Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03102010City Council Present: Mayor Richard H. Gillmor Vice -Mayor Jim Hill Council Member Andrea Coy Council Member Eugene Wolff Council Member Don Wright None. CITY OF HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 2010 6:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 1. Mayor Gillmor called the regular meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. 2. Rev. Ian Crawshaw, Fellsmere Community Church gave the invocation. 3. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 4. ROLL CALL Staff Present: City Manager, Al Minner City Attorney, Robert Ginsburg City Clerk, Sally Maio Deputy City Clerk, Jeanette Williams Airport Director, Joseph Griffin Finance Director, Ken Killgore Building Department Plans Examiner, Charles Geisz Growth Management Director, Rebecca Grohall Growth Management Manager, Jan King Police Chief, Michelle Morris Police Captain, Mike Beyers Parks Superintendent, Chris McCarthy MIS Senior Systems Analyst, Barbara Brooke -Reese 5. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS Modifications and additions require unanimous vote of City Council members Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Two 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. 10.041 A. Proclamation GFWC Women in History Month March 1 Mayor Gillmor read and presented the proclamation to members of the GFWC. 10.042 B. Rob Medina Community Military Affairs Officer for Congressman Bill Posey (FL 15) Mr. Medina thanked Council for their leadership, touched briefly on some federal issues and invited the public to contact the Congressman directly or through him. Brief Announcements Mr. Wright announced the Sebastian Police Department's Bicycle Rodeo and Safety Event to be held March 20 at 9:00 am at the Barber Street Sports Complex. Mr. Wright also urged everyone to make sure they are counted in the 2010 Census. He cited a Florida League of Cities statistic that $2,200.00 of state and federal aid is lost for each person not counted. Ms. Coy announced the Sebastian River Area Chamber of Commerce Concert in Riverview Park on Friday, March 19 will be the Sebastian River High School Jazz Band. Mr. Hill announced the Pelican Island Wildlife Festival will be held this Sunday at Riverview Park. (later corrected to Saturday) 7. 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. 3 11 A. Approve Minutes February 24, 2010 Regular Meeting 10.043 B. Approve the 2010 Rotary Club Home and Garden Show at Riverview Park 13 -18 on March 27 and 18, 2010 from 9:00 a.m. to 5 p.m. Consider Request to Serve Alcoholic Beverages (Parks Transmittal, Application, Diagram, Letter) 10.044 C. Resolution No. R -10 -06 DeShea Aviation Lease Sublet (Airport 19 -59 Transmittal, R- 10 -06, Correspondence, Lease) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO THE SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT; AUTHORIZING THE SALE/TRANSFER OF LEASEHOLD ASSETS BETWEEN DeSHEA AVIATION AND KENNETH MISHLER; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Wright asked that on circle page eight, paragraph 2, his comment reflect that he was "not addressing the need to conserve water" instead of "not concerned with conserving water 2 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Three MOTION by Mr. Hill and SECOND by Ms. Coy to approve consent agenda items A, B, and C with the context of Mr. Wright's paragraph adjusted. Prior to the vote, the City Attorney asked that the resolution title in item C reflect the originating resolution (R- 95 -58) for the record. Mr. Hill and Ms. Coy agreed to include his request in the motion. Result of the roll call vote: AYES: All NAYS: None Motion carried 8. 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. Ms. Coy announced the County Commission will be re- addressing the Ocean Concrete issue in April noting Council had sent a letter when this first came up. Mr. Wright said he was one of the directors that worked on the first round of opposition and a letter was sent. He suggested sending the letter again unless Council's opinion has changed. Mr. Hill said he would like more information before sending the letter again. Mayor Gillmor called for a recess at 6:54 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:06 p.m., all members were present. Mr. Hill corrected the actual day of the Pelican Island Wildlife Festival to Saturday, March 13 Mayor Gillmor said that during the break the City Manager requested that item 12C be moved up to 9A as the consultant was in attendance. 