ft. high by 200 lineal feet of green vinyl chain link fence with a landscape barrier and Irrigation system on property my wife and I own ( this parcel of land dose not abut our residence ). All the proper paper work was submitted, including a stamped survey of the property indicating the work to be performed. The reason for my permit was three -fold: 1) to stop the illegal dumping of trash on the rear of the property, 2) to keep the neighbors from parking on our property, and 3) to stop the adjoining neighbor from depositing his excess plant material and related landscape debris on the property. The other. more cogent concern was that over the years the former owners were subject to nobfication by Code Enforcement of excessive over growth. The problem that has existed is that all the materials that were cut and mulched were left on the property creating a large quantity of dried underbrush. Thus, as the seasons passed more and more of this underbrush has accumulated, and as the dry season/the fire season approaches, this material can be easily ignited by a lighting strike. a careless thrown lit cigarette, or mischievous youth, thinking a small brush ,ire is a fun thing to create and watch! The thick blanket of underbrush, therefore, presents an unsafe set of conditions that create a liability to the property owner. Any damage to adjoining properties, in certain cases, could be assessed against the property owner based on a'failure to maintain'. The young lady at the counter was extremely help, very knowledgeable and articulate. She accepted my application for processing and sent me ori to pay the cashier. Prior to leaving City Hall and during the Processing of the permit application, however, she realized this particular parcel of land did not adjoin my Property and informed me she could not issue the permit because a fence is considered an accessory structure. My conundrum: Subsequently. I researched the city ordinances to fully understand the meaning of 'accessory structure'. Looking comprehensively. I found the following to be applicable: As specified in the Code of Ordinances, the Land Development Code, City Of Sebastian, Florida Article XXIL Language and Definitions states Accessory structure. A structure_ which is customarily associated with, that is subordinate in size and incidental in use to the principle structure and located on the same site. Examples are tool shed and garages. Accessory use. A use that is clearly incidental to the principal use, that is subordinate in area, extent or purpose to the principal use and contributes to the comfort, convenience or necessity of the principle use, and that is located on the same lot with such orinctple building or use. Now, factoring in the General Regulations, Sec.54-2.7.5, Accessory Structure, the following definitions are stated a) Presence of a principal building required. b) Location: (1 8 2) General rules of location. This section specifically addresses building height, square footage of accessory structures and required setbacks from property lines. c) General regulations of accessory buildings - again this section addresses what is permitted as an accessory structure, the square footage, the area and roof pitch. And, considering Sec 54-2-7.7 Walls and Fences, this section states a) General regulations of walls and fences, Self-explanatory in addressing the specific steps and requirements (1) Permit required (2) Application procedures (3) Issuance of permits (4) Construction to withstand forces of nature (5) Posts and supporting members (6) Maintenance (7) Height (8) Temporary construction fences (b) Types of fences and walls permitted (1 thru 5) are self-explanatory. (c) Fences and walls in residential areas. The information in this section is self- explanatory Also, factoring in Article XXII. Language and Definitions, Sec. 54-5-22.2 definition of terms, more clarifying information is presented Accessory use, A use that is clearly incidental to the principal use. that is subordinate in area, extent and purpose to the principle use and that contributes to the comfort, convenience or necessity of the principle use and that is located on the same lot with such principal building or use. N.B. Then, there are more specific definitions in the Code Of Ordinances: Fence (or Wall ) is described as a structure intended to separate or enclose or define space , basically freestanding, constructed of one or more materials such as wire, wood. stone, cement or brick. designed to be decorative or ornamental or to serve utilitarian purposes as to control ingress or egress or persons or animals. Use. The' use "of property is the purpose or activity for which the land or building thereon is designed, arranged or intended, or for which it is occupied or maintained, and shall include any performance of such activity with reference to the specifications of this zoning code. In reviewing the scope of the applicable sections of the Code of Ordinances, it is clear that the intent of accessory structure or accessory use was proposed to be an existing structure or building on an existing site, and was not intended to be applied to vacant land or to a fence on vacant land. Further, the definition of a fence being a structure as taken in the literal terms means that this definition is being applied in a subjective manner that is actually contrary to the other definitions dispersed in other sections in the ordinances. As a land owner, I am placed in a position where I am being denied the ability to protect my property from trespass, vandalism, illegal parking, the dumping of fresh, etc. Further. 1 am denied the ability to create a landscaped area that would be more harmonious with the neighborhood. In essence, interpreting a perimeter fence as an accessory structure denies me my right as a vacant land owner to protect my properly and opens me to further litigation should untoward events occur. Clearly, should I not be able to protect my property, I then would be open for litigation from the city, from adjacent property owners and from other neighbors. This "Catch 22" situation is simply unacceptable. I ask that you reconsider my request for a permit to erect a perimeter fence on my vacant land. Doing so would protect all involved and impacted. Thank you for your consideration of my request. I await your response. Should you want to meet to discuss this matter Further, I can be reached at the letterhead address or via my phone: 772-205-9418. Sincerely, Patricia A. Pazzuljo AarKres tmduti Patricia A. Pezzullo EXHIBIT C RESOLUTION NO. R-08-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA, ADOPTING GUIDELINES FOR PROTECTION OF PROTECTED ANIMAL AND PLANT SPECIES IN REVIEW OF LAND CLEARING ACTIVITIES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City is home to a number of protected animal and plant species; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City to provide good stewardship of the habitat for these species within the framework of an urban environment; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows: Section 1. GUIDELINES ADOPTED. The City Council hereby adopts the following guidelines for review of land clearing activities within the City of Sebastian: I. Before any clearing may begin, the property owner must apply to the City for a "Nuisance Abatement" permit and inspection by the City's Growth Management Department. Nothing within these guidelines, including the issuance of a "Nuisance Abatement" permit, shall authorize activity constituting a "taking" of a protected plant or animal species. II. Clearing on the parcels covered in the City of Sebastian Area -wide Habitat Conservation Plan should not occur during the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) nesting season. Typically nesting season is March I" to June 3& but may vary slightly from year to year. III. If the lot is inhabited by gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) or other state or federally listed species, a permit from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may be required. W. In remedying a nuisance, overgrowth shall be cut back a distance of five feet from the property line unless the Growth Management Department determines that a lesser amount is required to safeguard protected plant and animal species. The Growth Management Department may also require that the homeowner protect plant species like sand oak or scrub oak for the benefit of wildlife. V. The penalty is $250 for each violation of this section. Section 2. CONFLICT. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution shall become effective upon adoption. The foregoing resolution was moved for adoption by Councilmember Neglia The motion was seconded by Councilmember Paternoster and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Mayor Andrea Coy Vice -mayor Sal Neglia Councilmember A] Paternoster Councilmember Dale Simchick Councilmember Eugene Wolff yes yes yes The Mayor thereupon declared this resolution duly passed and adopted this 2701 day of August, 2008. ATTEST: �a Sally A. Ma' , MMC City Clerk CITY OF SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA By: Mayor Andrea Coy Approved as to form and legality for reliance by the City of Sebastian: Rich Stringer, ity 60mey