Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-20-2024 CC MinutesSEBASTIAN CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION 19G-1014 SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2024 - 6:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA The City Manager opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. but explained there would not be an official call to order until the administration of oaths for the newly -elected Council Members. The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office to Council Member Kelly Dixon and Council Member Ed Dodd. They took their seats upon the dais. 2. Council Member Dodd called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. A moment of silence was held. 4. Council Member McPartlan led the Pledge of Allegiance. 5. ELECTION MATTERS A. The City Attorney read the Certificate of Canvassing Board Returns official returns delineating the number of certified votes received for the Council Members and with regard to the referendum item for the election that took place on November 5, 2024. With regard to Council elections, there were 20,852 votes cast. Council Member Dixon received 10,055 votes, Council Member Dodd received 9,276 votes, and Damian H. Gilliams received 1,521 votes. Council Member Dixon and Council Member Dodd will now serve for a two-year term. With regard to the Charter referendum item, a total of 15,262 votes were cast. There were 6,377 votes approving this item and 8,885 votes rejecting this item. This item would have increased a Council Member term from a two-year term to a three-year term in 2025 and then a four-year term in 2026 if it had been approved. Council Member Dodd asked for public input on the above items, and there was none. B. Council Member Dodd called for nominations for the position of Mayor. Council Member Nunn nominated Fred Jones for Mayor. Council Member Dodd expressed that Mr. Jones is a great guy and he did a great job as Mayor, but he has decided to nominate Bob McPartlan because he is the longest serving member on the Council and he would like him to be the Mayor during the Centennial of Sebastian. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 2 Roll call: Council Member Dodd - Bob McPartlan Council Member Dixon - Bob McPartlan Council Member Jones - Bob McPartlan Council Member McPartlan - Bob McPartlan Council Member Nunn - Bob McPartlan Bob McPartlan will serve as Mayor for the upcoming year. C. Mayor McPartlan called for nominations for Vice Mayor. Council Member Dodd nominated Fred Jones for Vice Mayor. There were no further nominations. Fred Jones will serve as Vice Mayor for the upcoming year. 6. Roll call: Council Member Dixon Vice Mayor Jones Mayor McPartlan Council Member Nunn Council Member Dodd Staff Present: City Manager Brian Benton City Attorney Jennifer Cockcroft City Clerk Jeanette Williams Communications and Social Media Coordinator Avery Joens GIS Technician Ross Kelley Community Development Manager Dom Bosworth Community Development Director Alix Bernard City Engineer/Special Projects Director Karen Miller Contracts/Procurement Manager Jessica Graham Parks and Recreation Director Richard Blankenship MIS Technical Assistant Joseph Perez Police Chief Daniel Acosta Deputy Police Chief Tim Wood AGENDA MODIFICATIONS 8. PROCLAMATIONS. AWARDS. BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Proclamation -Native American Heritage Month —November 2024 Mayor McPartlan read and presented the proclamation to Ms. Sydney Rigaud, the Vice Regent of the Pelican Island Chapter Daughters of the American Revolution. Ms. Rigaud expressed thankfulness for this proclamation and stated that many Native Americans helped the American Revolution to succeed. She noted that her organization does service projects, honors veterans, and provides scholarships to high school students. B. Proclamation — Geographic Information Systems Day. November 20.2024 — Manning Minds and Shaving the World Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 3 Mayor McPartlan presented the proclamation to Ross Kelley, GIS Technician, and commended him for mapping out all of Sebastian, every street sign, every stop sign, and every little detail for the City. The GIS Technician encouraged residents to explore the GIS tools that are available on the City's GIS page at https:Hcosl225.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html. The GIS page includes a historical tour, a virtual art and history tour, as well as maps showing parks and current capital improvement projects in Sebastian. Mayor McPartlan invited Indian River County Commissioner Laura Moss to say a few words Commissioner Moss congratulated Council Members Dixon and Dodd on their reelection and Mayor McPartlan and Vice Mayor Jones for stepping into their leadership roles. She is proud to be a Sponsor of the Sebastian Centennial events and she is looking forward to celebrating with everyone at Sebastian's Centennial on December 8, 2024. Commissioner Moss also mentioned that Indian River Commissioner Susan Adams was here earlier. Commissioner Adams needed to leave due to a family matter, but she wanted to express her appreciation for the Habitat for Humanity Project. BriefAnnouncements: Friday, November 22 — Chamber of Commerce Finally Friday on Cleveland Street — 6pm to 9pm Thursday and Friday, November 28 & 29 City Hall Closed for the Thanksgiving Holiday Friday, December 6 - 35th Annual Sebastian River Area Chamber of Commerce Light Up Night — 5:30pm to 8pm Saturday, December 7 - Pearl Harbor Day Observance at Veterans Memorial Park —12: 30pm Saturday, December 7 - Rotary Club of Sebastian Craft Brew Hullaballoo at Riverview Park —12pm to 4pm Saturday, December 7 — Annual Christmas Parade from Main St. to Riverview Park— 6pm Sunday, December 8 - Centennial Celebration Event in Riverview Park —10am to 6pm Friday, December 13 - Chamber of Commerce Finally Friday on Cleveland Street - 6pm to 9pm Saturday, December 14 - Wreaths Across America at Veterans Memorial in Riverview Park — Noon Vice Mayor Jones announced the upcoming events. 9. PUBLIC INPUT Carol Kroegel, came forward and explained that she is the wife of Robert Kroegel, and her husband is the great grandson of Paul Kroegel, who was one of the City's founders. Her husband's father, Douglas Kroegel, sold his land at a very low price to Indian River County so that a park could be built on Indian River Drive. The Kroegel family has a vested interest in the ecological preservation of this area. Regarding the 3 acres of land on Concha Drive that she heard has been allocated to Habitat for Humanity, she said that the street has a drainage problem with water pooling in the street when it rains and says that recently homes were almost flooded from the river behind their homes. She asked how putting 12 homes within 200 feet of the Sebastian River will affect the mission of protecting the water quality of the Sebastian River as well as the wildlife in the area. She asked if the additional water runoff created by 12 additional homes will cause the homes on the river to be more at risk for flooding after the building of these homes. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 4 She said she heard on September 11, 2024 that the City Council had donated this land to Habitat for Humanity. She would like to know when this decision was actually made and who made it. When was it decided that land that residents were told would be a park became a plan for affordable housing? When was this change advertised to the public? Why was it decided to donate land near a natural estuary of St. Sebastian River? At what stage is the development of this project? Is there anything that might change the decision at this point? Why was this parcel chosen, as opposed to other parcels in more remote areas of town or ones that are not on waterways? Ms. Kroegel had several questions regarding the timeline. When will these homes be built? What will be the size of the homes? Will they all look alike? How many will there be? Who will live there? Are the homes allocated to people who work in the City or random people on a list? Mayor McPartlan invited the City Manager to respond to Ms. Kroegel's questions about the project. The City Manager said he was happy to respond, but asked if the Mayor wanted to take additional input first. Council Member Nunn said some facts need to be presented in order to address these concerns because there may be some misconceptions about what is being done and what the process is. Council Members expressed agreement with the City Manager going ahead and addressing concerns at this time. The City Manager explained that this process began earlier in 2024 when providing workforce affordable housing was identified as a need by residents in the strategic planning process and thus it has been a priority of the City. Florida Statute Section 166.0451 requires that the City identify any eligible properties that might be appropriate for affordable housing. On July 24, 2024 Staff had presented different parcels of land that might be good options for working with Habitat for Humanity to create affordable housing in the City. City Staff negotiated an agreement to transfer three parcels of City property to Habitat for Humanity and that agreement was approved by Council on October 16, 2024. The City Manager clarified that this will not be multifamily housing or Section 8 housing being built. It will be single-family homes to provide workforce housing. The houses cannot be for people who are already homeowners. Priority will be given to (1) current employees of the City of Sebastian, (2) residents of Sebastian, (3) current public safety officers, including law enforcement or fire/rescue paramedics who are employed by or residing in Indian River County, (4) current public -school teachers employed by or residing in Indian River County, and (5) Indian River County residents. Mayor McPartlan clarified that these houses are not being given away. Applicants for the housing will have to go through a process with Habitat for Humanity, will have to put in their sweat equity, and will pay a mortgage just like everyone else does. Council Member Dodd asked about this parcel of land being previously designated as a park by the City. The City Manager said these parcels were zoned for municipal use when they were transferred to the City from General Development Corporation. The City has not made any plans to create a park with any of these parcels. Council Member Nunn reminded Council and residents that the rime for public input is not over even though they have been clarifying a few matters on workforce housing. Mayor McPartlan asked Mr. Loomis, Executive Director of Indian River County Habitat for Humanity, to come forward and respond. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 5 Mr. Loomis reviewed that Indian River Habitat for Humanity has been building homes in Indian River County for almost 34 years and they have built over 1,000 homes. There is a severe shortage of affordable housing and everyone knows someone being affected. If you purchased a home 20 to 30 years ago, things were easier then. In 1995 it cost 2 and ''/z times the average income to buy a median -price house, but today it requires 6 to 7 times the average income. Mr. Loomis explained that single-family homes will be built on the parcels of land donated by the City. Habitat for Humanity will not be building multifamily homes, duplexes, triplexes, or apartments. It will still be low density. He expects these homes to appraise in excess of $300,000 and they will be priced over $200 per square foot. Regarding environmental conditions, Mr. Loomis noted that every house will have a brand-new aerobic septic tank system which are systems that are far more sustainable. They also work with the Audubon Society to ensure that they use 100% native plants and trees to assist with environmental sustainability. Through the development process they address stormwater and drainage and all of their work will go through the City's building and planning processes. They use professional engineers, follow all Codes, and do not cut corners. Council Member Jones asked Mr. Loomis to explain about the sweat equity part of the process. Mr. Loomis stated that the homes will not be rentals or for people that may not properly care for the property. The homes are sold for the appraised value, and the buyer is provided with a low-cost 30-year mortgage. Habitat for Humanity make use of government subsidized programs and land donation in order to keep costs down on building the house, but this does not translate into a deflated property value. What the buyer pays is based on what they can afford, but the sales price of the home is still the appraised value. Mayor McPartlan asked if a buyer can flip the house or rent the house out Mr. Loomis said no. Mayor McPartlan allowed more residents to come forward with questions and input. Wendy McLoughlin, 1541 Ocean Cove Street, asked how this process happened. Did they look at the demographics of the area? Have they considered real estate comparables? Was a real estate lawyer hired to determine how this will affect property values in the neighborhood? Ms. McLoughlin told Council that they were voted into office to take into account the best interest of residents. She asks if Council has taken the interest of residents into account when they made this decision. She reminded Council that they can be voted out. She said she has nothing against people who move in or who are low income. She is considering her community, which has always been quiet and peaceful, and she believes this is going to change everything. Rich Beard, 714 Concha Drive, a retired CPA, asked how this land was obtained by the City and if there is a stipulation for its use. If the property has been reserved, why have they decided to now build homes on it now? On behalf of the animals and native plants located on this parcel, he does not see the need to build low-income homes there and remove the natural environment. If there has to be a change, he would like to make a park out of it. Mike Lopowitch said he just heard about this land being given away by the City yesterday. He looked up Habitat for Humanity and said they basically build cookie -cutter houses. He said this will clearly lower the value of homes in the neighborhood. He asked how much the CEOs of Habitat for Humanity are Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 6 making and said that somebody is making money off of this. He said he had worked for the state and the federal government and he had never heard of employees getting low-income housing. He asked if there were some kickbacks or something unethical going on here. Terry McGinn stated that he has been at every City Council meeting where this was discussed, which was probably five of them. He has been present every time Habitat for Humanity made a presentation, and he had not seen any of these residents at a City Council meeting before. He noted that if a developer bought these lots, these residents would not have anything to say about it because it would be private enterprise. He says so many people here have enjoyed free access to undeveloped land for so long that they do not want to see it developed. Russell Betz said he has an issue with the fact that he was not informed. He acknowledged that he would have known if he had come to every City Council meeting, but people have to work, have a lot of responsibilities, and are not always able to keep up. He has a neighbor that is 92 years old and is not on the internet. There were never any signs posted on the property. Usually when there is rezoning a sign is put up staring that is the case, but he has not seen anything like that. Carol Klebba, 726 Concha Drive, said they bought the land and built their house in 1997, and at that time they were told that there would be a park in this area. Her house is currently valued between $550,000 and $595,000. She has been a realtor, and she knows if you put a house in that area for $300,000 to $350,000, the value of her property will decrease by $50,000 to $100,000. Louise Kautenburg stated she has lived in Sebastian for almost 30 years. There are various prices on the houses within her neighborhood, but they are still all good neighbors to each other and they each take care of their properties. She calls it a healthy, sustainable neighborhood. Glenda Phillips, 1674 Adams Street, would like to know if a study was done to ascertain how many empty homes there are in Sebastian. She said there were a bunch of houses that were just built on Schumann Drive, and she would like to know if those houses are occupied. She would like to know if a traffic study was done. There is a severe curve near her house that they call "Dead Man's Curve" because several accidents have happened. She would also like to what will be done about the wildlife. The parcels have turtles, scrub jays and different birds, cats, and panthers. Barbara Panta, 746 Concha Drive, said she was told that this area near her was a park and that it was going to continue to be an undeveloped area. That is why she chose her house and paid more for it when she purchased in 2017. If someone gave the land to the City for it to become a park, why is that not being considered? She asked if a City employee, even a part-time employee, could get a house and then quit their job. Mayor McPartlan mentioned that such a person could quit their job, but they would still be required to make their mortgage payments, just like everybody else. Kathryn Rapach, 1582 Ocean Cove Street, said she has been living in Sebastian for over a decade. Her daughter, Brooke, also came up to speak with her. Brooke is currently doing her 5 h grade project on deforestation and shared that she is not happy with this happening in her neighborhood and noted the construction noise will cause disruption for the elderly residents in the neighborhood. Kathryn mentioned land that is near Highway 512 is being made into a distillery and asked why couldn't that land have been used for housing instead. Kathryn and Brooke were also concerned about the wildlife in this area, including peacocks, bobcats, bam owls, and various birds. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 7 Nancy Moore, 1558 Ocean Cove, said she used to live in Ft. Lauderdale before she moved to Sebastian. She even bought the undeveloped lot next door to her house in order to provide a place for the local wildlife. She chose to move to Sebastian because of the quiet, the beauty, and the animals. She is against taking down every tree and driving away all of the animals. She says this undeveloped parcel was an asset to the City, and the residents should have a say in what is done with it. Damien Gilliams, President of the Sebastian Property Owner's Association, stated he has been in the community for 40 years as a real estate broker. He explained that General Development Corporation went bankrupt and turned over a lot of property to City. It was not given to special interests, but to the City. He stated this was surplus property that belonged to the taxpayers of Sebastian. He stated the City already had an opportunity to create low-income housing in the recent past when it annexed 2,000 acres, but they did not provide for it in the developer's agreement. Mort Orman, originally from Maryland, said in 1984 when the Baltimore Colts were owned by Robert Irsay, there was a lot of discussion about moving the team out of Baltimore. Irsay promised he would never do that, but one winter night, in the middle of the night, he loaded up two Mayflower vans and moved the entire team to Indianapolis. Overnight the beloved Baltimore football team was gone, and there was nothing the people of Baltimore could do about it. Mr. Orman feels that the Council has done something similar here. He said there should have been a meeting to discuss this before Council signed over that property. Nikki Grant said that a lot of the issue tonight is a lack of communication and that people did not know what was going on. Transparency is a basic issue. She thinks if residents had more information ahead of time, this would have been smoother and people would not have been as upset. She asked if the parameters say what the square footage of the houses will be. Council Member Nunn informed her the houses would be roughly 1,500 square feet. Charles Stadelman on Zoom said he was previously a real estate broker. He noted that people have been priced out of the market for various reasons and housing is out of reach for many. He wants to congratulate Council for taking this issue up and providing relief for people who work here. He concluded that these houses are needed. Council Member Nunn noted that some people have mentioned the low-income houses on Schumann Drive. He used to live in that area when he was young with his family, and it is a low-income rental area. He noted that Habitat for Humanity works hard to find qualified applicants. There is no bank or builder offering a 30-year interest free mortgage to help someone buy a house, but that is what Habitat for Humanity does. Mayor McPartlan called for a 10-minute recess at 7:32 p.m. 10. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING At 7:47 p.m., Chairman McPartlan convened the Board of Adjustment meeting. Mr. Dodd arrived soon after at 7:54 p.m. A. Consideration of a Variance Reouest - Sean Strobl - 798 Snire Avenue - Six-foot High Fence on a Comer Lot Located within the Secondary Front Yards, and Located in Front of the House - LDC Sections 54-2-7.7(c)(3) & 54-2-7.7(c)(1) The City Attorney asked for anyone who planned to speak to fill out a speaker oath card. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 8 Sean Stroh], the applicant, came forward and explained that the main issue with his variance request is line -of -sight or visibility concerns for drivers. The only potential affected driveways would be his driveway and the immediate neighbor behind him, but the lattice on his fence does not block the view for either of these driveways. Mr. Stroh] took pictures from these driveways to show that the fence is not causing an obstruction of the view of the road or the stop sign. The Community Development Manager reviewed that this is a variance request regarding a fence for a corner lot which is treated a little bit different than fencing on a regular lot. The City does not allow a 6-foot fence in the front of a house, and also on a comer lot. The Code requires a 6-foot fence to have to meet the secondary front yard setback of 20 feet from the secondary line, which is not measured from the edge of the road. The applicant came in and applied for a permit in May 2024 and brought in a survey indicating where he was going to put the fence. The Building Department staff showed him where a 6-foot fence or a 4-foot fence could be placed on his property. Mr. Strohl's 4-foot fence was installed and inspected and approved by the Building Department. After the fence was approved and the permit was closed out, Mr. Strobl installed an additional 2-foot lattice on top of the fence. The Code states that a permit is not needed if a lattice does not create a barrier, but that is referring to garden trellises and things like that. Mr. Strohl's lattice addition clearly creates a barrier and adds to the height of the fence. The fence is on the property line. The Code requires the Board of Adjustment to examine certain criteria in deciding if a fence variance can be granted. Mr. Strohl's fence does meet some of the criteria. • There is an existence of special conditions or circumstances because his property does face three roadways. It is a unique lot with three front yards. • It can also be argued that this creates a hardship condition for him because if he has to use the 20-foot setback on three sides, this causes him to lose quite a bit of the use of his back yard compared to other corner lots or other interior lots. • However, with the addition of the trellis, the applicant has created a condition that puts his fence at odds with what is allowed by the Code, particularly in light of the fact that the applicant added the lattice after his permit had been approved. • Many other corner lot owners have had to meet the ordinance regarding their fences within their secondary front yards and have had to use a 20-foot setback when they installed a 6-foot fence, so granting this variance would be granting him a special privilege. The Community Development Manager reminded the Board of Adjustment that only the minimum variance should be granted. There is also a specific section of the Code that gives specific dimensions to make sure that a fence is not within a visibility triangle. Staff went out and took pictures and Mr. Strohl's fence does meet the Code's requirements for a visibility triangle, however, his 6-foot fence juts 20 feet in front of the neighbor's house to the north on Wimbrow Drive and there may be a visibility concern for this specific neighbor when they are backing out of their driveway. Choice A. The Board of Adjustment can decide to grant the variance and allow the applicant to keep the fence that extends into the secondary front yards at 6 feet. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 9 Choice B. If the Board of Adjustment denies the variance, the applicant would have to take down the trellis so the fence will again be a 4-foot fence as originally permitted. There is a section on the rear yard where the 6-foot fence can remain. The applicant also has the option to keep his fence 6-foot high, but then he would need 20-foot setbacks on the two secondary front yards. Choice C. The Board of Adjustment may decide to partially grant the variance, allowing the applicant to potentially keep his 6-foot fence with the condition that it is placed 10 feet from the property line on Wimbrow Drive, rather than the 20-foot setback required by the Code. Whatever the Board of Adjustment decides, Staff asked for the applicant to make the required changes within 2 months, and regardless of the choice to grant or deny, or grant a partial variance, the 6-foot fence in the front of the yard needed to be addressed. Chairman McPartlan opened the floor for public input from anyone in favor of this variance request. Erik Hendrickson -Cruz, who lives at 465 Mark Street directly across from Mr. Strohl's house, said that he is the one most impacted by this fence since he frequently travels down Mark Street and stops at both of the stop signs that are near the applicant's house. He asked for the variance to be granted because this lot is very unique. The applicant has small children and his dogs were jumping the 4- feet fence, which is why the trellis was added at a later date. He says the applicant and his family have been wonderful neighbors. He gave an example of them flying a flag at one point that he took issue with, but they took it down without any questions to be considerate to him. He is glad to have a neighbor that is a young family, rather than neighbors that look up variances and make complaints. He asks for the variance to be granted since it is for the safety of their children and their pets, and it causes no concern for him, an impacted neighbor. David Moore, 762 Wimbrow Drive, also brought up how unique this property is. He owns the home that the Community Development Manager mentioned with a driveway near the applicant's fence and with possible visibility concerns. He says visibility is not an issue for him or for anyone that uses his driveway. Chairman McPartlan asked if anyone opposed this request. Eugene Wolff, 757 Wimbrow Drive, opposes the granting of the variance because he views it as a privilege and such privileges should not be given to owners of properties that are not in line with Code enforcement. He feels he is most impacted because his house faces the applicant's property. He says the applicant's property has several egregious Code enforcement issues, including parking a vehicle in a drainage swale, as exhibited on page 34 in Exhibit F6, an unregistered vehicle on the property, and adults living in a utility shed on the property. William Thompson, 751 Wimbrow Drive, agrees it is an odd lot, but he thinks the fence was built in a haphazard way and it will fall apart and blow apart in a storm and affect everyone's safety. He also disagrees with the fence being built so close to the roadway, particularly since there is a lot of usable space on the property. He is also annoyed by the applicant's little dog that he says barks and whines all day long. Mr. Strobl said in response to the "egregious" violations, the Code allows a resident to have one unregistered vehicle on a property. He does have an unregistered 1987 Jeep that is a project that he is working on. His 70-year-old mother lives with him, and she cannot walk all the way to the front door of the house because it is an uphill walk for her so he does park his car close to his house. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 10 The City Attorney reminded the Board and told Mr. Strohl that he does not have to address issues except in regard to the fence. The Board of Adjustment will only be considering issues in relation to the variance request. Mr. Strohl said he no longer has anyone living in his shed at this time. He did apologize for his dogs offending his neighbor. He would like clarification with the problem with the fence on the front portion of the house to make sure he understood. The Community Development Manager clarified that a 6-foot fence cannot be in front of the house, but it can be a 4-foot fence. Mr. Strohl explained that this area is his mother's patio, and this is where his mother lets the dogs out of the house and why the higher fence was needed in this area. Without the lattice/trellis the dogs were jumping over the fence. He has one area of his fence, the gate, where he has not installed the lattice, and his dogs are able to jump over that section. Mr. Strohl said if they would consider granting the variance with a 10-foot setback for the fence, it would be even more of a help to him if they could give him an 8-foot setback because he would not have to move as many posts to remedy the situation. Mr. Nunn asked the Community Development Director to specifically clarify what needed to be changed about the portion of the fence that is in front of the house. She explained that the Board of Adjustment has never granted a variance for a 6-foot fence in front of a house because it does not meet any of the criteria for a variance. Mr. Nunn asked the applicant to look at Exhibit G and asked if that part of the fence that extends in front of the house is his mother's patio and if the fence was moved back could she still use the patio. Mr. Strohl said yes, that is his mother's patio, but if the fence was moved back, the patio would no longer be a private area for his mother, and she would no longer be able to let the dogs out into the fenced in yard. MOTION by Vice Chair Jones and SECOND by Ms. Dixon to grant a partial variance, allowing those portions of the fence that extend into the secondary front yards to remain 6 feet high with the condition that the fence along Wimbrow Drive must be 10 feet from the property line, but deny the portion of the fence that extends beyond the front house line to stay at 6 feet high. Mr. Nunn said he tends to agree with granting the partial variance because they do not want to set a precedent or make an exception allowing for the 6-foot fence in front of the house without extenuating circumstances. The Community Development Manager asked if the Board of Adjustment could include a 2-month deadline to make the required changes to ensure that the fence could be modified, inspected, and the permit closed out within timeframe. Vice Chair Jones said he is fine with that being included in his motion and Council Member Dixon seconded that as well. Mr. Dodd asks if the applicant will then be charged another permit fee. The Community Development Manager said she was not sure. The other permit was closed out, but she said she could ask if it can be viewed as a permit modification. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 11 Mr. Nunn asked for a waiver of the permit fee to be added to the motion. Vice Chair Jones agreed with a waiver of the permit fee being included in the motion and Ms. Dixon seconded that as well. Mr. Strohl asked the Board of Adjustment if they could agree with an 8-foot setback rather than 10- feet because it would help him to correct the fence by simply removing one panel of fencing. Vice Chair Jones was not willing to make that change to the motion. Roll call: Vice Chair Jones - aye Chairman McPartlan - aye Mr. Nunn - aye Mr. Dodd - aye Ms. Dixon - aye Motion carried. 5-0 B. Consideration of a Variance Reouest - Brandon & Jennifer Martin - 491 Kumquat Avenue - Six-foot Hieh Fence on a Corner Lot Located within the Secondary Front Yard - LDC Section 54-2-7.7(c)(3) The City Attorney asked for anyone who planned to speak regarding this variance request to fill out a speaker oath card. Brandon Martin, the applicant, 491 Kumquat, came forward and explained there were no line -of - sight issues or visibility issues with the fence, but they also have a pool in the backyard and if they have to move their fence back, they will have no back yard area for their children or dogs. He believes their fence adds value to the neighborhood and most of his neighbors are happy with it. He also noted there are several instances near his home of overgrown 20-foot bamboo that affect visibility when driving. The Community Development Manager noted that it is highly unusual to have the same variance requests to come up within such a short span of time. She researched how often this issue has arisen in case a change to the Code needed to be addressed, but in the last 10 years this type of variance request has only come up twice. It does seem to simply be a coincidence that both requests came in within three weeks of each other, and each request should be looked at upon its own merits. She explained that the City received an application for a permit from a fence contractor to put up a 6-foot fence on this property. Comments were sent to the fence contractor from the Zoning Department that the permit was being denied due to the fence being 6 feet in height in the secondary front yard, as well as comments from the Engineering Department that the permit was denied due to the proposed location on the property line in the rear utility and drainage easement. The fence was installed without the issuance of the permit and without any of those concerns being addressed. City staff did not receive a revised survey. Thus, the applicant still does not have a building permit in place for the fence and that also needs to be addressed. Unlike the previous variance request, there is not a unique property. It is a standard corner lot that is wider than other corner lots in the area. Most comer lots are 85 feet wide, but this corner lot is 100 feet wide. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 12 The fence was put in about 3 to 4 feet into the street right of way, so it is incorrectly installed. The applicant cannot get a variance for that, no matter what, because a fence cannot be placed in the street right of way. The Board of Adjustment can allow the fence to be on the property line or moved inward. • In considering the criteria to be considered to grant a variance, there are not special conditions or circumstances that would favor the applicant's request. • The conditions were created by the applicant and his contractor installing a fence without a permit and without addressing the concerns of the Zoning and Building Departments. • There would be special privilege conferred if the variance was granted. A close neighbor has been in this same situation and has conformed to the requirements of the Code and reduced their secondary front yard fence to 4 feet. • There is no hardship for the applicant to conform to the requirements of the Code. The property does have a pool and an auxiliary driveway, but the homeowner can still enjoy his backyard even if the variance is not granted. He still has recreational storage and parking abilities in his backyard. The Community Development Manager reviewed the options before the Board of Adjustment. Option A. The Board of Adjustment could deny the variance. Option B. The Board of Adjustment could grant the variance to allow the 6-foot fence on the secondary front yard setback, but the applicant would still need a permit issued. Staff did verify that the fence is not causing a problem with the required visibility triangle in his front yard. Option C. The Board of Adjustment could grant a partial variance and allow a portion of the 6-foot fence to extend into the secondary front yard and a distance specified by the Board, for instance, 10 feet from the property line, rather than 20 feet per the Code. Regardless of the option chosen by the Board of Adjustment, the fence must be relocated out of the street right of way and out of the rear easement. Mr. Nunn asked about the red and blue lines drawn on Exhibit F on page 62. The Community Development Manager clarified that the red lines show where the fence has been installed and the blue lines show what the permit had requested or what the applicant's contractor said he had planned to build if the permit was granted. The City had concerns because the blue line is shown to be in the rear easement, as commented upon by Engineering, and there were no dimensions given so it was unclear where the fence would be placed, as commented upon by Zoning. Mr. Nunn commented about fences being allowed within an easement as long as the homeowner grants access and assumes the cost of repairs. He asks if this is allowed in this type of case. The Community Development Manager said an affidavit can be completed by a homeowner that says they will relocate the fence if it needs to be accessed by the City or utility provider. Such an affidavit would also have to be signed off by the Engineering Department, but in this case the Engineering Department had already denied the permit based on the fence being in the rear easement and due to some maintenance issues with this specific drainage ditch. Such an affidavit is not always an option. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 13 Chairman McPartlan asked for public input from those that agree with the variance request. Marsha Brizzie, 182 Coconut Street, said that she walks past the applicant's house every day. There is nothing about this fence that is blocking her vision to watch for cars and walk safely around the neighborhood. She was shocked to hear there is a problem with the applicant's fence. The 8-feet bamboo at a nearby home that was even closer to the street was definitely a problem. This is the only part of his yard that can be used for his dog. There is no backyard space because of his pool. The Community Development Manager agreed that City staff did not consider there to be a visibility problem due to the fence. She noted that the applicant can keep the fence where it is on the property line but it needs to be taken down to 4 feet in the front yard setback to be in accord with the Code. Ms. Brizzie also pointed out that the fence does not look 6 feet high because the land goes downhill and lowering the fence may mean his dogs will be able to jump over it. She said the fence is not causing any visibility problems within the neighborhood. Chairman McPartlan asked if anyone would like to speak in opposition to this variance request and no one came forward. Mr. Martin, the applicant, explained that they had no intention to file a permit for something that was not appropriate and that is why they hired a licensed contractor to handle the fence installation. He stated they have no problem moving the fence out of the rear easement. He was just trying to create some usable yard space on the side yard because the enjoyment of his property is limited. The Community Development Manager discussed that the Board of Adjustment could go with Option C and grant a partial variance. She also pointed out that from the side of their garage to their property line, there is 30 feet of usable space. By moving the fence 10 feet, that still gives them 20 feet by their garage. She explained this could have been avoided if the applicant had worked with the City through the permitting process. She also requested a deadline to move the fence out of the easement, to relocate the fence, and to get the fence permit issued. Mr. Dodd referred to Exhibit H 1 and asked for clarification on what Option A would provide to the applicant. The Community Development Manager advised that the applicant could move the fence out of the street right of way and install a 4-foot fence along the property line, shown with a red line on Exhibit H1, but she does not think that is an option for the applicant because they needed a 6-foot fence because of their dogs. The blue lines on Option A on Exhibit HI show where the fence would have to be moved to if the Board of Adjustment denied the variance. Mr. Dodd confirmed his understanding of Option C was that it would reduce the side yard by 10 feet but the applicant can still have a 6-foot fence and a 20-foot side yard. Mr. Dodd asked about the responsibility of the contractor to pull a permit and then to finalize the permit process. The Community Development Manager confirmed that it is the responsibility of the contractor to follow through on the permit process and the contractor was fined for putting the fence up without the permit being issued. The contractor will have to pay that fee before there can be a final inspection. Mr. Dodd states he has a problem blaming the homeowner when there was a contractor involved and the contractor is responsible to know these requirements. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 14 Mr. Nunn agreed that this needs to be addressed with the contractor. If there had not been a Code violation, we would not have known this fence was built without a permit. He wonders how many fences are being built without the required permits. MOTION by Mr. Nunn and SECOND by Mr. Dodd to approve Option B and grant the variance to the applicant, but that includes completion of the permitting process. Mr. Dodd noted that the house is far enough back from the street that he does not believe the higher fence is creating any visibility issues for traffic. Mr. Nunn pointed out that the Community Development Manager agreed there were no visibility issues with where the fence is currently. She also confirmed there were no visibility issues with cars backing out of neighboring driveways. Chairman McPartlan asked if all of the neighbors were notified of the variance request. The Community Development Manager said letters were sent to the neighbors notifying them. Mr. Nunn commented on how much space there is between the road and the swale. The Community Development Manager pointed out that the fence is in the street right of way and needs to be moved back about 3 feet and the fence in the rear will need to be relocated out of the rear easement. Because the permit has not been issued, the City would require the contractor to adjust his survey to show where the fence is, and staff would request that this all be completed within a set timeframe. Mr. Dodd asks if those changes, relocating the fence 3 feet to get it out of the street right of way and relocating the fence out of the rear easement, are required for Option B. The Community Development Manager clarified that those specific changes would be required for the permit to be issued, even if the Board of Adjustment agrees to grant the variance to the applicant. The Engineering Department will not sign off on the permit unless the fence is out of that rear easement. There will still be some fence relocation and then a survey showing where the fence is, even if the full variance is granted. The City Manager reminded the Board of Adjustment to give a timeline for completion. Mr. Dodd expressed concerned that a timeline might not be met since in involves a contractor who has been deficient and already chosen not to follow proper permitting procedures. The applicant has asked for the variance but now he may have to become involved in litigation with the contractor before this is over with. The Community Development Manager said Staff had recommended giving the applicant 2 weeks to get the permit issued. The applicant can take over the permitting process and handle it himself. A survey is needed that shows where the fence is going to be, in accordance with the Board of Adjustment's decision. Then the permit will be good for 6 months to get the fence relocated and call in a final inspection that will verify the fence is in the correct location. The City Attorney informed the Board of Adjustment that they can ask for clarification from the applicant, but she would not open the meeting up to the public at this time. Mr. Nunn asks for the applicant to come forward because he may have already considered some of these matters regarding his contractor. Mr. Martin, the applicant, said that the contractor has been in contact with him and he thinks he will be available to relocate the fence within 60 days. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 15 Mr. Nunn agreed to add to his motion for Option B granting the variance the requirement of completing the permitting process with all proper fees within 60 days, and this was seconded by Council Member Dodd. Roll call: Chairman McPartlan - aye Mr. Nunn - aye Mr. Dodd - aye Ms. Dixon - aye Vice Chair Jones - - aye Motion carried. 5-0 Chairman McPartlan adjourned the Board of Adjustment meeting at 8:44 p.m. 11. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Chairman McPartlan convened the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 8:44 p.m. A. Approval of May 22, 2024 CRA Minutes B. Approval of September 25, 2024 CRA Minutes C. Approval of October 16, 2024 CRA Minutes MOTION by Mr. Dodd and SECOND by Vice Chair Jones to approve the May 22, 2024, September 25, 2024, and October 16, 2024 Minutes. Roll call: Mr. Nunn - aye Mr. Dodd - aye Ms. Dixon - aye Vice Chair Jones - - aye Chairman McPartlan - aye Motion carried. 5-0 D. Consideration of a Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for Design of the Riverview Park Renovations. Annrooriate Matching Funds and Forward to Citv Council for Annroval The City Manager explained that this is a request from Staff for the Community Redevelopment Agency to approve and allow this FIND grant agreement to be forwarded to City Council. The request is for $100,000, which would include $50,000 provided by FIND and $50,000 matched from the CRA budget. These funds will assist with the design of the Riverview Park renovations. MOTION by Mr. Dodd and SECOND by Ms. Dixon to approve Item D. Chairman McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Mr. Dodd - aye Ms. Dixon - aye Vice Chair Jones - - aye Chairman McPartlan - aye Mr. Nunn - aye Motion carried. 5-0 Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 16 E. Consideration of ADDroval of Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for Design and Installation of Dry Line at Law Enforcement Dock. ADDroDriation of Matching Funds. and Forward to Citv Council for ADDroval The City Manager explained that this is a request from Staff for the Community Redevelopment Agency to approve and allow this FIND grant agreement to be forwarded to City Council. The request is for $80,000, which would include $40,000 provided by FIND and $40,000 matched from the CRA budget. These funds will assist with the design and installation of the dry line for safety purposes at the law enforcement dock. Mr. Dodd asked if cost sharing was done for enhancements on the original dock. The City Manager said they do have some agreements in place for cost sharing with some other agencies relating to the law enforcement aspect of the dock. The need for a dry line was established later and had not been included in the original agreements. Staff may end up seeking additional funds and cost sharing from the Fire Department if they will be housing the law enforcement boat there, but this grant application is a way of helping with the initial design and installation cost of the dry dock. MOTION by Mr. Dodd and SECOND by Mr. Nunn to approve Item E. Chairman McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Ms. Dixon - aye Vice Chair Jones - aye Chairman McPartlan - - aye Mr. Nunn - aye Mr. Dodd - aye Motion carried. 5-0 F. Consideration of the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for Revised Structural Engineering Assessment, Design. Permitting and Bid Package for the ProDertv Located at 1540 Indian River Drive; ADnroDriation of Matching Funding; and Forward to Citv Council for ADDroval The City Manager explained that this is a request from Staff for the Community Redevelopment Agency to approve and allow this FIND grant agreement to be forwarded to City Council. The request is for $200,000, which would include $100,000 provided by FIND, $50,000 matched from the CRA budget for this year's budget and $50,000 requested from additional fund reserves. These funds will assist with the revised structural engineering assessment, design, permitting, and bid package for the property located at 1540 Indian River Drive, also known as Fisherman's Landing. Mr. Dodd asked if this would include the old Hurricane Harbor building, and the City Manager said yes. MOTION by Ms. Dixon and SECOND by Mr. Nunn to approve Item F. Chairman McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Vice Chair Jones - aye Chairman McPartlan - - aye Mr. Nunn - aye Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 17 Mr. Dodd - aye Ms. Dixon - aye Motion carried. 5-0 G. Consideration of the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for the Replacement of the Working Waterfront Dry Line: and Forward to Citv Council for Approval The City Manager explained that this is a request from Staff for the Community Redevelopment Agency to approve and allow this FIND grant agreement to be forwarded to City Council. The request is for $50,000, which would include $25,000 provided by FIND and $25,000 matched from the CRA budget. These funds will assist with replacement of the working waterfront dry line. This was needed because the existing dry line did not pass inspection and has been inoperable. MOTION by Mr. Nunn and SECOND by Vice Chair Jones to approve Item G. Chairman McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Chairman McPartlan - aye Mr. Nunn aye Mr. Dodd aye Ms. Dixon aye Vice Chair Jones aye Motion carried. 5-0 H. City Council Consideration of a Land and Water Conservation Grant AD_ Dlication to Renovate the Main Street/CaDt. Hardee Boat RamD The City Manager commended staff and the grant writing agency they have employed for their remarkable work in helping the City to obtain this many FIND grants. This is a request from Staff for the Community Redevelopment Agency to approve and allow this FIND grant agreement to be forwarded to City Council. The request is for $100,000, which would include $50,000 provided by FIND and $50,000 matched from the CRA budget. These funds will assist with the design of the Main Street Captain Hardee Phase I Improvements, which includes the dredging and other associated projects. MOTION by Vice Chair Jones and SECOND by Ms. Dixon to approve Item H. Chairman McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Mr. Nunn - aye Mr. Dodd - aye Ms. Dixon - aye Vice Chair Jones - aye Chairman McPartlan - - aye Motion carried. 