9. QUASI- JUDICIAL HEARINGS 10.048 A. C- Award Professional Services Agreement for Evaluation and Appraisal 257 -322 Report to Outlier Planning, LLC in the Amount of $37,486.00 (GMD Transmittal, Agreement, Exhibit A, Scores) The City Manager said the City is required to submit an evaluation and appraisal report for the comprehensive plan, over 10 companies responded to the RFP, staff is recommending this new firm comprised of experienced planners. He said they will reduce their cost by 5% if the Dept. of Community Affairs does not approve the EAR the first time through. He said Brandon Schaad was in attendance to answer any questions. Mayor Gillmor asked about the different prices depicted in the agenda packet on circle pages 307 and 315. The City Manager explained the initial proposed price was $42,486 with their offer of cutting off $10,000 if they don't perform so he asked them to cut $5,000 off right away to which they agreed. Mr. Wright said Outlier Planning did a fine job with their proposal. 3 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Four Public Comment Damien Gilliams, 1623 US Highway 1, said it sounds like the City can save another $5,000 and asked if it was budgeted. The City Manager confirmed it was budgeted at $50,000. MOTION by Mr. Wolff and SECOND by Mr. Wright to approve the agreement with Outlier Planning staff and author the City Manager to execute the attached agreement. Ms. Coy thanked the Outlier Planning Group for their negotiations, and noted the local groups were almost double the price. Result of the roll call vote: Ayes: All Nays: None Motion carried. 10.045 B. A. Appeal of Approval by the Planning Zoning Commission on January 7, 2010 of a Site Plan Modification for the Seawinds Real Estate Company, LLC Crematory Located at 735 S. Fleming Street 61 -62 (Memorandum from City Attorney) 63 -196 (GMD Transmittal, Exhibits A -G) The City Attorney read the title and explained the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision was on circle pages 65 and 66 from which the appeal was taken. The City Attorney swore in those who intended to address Council. Mayor Gillmor disclosed that he received a letter that is in the packet. The City Attorney asked Council if there were there any other communications to them. Mr. Wright disclosed that he and Sam Coburn are members of the Rotary Club and he is a member of the Elks Club; but he has not discussed this issue with any parties. Mr. Wolff said he had an e-mail from the City Clerk and received a voice message from Gene Heitzman though he did not respond to it. The City Attorney asked Mr. Wright if he was a director or equivalent of a director or officer with the Elks. He said he was not, only a member. The City Attorney advised that he did not have a conflict of interest, and then asked him if he had the ability to be impartial. He answered that he did. The City Attorney advised that the key to the proceeding was to have the ability to be neutral and impartial, and rule on the evidence before them as well as what might be presented. He asked Council if they believed that they had that ability despite any e- mails, voice messages or correspondence they might have received. All Council Members said that they did. 4 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Five 7:37 pm The City Attorney asked each side who is represented by an attorney, or anybody present, if they have any objection to what has been disclosed. There was no response. Appellant's Presentation Leon Nichols, Attorney representing the B.P.O. E. Elks Lodge #2174 (hereafter Lodge), said they have filed the appeal based on the terrible fire that occurred at the crematory that would have spread to the Lodge if the wind had been blowing from the south. He said the crematory is 20 feet from the Lodge and at the time of the fire, there were over 100 people at the Lodge playing bingo. He requested that the crematory be constructed where it won't be an endangerment to a populous area such as the Lodge. He described the improvements planned for the new larger crematory and read Chief Morris' letter (circle page 83) suggesting the relocation to the other side of the building. He said the 2003 Planning and Zoning Commission relied on calling the crematory an accessory structure to receive approval; and he read Attorney Stringer's comments regarding conditional use on circle page 136 noting they relied on the structure's convenience to the funeral home for approval. Mr. Hill clarified that Mr. Stringer was the City Attorney, and he was representing the City at that time. Mr. Nichols continued, citing circle page 109, to describe the events of the fire and said he has developed the following opinions based on his education and experience: the fire was an accidental event; the origin was in the roof assembly; the first fuel ignited was ordinary combustibles of roof assembly; ignition of the first fuel was the result of excessive heat transfer radiated and or conducted from the emissions vent stack by the pipe assembly; failure to monitor the chamber resulted in excessive heat conditions. He asked who is to say this won't happen again. He cited the Dept. of Environmental Regulation (DEP) warning letter regarding the funeral homes' tardiness with their visible emission test pointing out they aren't even following state guidelines. The City Attorney said staff identifies what is before Council, then Council can question staff, those who support the appeal would then address Council. The Growth Management Director said the proposed site meets the LDC requirements therefore staff recommended approval and initially both the City's Building Dept. and the County's Fire Dept. were satisfied that all fire protection concerns were addressed. She said DEP would require re- licensure. She said the Planning Zoning Commission approved the modification with six conditions, citing circle page 172 and the applicant is requesting a modification of condition number six but the Building Department and Fire Department have approved the modification. Ms. Coy asked if the modification included the March 10 e-mail from Brian Nolan stating the need for additional fire protection measures are needed within the structure, and then read from the e-mail. The City Attorney said this was addressed with the City Manager yesterday, and since it has come in subsequent to the record, the Mayor as Chairman should rule whether the e -mail is acceptable as evidence. Mayor Gillmor asked what he should advise. 5 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Six The City Attorney said he could accept it because the issue was discussed and it is relevant, but he noted Council has the ability to overrule his decision. Mr. Wright said Council's review without that piece of evidence would be premature. He noted the e-mail requires a revised set of plans and he asked how they can make any decision on this without them. The Growth Management Director said the applicant has not yet modified the plans because if they did they wouldn't comply with the P Z approval from January. The City Attorney said the first step is for the Mayor to decide if the e-mail from Chief Nolan (attached) can supplement the record. Mayor Gillmor said for the record the Nolan e-mail can supplement the record. 7:44 pm Mr. Wolff said the e-mail implies the Fire Department has done their fiduciary duty, and when the body was put in at 890 which conflicts with statements from the funeral home that the crematory was preheated to 1600° he said he was surprised that the Fire Dept. didn't question this as it could have been cause of the fire. He noted the conflicts on circle pages 169 and 170. The Growth Management Director said it was her understanding that when the body was put in it was 890 and then the unit heats up to 1600° and offered a representative from the funeral home to answer any questions. Mr. Wolff said his point was if the Fire Department overlooked something as significant as that, how are we to trust that a single sprinkler and one -hour fire rated drywall is going to correct what the situation calls for. The City Attorney suggested inviting anyone supporting the appeal to speak at this point and then Council can ask any questions of all parties and then Council can hold their discussion. 7:49 pm Charles Delauder, Exhalted Ruler of the Sebastian Elks Lodge, 831 Gladiola Avenue, described the events of the fire, noting he had called 911 to report the crematory was completely engulfed in flames and no one from the funeral home was in sight. He said the crematory was built right outside the fire exit of the Lodge and if the wind was blowing as it was last week, they would have had severe damage to the Lodge. Mr. Delauder read from a January 6, 2009 fire report to which car eight was dispatched. The respondent noticed smoke and a red orange glow from the exhaust at the crematory. The respondent met with a crematory employee who reported the cremation was preceding "10/4 Mr. Delauder said they were having a meeting at the Lodge and went out to talk to the employee who said he was burning trash, noting there had been previous statements that they regularly burn trash. He asked for Council's consideration. Andrew Simso, 1569 Ocean Cove Street, said he would like the public to see the pictures on the overhead. Mayor Gillmor pointed out the public was not making decision and Council had the pictures. In response to the Mayor, Council indicated the display was not necessary. Mr. Simso provided materials to the City Clerk who gave them to the City Attorney to ascertain whether they could be accepted as evidence. 