5-0 I. Consideration of Authorizing Staff to Submit a Land and Water Conservation Grant ADDlication to Renovate the Main Street/CaDt. Hardee Boat Ramn and Forward to Citv Council for Approval Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 18 The City Manager explained this is Staffs request from the Community Redevelopment Agency for approval to apply for a Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) grant to assist with the renovations of the Main Street Captain Hardee Boat Ramp. This will be for the needed design and the construction portion of the project. The total budget for this portion of the project is $400,000. If the CRA give its approval for the application, Staff will request a $200,000 LWCF grant and request a $150,000 match from the CRA budget and use the $50,000 from the previously approved FIND grant (Item H above). If approved by the CRA, Staff asks for this item to be forwarded to City Council for approval as well. Mr. Dodd asked for clarification because the Executive Summary within the Staff Report says that this LWCF grant will fund half of the improvements. The City Manager reviewed that the half refers to the $200,000 LWCF grant which will cover half of the $400,000 estimated cost for the project. Mr. Dodd asked if the $400,000 will cover all of the needed improvements. The City Manager said it is unknown if $400,000 will be enough to handle all of the improvements. The costs are an estimate because the design has not yet been completed, but this will include the costs for dredging. If more funds are needed, Staff will pursue additional funding mechanisms or additional funds from the City. MOTION by Mr. Nunn and SECOND by Ms. Dixon to approve Item I. Chairman McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Mr. Dodd - aye Ms. Dixon - aye Vice Chair Jones - aye Chairman McPartlan - - aye Mr. Nunn - aye Motion carried. 5-0 12. Chairman McPartlan adjourned the CRA Meeting and reconvened the City Council Meeting at 8:55 p.m. 13. CONSENT AGENDA A. Consideration of Resolution No. R-24-72 Approving a Piggyback of Contract 2023056 by Indian River County for Fiber Optic Services and Consideration of a Purchase Order for $19,438.27 for Gerelcom, Inc. to Provide Fiber Services B. Consideration of Resolution No. R-24-63 Providing Approval of a Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for the Replacement of the Working Waterfront Dry Line, Appropriation of Matching Funds as Well as Providing Authorization to the City Manager to Execute C. Consideration of Resolution No. R-24-65 Providing Approval and Execution of a Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for Design and Permitting for Riverview Park Renovations Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 19 D. Consideration of Resolution No. R-24-66 Providing Approval of Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for Design and Installation of Law Enforcement Dock Dryline; Appropriation of Matching Funds as Well as Providing Authorization to the City Manager to Execute E. Consideration of Resolution No. R-24-67 Providing Approval of the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for Revised Structural Engineering Assessment, Design, Permitting and Bid Package for the Property Located at 1540 Indian River Drive; Appropriation of Matching Funding; and Authorization for City Manager to Execute F. Consideration of Resolution No. R-24-68 Providing Approval of the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) Grant Agreement for Design of the Main Street/Hardee Boat Ramp Improvements Phase I, Appropriation of Funding and Authorization for City Manager to Execute G. Consideration of Authorizing Staff to Submit a Land and Water Conservation Grant for the Design and Construction of Main Street/Hardee Boat Ramp Improvements, Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Appropriate Documents Council Member Dodd asked for Item A to be pulled for discussion. MOTION by Council Member Dixon and SECOND by Vice Mayor Jones to approve Items B through G. Roll call: Council Member Dixon - aye Vice Mayor Jones - aye Mayor McPartlan - - aye Council Member Nunn - aye Council Member Dodd - aye Motion carried. 5-0 Item A - Contract 2023056 by Indian River County for Fiber Ontic Services Council Member Dodd pulled this item to clarify that this item is to provide fiber optic services for the City operational facilities, not for the entire City of Sebastian. MOTION by Council Member Dodd and SECOND by Vice Mayor Nunn to approve Items B through G. Mayor McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Vice Mayor Jones - aye Mayor McPartlan - - aye Council Member Nunn - aye Council Member Dodd - aye Council Member Dixon - aye Motion carried. 5-0 14. COMMITTEE REPORTS & APPOINTMENT Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 20 Vice Mayor Jones reported that he attended the Beach and Shoreline Preservation Committee and he found out the County now has a spot on their website where derelict vessels can be reported. It is not easy to move the derelict vessels, but this can help the County to get the process started. [Fi11i1:3il�H: I �/:� 1`Lei.9 A. Second Reading for Ordinance No. 0-24-19 — Proposed Amendment of Citv Code Chanter 2 Concerning Procurement of Goods and Services The City Attorney read the title of Ordinance No. 0-24-19. The Contracts and Procurement Manager reviewed that the first reading of Ordinance No. 0-24-19 took place on November 4, 2024. This is now the second reading. She said she was glad to answer any questions and review the proposed changes. MOTION by Council Member Nunn and SECOND by Vice Mayor Jones to approve Ordinance No. 0-24-19. Mayor McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Mayor McPartlan - aye Council Member Nunn - aye Council Member Dodd - aye Council Member Dixon - aye Vice Mayor Jones - aye Motion carried. 5-0 B. Second Reading for Ordinance No. 0-24-20. Making Textual Amendments to Chapter 74 of the Code of Ordinances. Parks and Recreation The City Attorney read the title of Ordinance No. 0-24-20. The Parks and Recreation Director stated this is the second reading of Ordinance No. 0-24-20, and he was glad to answer any questions. Council Member Dodd noticed a lot of people in the park that were using vape pens while he was at the Clam Bake and he wondered how this ordinance prohibiting all forms of tobacco and electronic smoking devices would be enforced in the City. The Parks and Recreation Director said it is better to have the prohibition codified in order to make expectations clear to be able to enforce it. MOTION by Council Member Nunn and SECOND by Vice Mayor Jones to approve Ordinance No. 0-24-20. Mayor McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Council Member Nunn - aye Council Member Dodd - aye Council Member Dixon - aye Vice Mayor Jones - aye Mayor McPartlan - aye Motion carried. 5-0 Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 21 fC�4i:1�11►1E.y1�1� : �b`�1►`I.4I.`I.`D��iST� 17. NEW BUSINESS A. Citv Council Reconsideration of Ordinance No. 0-24-17 The City Attorney reviewed that at the October 16, 2024 City Council Meeting asked for Ordinance No. 0-24-17 to be brought up again for reconsideration. Ordinance No. 0-24-17 was adopted on September 25, 2024 upon a second and final reading and a public hearing, and it became final after 10 days. If the Council decides to move forward with reconsideration, a new ordinance will need to be brought forward that will rescind Ordinance No. 0-24-17. The City Attorney clarified that the procedure for Council tonight would be to have a discussion on whether to make a motion to reconsider Ordinance No. 0-24-17, and this discussion was not a public hearing asking for public input. If Council decided to move forward with a new ordinance to rescind Ordinance No. 0-24-17, then a public hearing and notice would be required when the new ordinance is brought forward. MOTION by Council Member Dodd and SECOND by Council Member Dixon to reconsider Ordinance No. 0-24-17. Roll call: Council Member Dodd - aye Council Member Dixon - aye Vice Mayor Jones - nay Mayor McPartlan - nay Council Member Nunn - nay Motion failed. 3-2 B. Consideration of Plavaround Design and Surface Tvne for Brvant Court Park Plavground and the Issuance of a Purchase Order not to Exceed $75.000.00 to Miracle Recreation Eauinment Co. and Provide Authoritv for Execution to the Citv Manager or Designee The Parks and Recreation Director showed Council a photo of the existing conditions of the Bryant Court playground. He reviewed the details of the proposed new playground and asked for their approval of the new playground equipment. He also asked Council to consider the type of surface to be placed on the ground underneath the equipment, either artificial turf or mulch. The artificial turf meets ADA requirements, is easier to maintain, and it should last longer than mulch. He stated that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee met on November 18, 2024 and their consensus was for the artificial turf. The $75,000 price includes the purchase of the equipment and the installation. The City Manager pointed out that the equipment will include an ADA accessible swing, an infant swing, and two saddle swings for older children. Council Member Nunn asked if the playground equipment could be turned in a different direction than what is shown in the photo. He pointed out the benefit of a parent being able to watch a couple of children on both pieces of equipment at the same time. The Parks and Recreation Director anticipates the equipment would be turned and set up differently than the picture because of where the shade is at Bryant Park. Council Member Nunn has noticed that the artificial turf he has seen has been holding up well and he thinks it is better than the mulch. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 22 Council Member Dixon asked about the maintenance of the seams. She was concerned about liability issues for the City. The Parks and Recreation Director explained that moisture from rain causes decay of the threads that hold the seams together, so over time the seams have to be resewn. Other than brushing or blowing the turf every now and then, the resewing of the seams is the only maintenance. He believes the surface will be glued down, not put down with spikes. The ground underneath the artificial turf will be packed. Council Member Dodd reminded Council that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee members regularly inspect the parks on a monthly basis and they help Staff to identify maintenance issues before they become problems. MOTION by Council Member Nunn and SECOND by Vice Mayor Jones to approve the purchase and installation of this playground equipment at Bryant Park with the artificial turf surface. Mayor McPartlan asked for public input and there was none. Roll call: Council Member Dixon - aye Vice Mayor Jones - aye Mayor McPartlan - aye Council Member Nunn - aye Council Member Dodd - aye Motion carried. 