6 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Seven Mr. Simso said the Lodge has a tree 18 feet to the west of the crematory and the Lodge's eaves are only 14 feet from the crematory and if the wind was blowing from the south to the north the building would have been in extreme danger. Mr. Simso said EPA regulations state cremation should not begin until secondary chamber temperature is equal to or up to 1600° and leaving the body unattended at 800° was a violation. He said he had letters and signatures referring to incidences of black smoke, sparks and odors. He said under oath, Mr. Young testified to P Z that there was no smoke. Buck Vocelle, Attorney representing the funeral home said the Mr. Simso's information was outside the record. The City Attorney said the Mayor has the ability decide if his information should be included and he asked Mr. Simso if what he was reading was presented to P Z and Mr. Simso said it was not, but he brought it because P Z said they had brought nothing in writing. Mayor Gillmor advised Mr. Simso's five minutes had expired and reminded that he would strictly adhere to the five minute rule and the speakers should not repeat themselves. Madelyn Walsh, 14 year City resident, 10 year Elks member, said when they originally built the crematory the funeral home assured the Lodge there would not be odors, smoke and ashes and she has personally seen smoke, ashes and a gurney pushed into the crematory. She said rebuilding the crematory twice as big is twice the risk than what they had before. She said the crematory should be rebuilt behind the funeral home, away from the Lodge and it was about being a good neighbor. Greg Golien, 711 Wimbrow Drive, Elks member, said he cannot understand how a city as nice as Sebastian can have burning bodies in a residential /commercial area. Eric Fischer, 69 Fischer Hammock Road, said he attended the 2003 meeting with his father, Dr. Henry Fischer, Sebastian General Partnership, where there was opposition to the crematory. He said they still own land adjacent to the funeral home and relocating it to the north side by the funeral home with a sprinkler system or state -of- the -art alarm system would be amenable. Ms. Coy said the record reflects Dr. Fischer had objections, and she asked about the recreation tract near the townhouses. Mr. Fischer said his father sold the townhouses, and their vacant land touches the Seawinds property as well as the townhouse property. Ms. Coy asked if they objected to moving the crematory south to abut their vacant land. Mr. Fischer replied they do object as they have plans for the property. Damien Gilliams said he lived within walking distance of the Lodge and asked the Growth Management Director if the crematory was part of the 1997 and 2003 PUD site plan approval. The Growth Management Director said it was. Mr. Hill called for a point of order and asked Mayor Gillmor if they were allowing members of the public to question staff and if they were, Mr. Hill asked that the staff be allowed to answer without interruption. Mayor Gillmor said he would allow it at this point and asked Mr. Gilliams to allow the Growth Management Director to respond. He asked Mr. Gilliams to repeat his question. 7 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Eight 8:18 pm Mr. Gilliams said the minutes show it just came for plat approval this year, the 2003 site plan with a conditional site plan hasn't been caught up. The Growth Management Director said Mr. Gilliams was referring to the commercial PUD which should have been final platted as the pieces were developed but was platted in last year's "catch up plat this piece remained unplatted but it is part of the PUD and they are filing a final plat for presentation in the near future and there is a condition that they receive final plat approval before Council before they receive their certificate of occupancy. Mr. Gilliams said the site plan does not indicate a drainage plan. The Growth Manager Director said the PUD has a storm water master plan in effect at this time and was not overlooked. Mr. Gilliams said the crematory belongs in an industrial area and should be sent back to P Z. Mayor Gillmor advised him that his time was up. Mayor Gillmor said the record should reflect that ample time was given for those to speak in favor of the appeal. The City Attorney advised the appellee should make their presentation. Buck Vocelle, Attorney, 3333 20 Street, Vero Beach, representing Seawinds thanked the Elks members and Mr. Fischer for their comments. He introduced Jim Young, Seawinds Funeral Home; Engineer, Randy Mosby; and Environmental Specialist and Chemical Engineer, Luis Llorens. Mr. Vocelle said he wanted to address Mr. Wolff's concern. He said the fire report said the fire resulted from radiating heat transfer to the roof, not a malfunction of the unit itself and those concerns have been addressed between the applicant, staff and the Fire Department. He said the plans have been submitted in accordance with the fire marshal's direction. He continued to say they have an existing use and would not have had to come to Council if it stayed the same size. He pointed out that staff considers the project a minor site plan modification; and it is consistent with the CLUP, the Land Development Code, and Code. He said it is an ancillary use and doesn't require a separate operator under state law, the new machine does have an auto shut off and is more efficient than the old machine, and during the exchange of bodies the temperature is lowered. Mr. Vocelle cited some of the Elks points listed on Exhibit D, that the funeral home has been a good neighbor, some employees are Elks members, and they donate to Elks fundraisers. He said they have gone over and above with the sprinkler system trying to make it as safe as possible and the DEP requirement for air quality testing would not have prevented fire in any way, shape, or form. He introduced Mr. Young. James W. Young, Owner of Seawinds Funeral Home, 1310 River Reach Drive, Vero Beach, said he has owned and operated funeral homes since he was age 23 and this is the first building that he has been involved in with a fire. He said they have met the requirements, purchasing a state of the art machine and there is a need for a crematory in Sebastian. 8 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Nine 8:36 pm Mayor Gillmor asked him how many funeral homes he owns and Mr. Young said three. Mayor Gillmor asked if the others had crematories and Mr. Young said no, all the cremations take place at the Sebastian facility. Ms. Coy pointed out that he is asking to be exempt from one of P Z requirements. Mr. Young offered to have Mr. Mosby speak to their request. He asked Council for their approval. Mr. Wright said he was concerned with the fire potential and the fact that an Elk member made the emergency call instead of a crematory employee. He asked for confirmation of their intent to comply with Chief Nolan's recommendations. Randy Mosby, Mosby, Smith Engineering Inc., 610 First Street, Vero Beach, said P Z's fifth condition cannot be met as a two -hour UL fire rating for ceilings is not available. He said working closely with the Fire Department and the Building Director they have come up with an acceptable alternative where the exhaust comes through the ceiling and the wood trusses are built around it so there is a clearance form the stack. He said the drawings have been revised and resubmitted to show a one -hour firewall inside the shaft with the sprinklers on the top and bottom of the building as required by the Fire Department. Mr. Wright said he was concerned with the time it took for response to the fire and asked if the Fire Department can be notified instantly by way of an alarm system. Mr. Mosby replied there is no plan for an alarm and it is not required by any code. Mr. Wolff asked what was the objection to the wall between the two properties. Mr. Mosby said there was no objection, noting there are landscape buffers and the building exceeded building codes in every way. Ms. Coy asked for confirmation that Mr. Mosby built the original building and Mr. Mosby said designed all of Chessers Gap. She pointed out that he probably stated at that time the equipment was state -of- the -art and she asked what is different today. Mr. Mosby said the environmentalist can address the equipment; and said the improved building has more fire protection. Ms. Coy said she understands there are submitted new plans but from her experience, it would be difficult for her to approve this without seeing the revised plans. The Growth Management Director clarified the revised plans are the building construction documents submitted for the building permit, there is not a revised site plan. Ms. Coy cited Chief Nolan's e-mail, "We will be receiving revised plans today and we will complete our review today She pointed out if it was approved the letter would read something like, "Congratulations it meets our approval," but the letter speaks to the future. The Growth Management Director said the Building Dept. does check for that too and will not issue a permit until the six conditions are met as well as the Fire Dept.'s concern. She offered to add the Fire Dept.'s approval as one of the conditions. 9 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Ten 8:51 pm Mr. Vocelle asked the City Attorney how the modification of this condition affects the Council's decision. The City Attorney outlined his recommendations on circle page 62, once the hearing is concluded; there are options to resolve the issue. He said it could be done in one vote or two but it can wait until Council is ready to make a motion. Mr. Wright said he has a similar concern as Ms. Coy that there is no indication that Chief Nolan has received the revised plan. He asked the Growth Management Director if she had been in contact with Chief Nolan. The City Manager said he spoke to Chief Nolan on Tuesday who did review the plans, and found them to code and in some spots above the code and since the two hour fire ceiling cannot be met, the City went with the sprinkler option. He suggested Chief Nolan may want to rewrite his memo stated he has reviewed the plans. Mr. Wright said that is the crux of the problem and he didn't