5-0 MOTION by Council Member Dodd and SECOND by Council Member Nunn to extend the Council meeting until 10:00 p.m., if the time is needed, carried with a unanimous voice vote of 5-0. C. Consideration of a Purchase Order for Phoenix Tradine. Inc. in the Amount of $215.509.42 to Provide a Law Enforcement Patrol Vessel The Police Chief reviewed that the planned purchase of a law enforcement patrol vessel had been before Council previously and Staff is now asking for approval of the purchase order. Mayor McPartlan remembered this being discussed and approved during the Budget Meeting. Council Member Nunn reminded Council that a FIND grant had been approved to help with 50% the purchase cost. Council Member Dodd had seen the County's boat, which is similar, and he said it has fantastic capabilities. The Police Chief noted that the boat should last for decades. MOTION by Council Member Dodd and SECOND by Council Member Nunn to approve the purchase of the law enforcement patrol vessel. Mayor Dodd asked for public feedback and there was none. Roll call: Mayor McPartlan - aye Council Member Nunn - aye Council Member Dodd - aye Council Member Dixon - aye Vice Mayor Jones - aye Motion carried. 5-0 D. Consideration of Direction on Proposed Voluntary Commercial Annexation along the U.S. I-Iiahwav 1 Corridor Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 23 The City Manager reviewed that at the July 10, 2024 Council had given direction for Staff to look into opportunities for commercial annexation of properties on the U.S. Highway 1 Corridor, including the areas from Barber Street North back up to 512 South. Staff believes the first step is contacting the property owners in these areas to request voluntary annexation. There are consulting funds available in the Community Development Fund and finding a consultant specializing in annexation may guide Staff in reaching out to property owners with a proposition that benefits the City as well as property owners. Staff would like direction from Council if they should continue to move forward with voluntary annexation. Mayor McPartlan asked if this meant Staff would go piece -by -piece in reaching out to property owners. The City Manager said Staff would like the advice of a consultant in order to address such questions and to know where to start the process. The recommended guidance would be brought before Council before specific actions were taken. Council Member Dodd said given the City's last experience with annexation in the 2018 or 2019 timeframe and also considering the public input tonight on the Habitat for Humanity issue, he would like to see more public outreach on what the City is trying to accomplish through annexation and how it would benefit the City and its residents. He mentioned that Indian River County has approved some things on the River that Sebastian City Council would not have approved. If the City wants to control what is going on in its surrounding areas, that goal can be met through annexation. Council Member Dodd stated that he does not disagree with the people that felt they were not notified about the transfer of City property to Habitat for Humanity because the City did not take any extra steps to reach out to residents on that. He does not doubt that it was a good decision for Sebastian, but meeting the statutory notification requirements is not always sufficient for residents to understand the good things that Council is trying to accomplish. Council Member Nunn said we need to make sure we have property owners that are interested in annexation before they hear negative ideas about it. MOTION by Council Member Dodd and SECOND by Council Member Nunn to authorize the City Manager to use funds to obtain the recommendations of an annexation consultant to reach out to property owners potentially interested in annexation and at the same time putting together a public outreach plan on what the City is trying to accomplish through annexation. Mayor McPartlan asked for public input. Terry McGinn recommended having a committee or a public workshop to get more public involvement in these processes. Roll call: Council Member Nunn - aye Council Member Dodd - aye Council Member Dixon - aye Vice Mayor Jones - aye Mayor McPartlan - aye Motion carried. 5-0 E. Council Discussion on House Bill (HB) 1379 Next Steps in Reeards to Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Svstems Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 24 The City Manager explained that at Council's direction, Staff has reviewed options on how to adequately comply with Florida House Bill (HB) 1379 requiring all properties within a Basin Management Action Plan to be connected to a central sewer system or upgraded to an enhanced nutrient -reducing onsite sewage treatment and disposal system (ENR-OSTDS) by 2030. He noted that the City Engineer has been with him at every meeting with the County discussing septic -to -sewer and she has presented three proposed remediation options. The City of Sebastian currently has 9,574 existing septic systems within the City limits. The map on page 639 details with red dots the septic systems that are in the process of being converted and the green shows systems that have already been converted to sewer. Everything that is in blue/purple are the systems that are not connected. This information came from the Department of Health. Option 1 would call for the conversion of all traditional septic tank systems to an enhanced nutrient reducing system, which is what HB 1379 requires when a sewer connection is not available and a septic tank fails inspection. The estimated cost is $220,202,000 for the 9,574 existing septic systems in Sebastian, or an estimate of $23,000 per home based on conversations with septic tank companies in the area. This would include a new drain field for each system which will likely be mandatory for a lot of homes. Staff requests direction from Council to seek out grant funding to assist residents with upgrading their septic systems. This becomes an immediate need once any current septic systems fail. Option 2 would be connecting homes with septic tanks to the Indian River County Utility existing sewer system where possible. Staff requests direction from Council to work with the County to coordinate funding, design, and construction of sewer connections within the City limits. This option will likely involve funding from the City to work together with the County. The efforts of Option 1 and 2 might need to be combined in order to create a long-term solution and to comply with HB 1379 by 2030. Option 3 would be constructing an additional wastewater treatment facility for the City of Sebastian. Staff requests direction from Council to investigate options with an existing interlocal agreement with Indian River County and to move forward with hiring a consultant for a Citywide assessment to determine the feasibility, design, and location of a City wastewater treatment facility. Such a study could cost up to $600,000, but might also help identify options for grant assistance. Council Member Dodd asks about possibly partnering with Fellsmere. The City Manager said he has previously had some discussions with Fellsmere. He believes they are currently considering the feasibility of a wastewater treatment facility on the west side of Fellsmere. If they considered a location on the east side of Fellsmere, closer to Sebastian, then a partnership might become a possibility. Council Member Dodd says that Fellsmere currently has an arrangement where they pump their wastewater to a lift station and pay for it to be processed by the County. The location of their wastewater treatment facility would not matter so much if we pumped it to them and paid them to process it for us. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 25 He said the main issue is that the $220,202,000 will be absorbed by the residents of Sebastian no matter what because all of the septic tanks will have to be replaced. He thinks it is likely the 2030 date will have to be changed or extended, but this problem still has to be dealt with. Every year the cost of making this transition will increase for homeowners. There was additional legislation in 2020 that put the responsibility for this issue on the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). At some point DEP may be inspecting septic systems, and if a septic system gets condemned, it will have to be replaced. The least expensive way to deal with this as a City, without creating a wastewater treatment facility, is to put the infrastructure in so residents can be connected to a central collection system and the wastewater would be sold to somebody or made part of the County utility. Council Member Dodd thinks the first step is to have the City Attorney bring Council a resolution to send to Indian River County asking them produce their plan to connect the City to sewer based on the five steps of the 1994 interlocal agreement because in the fifth step the County had said they would put together a plan to connect the City to sewer within five years of the signing of the interlocal agreement. The second step would be to begin the process of trying to find grants to assist residents in this conversion and that might require hiring a separate grant writer with knowledge in this area. He also thinks we need a true legal opinion on what the potential issues are with the interlocal agreement. Right now, through the interlocal agreement, Sebastian has agreed that the County is the sole source for sewer service. If we take a different route, how will that impact the City if we breach our obligations under the interlocal agreement? Sebastian needs to officially communicate to the County through a resolution that we want a plan to get connected to sewer. He says this has only been unofficially communicated to the County in the past. Sebastian is considered to be their service area. The City created an interlocal agreement with the County in 1994. He thinks the County should give us some estimates on the cost. He does not want to spend $600,000 on a feasibility study until there is a response back from the County. Vice Mayor Jones said if the County is not holding up their end of the bargain, then Council needs to understand how it will legally impact the City to break this interlocal agreement. Council Member Dodd reminded Council that the City Attorney is authorized to bring on an attorney to evaluate the interlocal agreement, determine the obligations of the City and the County, and whether the agreement is enforceable. The problem of converting septic systems is going to get more expensive as time goes on because nearly the entire east coast and parts of the west coast of Florida are subject to the requirements of HB 1379. He thinks the costs might end up being double the current estimates, closer to $400 million. Council Member Nunn said the discussion has been good, but he reminds Council that they are running out of time left for the meeting. The City Attorney said if this is the direction from Council then she can reach out for assistance from outside counsel, Mr. Andrew Mai, to evaluate the interlocal agreement, unless they would prefer someone else. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 26 Council agreed they would like to receive counsel from Mr. Mai and for a resolution to be brought to Council that specifically references the interlocal agreement and the County's obligation to produce a plan. F. Council Annointees to Indian River Countv and Regional Boards Council Member Dodd asked to be excused from the Treasure Coast Council of Local Governments, and he suggested Mayor McPartlan be on that Board. Mayor McPartlan committed to serve on the Treasure Coast Council of Local Governments on the first Wednesday of the month. Council Member Dodd asked if anyone was willing to serve on the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council because he is more than willing to step down from that. He also needs an alternate for the Treasure Coast Regional League of Cities because they are having trouble getting a quorum sometimes. Mayor McPartlan agreed to serve as an alternate on the Treasure Coast Regional League of Cities. Council Member Dixon would be glad to serve, but these meetings conflict with her work schedule. Council Member Nunn says that it is impossible for him to have a Wednesday morning meeting at this time so he would like to step down from the Sebastian River Area Chamber of Commerce that meets at 8 a.m. on the second Wednesday of the month. Vice Mayor Jones agreed to attend the Sebastian River Area Chamber of Commerce meeting. Council Members will continue monitoring the County Commission meetings on the same rotating schedule. 18. CITY MANAGER MATTERS A. Discussion on Annlvine for Grant Funding to be Used in the Purchase of the Sembler Property Located at 1527 and 1528 Indian River Drive Next to the Working Waterfront The City Manager stated that Council had previously provided direction a few years ago, in the 2022 to 2023 timeframe, to have discussions and negotiations if these properties came on the market. At this time the property owners have expressed some interest in selling and therefore the City might consider pursuing a grant opportunity to purchase the property. This is a time -sensitive issue because the identified grant is due in January and two appraisals will be needed on the property so that the median of the appraisals can be used for the grant application. A 20% or 25% match of City funds would be needed, but this would provide a larger amount to obtain this property if we were awarded this grant. If the City is able to obtain these properties it will help ensure that nothing is developed on the waterfront next to the City's Working Waterfront property. The grant consultant is ready to go on this. It was the consensus of Council for the City Manager to move forward with the grant application. The City Manager asked about rescheduling or cancelling the December 4, 2024 City Council meeting due to several scheduling conflicts, possibly only having one Council meeting for the month on December 11, 2024, and cancelling the December 18, 2024 meeting. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 27 It was the consensus of Council to have one meeting in December on December 11, 2024. The City Manager had one final item to discuss, the CRA Septic -to -Sewer and a request from the County for the City to pay for material costs, but since they are running out of time to complete tonight's meeting, he said this matter can be postponed until the next meeting. It was the consensus of Council to handle that issue at the next meeting. 19. CITY ATTORNEY MATTERS A. Discussion/Direction on Amendment of Time Limits for Public Inout The City Attorney reviewed that at the October 16, 2024 Council gave her direction to consider amending the time limits for public speakers. Council Member Dixon said they would not still be conducting this meeting at almost 10:00 p.m. if they reduced the time limit. Council Member Nunn said he would like to give public speakers 3 minutes and a speaker could be given an extension if Council wanted. Council Member Dodd said that 3 minutes is more than is usually given to speakers at many City meetings. MOTION by Council Member Dixon and SECOND by Council Member Nunn to reduce the time limits for public input from 5 minutes to 3 minutes. Mayor McPartlan asked for public input and if anyone was on Zoom. No public input was given. Terry McGinn recommended having a committee or a public workshop to get more public involvement in these processes. Roll call: Council Member Dixon - aye Vice Mayor Jones - aye Mayor McPartlan - aye Council Member Nunn - aye Council Member Dodd - aye Motion carried. 5-0 20. CITY CLERK MATTERS — None. 21. CITY COUNCIL MATTERS A. Council Member Dixon said the Clam Bake was wonderful, and she thanked everyone for participating. B. Council Member Dodd — None. C. Vice Mayor Jones said he is looking forward to the Centennial Celebration. D. Mayor McPartlan thanked Council for giving him the opportunity to lead the City. E. Council Member Nunn wished a Happy Birthday to Sebastian. Regular City Council, Board of Adjustment, and Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes November 20, 2024 Page 28 22. Being no further business, Mayor McPartlan adjourned the Regular City Council meeting at 9:52 p.m. Approved at the December 11, 2024 Regular City Council meeting. �/// Mayor Bob cPartlan ATTEST.• //n. Z16 bLi Onette Williams, City Clerk "Official" CERTIFICATE OF CANVASSING BOARD OFFICIAL RETURNS CITY OF SEBASTIAN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA We, the undersigned, Robyn Stone, County Court Judge, Leslie Rossway Swan, Supervisor of Elections and Joseph Flescher, Board of County Commissioners, constituting the Board of County Canvassers in and for said County, do hereby certify that we met on the 15 day of November, 2024 A.D., and proceeded publicly to canvass the votes given for the charter referendum herein specified at the General Election held on the 5 day of November, 2024 A.D., as shown by the returns on file in the office of the Supervisor of Elections. We do hereby certify from said returns as follows: For, Charter Referendum Question #1 Amending the City of Sebastian Charter to Increase Councilmember Terms to Four Years Shall Charter Sec. 4.12 of the City of Sebastian be amended to provide that the Council Members are elected for three-year terms in 2025 and commencing with the year 2026 thereafter for four-year terms? The whole number of votes cast was 15,262 of which number Yes, for Approval RECEIVED 66,377 VOTES No. for Rejection RECEIVED 8_,885 VOTES We certify that pursuant to Section 102.112, Florida Statutes, the canvassing board has compared the number of persons who voted with the number of ballots counted and that the certification includes all valid votes cast in the election. Robyn Stone, County Court Judge Canvassing Bo Chairman Leslie Rossway Swan, Supervisor of Elections Canvassing Board Member J h F%scher, County Commissioner nvassing Board Member November 15, 2024 "Official" icial" CERTIFICATE OF CANVASSING BOARD OFFICIAL RETURNS CITY OF SEBASTIAN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA We, the undersigned, Robyn Stone, County Court Judge, Leslie Rossway Swan, Supervisor of Elections and Joseph Flescher, Board of County Commissioners, constituting the Board of County Canvassers in and for said County, do hereby certify that we met on the 15 day of November, 2024 A.D., and proceeded publicly to canvass the votes given for the offices and persons herein specified at the General Election held on the 5 day of November, 2024 A.D., as shown by the returns on file in the office of the Supervisor of Elections. We do hereby certify from said returns as follows: For (Two Year Term) City Council Member Term, the whole number of votes cast was 20,852, of which number (VOTE FOR UP TO TWO) Kelly Dixon RECEIVED 10,055 VOTES Ed Dodd RECEIVED 9,276 VOTES Damien H. Gilliams RECEIVED 1,521 VOTES We certify that pursuant to Section 102.112, Florida Statutes, the canvassing board has compared the number of persons who voted with the number of ballots counted and that the certification includes all valid votes cast in the election. l 11 Robyn Stone, County Court Judge Canvassing Board Chairman Leslie Rossway Swan, Supervisor of Elections Canv sing Board Member J s h Flescher, County Commissioner vassing Board Member November 15, 2024 CITY OF $EIM HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OATH OF OFFICE I, Kelly Dixon, do solemnly swear that I will support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States, and of the State of Florida; that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the State; and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of the office of Council Member for the City of Sebastian of which I am now about to enter, so help me God. Kelly Dixon Sebastian City Council Member Sworn and subscribed before me by physical presence this 20T' day of November, 2024. Ms. Dixon is personally known to me. C� (,l),4xxA-�- A J66tte Williams, MMC City Clerk MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 2-28.2027 OF CITY OF SEBASTtAN HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OATH OF OFFICE I, Ed Dodd, do solemnly swear that I will support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States, and of the State of Florida; that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the State; and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of the office of Council Member for the City of Sebastian of which I am now about to enter, so help me God. Ed Dodd Sebastian City Council Member Sworn and subscribed before me by physical presence this 20' day of November, 2024. Mr. Dodd is personally known to me. J6knette Williams, MMC City Clerk .11101 MY CoMMiSSION EXPIRES 2-28-2027 0