have a problem relying on the City Manager who says he has spoken to Chief Nolan. Mr. Wolff said if there was a disciplinary hearing and was Mr. Coburn disciplined. Mr. Young said he was not, the state conducted an investigation, and it was an accident. Mr. Wolff said since the crematory was unmanned and the new facility will hold 25 remains unattended, he asked what the standard operating procedure would be for security. Mr. Young said they are planning to monitor the new facility with cameras and there is pretty much a Sebastian police car in their parking lot at all times. Mr. Wolff asked at what point it would become a major site plan modification. The Growth Management Director said when looking at the square footage of what the addition is, that this could have been done administratively but staff knew it would be a hot button issue and planned for the hearing. She also pointed out In 2003 it was determined the crematory is subservient to the funeral home and considered an accessory structure. Mr. Wolff asked if it was operated as a stand alone would it still be considered an accessory. She said probably not as the City's code does not really address crematories but she did speak to the County which allows crematories in commercial general with no additional setback. Luis Llorens, President/Project Manager of Al Environmental Consulting Services, said crematories are normally two chambers. The primarily chamber turns the body into a gas, and the second chamber is reheated to a minimum 1600 He said the machine is older and the newer machine will be computer controlled. Mr. Wolff said the minutes mention people seeing smoke and the funeral home reports that it is the cardboard casket that smokes. He asked about odors. Mr. Llorens said the older machines such as this, built in the 80's, have smaller pollution control devices and as people are becoming larger, the newer chambers are bigger with better controls to turn the body to gas. He said he tested the machine and it passed the emission test and he did not notice any odors during his test but he noted he is not present at every cremation. He said the newer machines are well sealed with about four or five inches between the outer and inner wall where the older machines only have two inches causing it to run much hotter, and with new machines smoke and odor are negligible. 10 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Eleven Ms. Coy asked if the crematory was used. Mr. Young said it was a used machine that was refurbished by the manufacturer. Ms. Coy asked Mr. Llorens if he was employed by the owner. Mr. Llorens said he is the environmental consultant for Seawinds and was contracted to complete the emissions test. Mr. Llorens confirmed for Mr. Wright that he would test the new machine after installation, and confirmed that the new machine would not be a refurbished machine. Mayor Gillmor called fora recess at 9:01 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:13 p.m., all members were present. Mr. Young said at the time of the DEP violation, he thought inspections were required every two years, the crematory did pass inspection and they were fined because of the lateness of the emissions testing. Mr. Vocelle noted this could have been handled as a staff matter, said the funeral home has attempted to meet all of the requirements, cited the P Z conditions on circle page 66, and requested approval with the modification of condition number five as indicated in Chief Nolan's e-mail. There was no input in opposition of the appeal. Mayor Gillmor called for the appellant's rebuttal to any comments or testimony. Mr. Nichols said the Elks are not challenging the equipment, but the location which has been the issue since 2003. He said that it needs to be relocated, and there is nothing in the code that provides for crematories. Ms. Coy asked the City Attorney if there is anything that says we cannot revoke the ancillary use. The City Attorney said there is an approved site plan, and you are here to consider doubling the size of the unit. Mr. Wright reconfirmed that the decision needs to be based on whether its meets the building code, the comp plan, the safety requirements of the Fire and Building Departments and the City Attorney said that is essentially it. He also noted that although the size will be bigger, the equipment is going to be a lot more efficient and safer. Mayor Gillmor said he takes objection that it is a minor site plan, it is not just for serving the Sebastian funeral home because if it were there would not be a need to double. MOTION by Mayor Gillmor to approve the appeal, and reverse the action of the P Z Commission. Mr. Wolff asked if the motion was based on his contesting it is a minor site plan and is Council able to deliberate whether it is major or minor. The City Attorney advised it being a minor site plan defined in code, in this particular case, it doubles the size, but it is still within the code and shouldn't be the basis for the determination. Mr. Wolff asked the City Attorney what merits are lacking that they can make a determination on. The City Attorney responded that they have an extensive record that was prepared by P Z, records from the Growth Management Department, what was 11 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Twelve presented today as well as argument, the supplemented document. He said they are the equivalent of an appellate court. Mayor Gillmor directed Mr. Wolff to circle page 62 as to where they can go legally. The Motion died for lack of a second. In response to questions from Council Members, the City Attorney said they are judging whether P Z was correct in their approval, and if Council allows the expansion, they can modify the conditions that were imposed, however if they uphold the appeal, he did not see how they could impose additional conditions. He advised that if the appeal is upheld there could be court proceedings to get the expansion or the owner could build on the existing footprint as approved in 2003. The City Attorney advised Council can't be arbitrary. He said the expansion meets the master plan, the building code, the code, but there was a fire. He said on the other hand the appeal is not frivolous, there are issues that could lead a deliberative body to decide that there are certain factors they can rely on to say they don't want the expansion. Mayor Gillmor said he understands they have the right to rebuild, but they want to double the size and his concern is the safety of the Elks. He said the stack is below the roofline of the Lodge and they haven't been raised in the new design; and a wind from the north will have some issues. He said there are considerable reasons not to approve doubling the size. Mr. Wolff said it was too bad they couldn't relocate to the Airport. He said to put it back with such intensive use in that corner, he wished we could find another location. Mr. Wright said he is concerned with the safety of the Elks Lodge, but codes, fire protection, and comp plan are being met, and he said he didn't think he was allowed to rule in favor of the appeal based on emotional feeling although he is allowed to have those feelings. Mr. Wolff asked about standard operating procedures noting no one is in attendance. Mr. Wright said the owner said there will be cameras. Mr. Wolff said someone is needed to monitor the cameras. Mr. Hill said there are requirements for these type of facilities and no one has presented that they are not meeting requirements. He said Council is an appellant body, they need to keep the emotion out, and what he feels about the Elks doesn't matter. Mr. Wolff said they have the opportunity to add any conditions that might improve the quality of life for the citizens and he asked if there was something they would like to see that the state isn't covering. Mr. Hill said they could not add anything impossible to attain. The City Attorney advised that if Council decides to reject the appeal and decides to look at conditions, there is condition number five that needs to be addressed. Ms. Coy asked Mr. Young if there were written standard operating procedures for the crematory. 12 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Thirteen Mr. Young responded that when they purchased the machine they had a training session by the manufacturer. Ms. Coy cited the manufacturer's operating procedures on circle page 176. Mr. Young said the new machine is computer operated, it comes with operating manual. Ms. Coy said there will still be rules to follow and asked if they complied with all of the operating procedures. Mr. Young said they did. Ms. Coy agreed that Council does have to separate the emotion but she was driving by and couldn't believe what she saw and compounding that with a crematorium, she said certain things had to occur to prevent public view of some unpleasant situations. She said they are allowed to look at safety issues and based on the historical record she was not comfortable taking the same small space and more than doubling the expectations. MOTION by Coy and SECOND by Mayor Gillmor to approve the appeal to P Z's decision. Result of the roll call vote: AYES: Wolff, Gillmor, Coy NAYS: Wright, Hill Motion failed as the LDC requires four affirmative votes. Mayor Gillmor cited the recommendations that the Elks members would like to see on circle page 99, emphasizing they have a duty to keep members safe. MOTION by Gillmor and SECOND by Mr. Hill to approve option 2B to modify the conditions imposed by P Z to include: Chief Nolan's recommendations, raise the smoke stake; and install a small barrier wall between the two buildings. The City Attorney advised if Council is so inclined, they should do it in two motions: (1A) to reject the appeal and reaffirm the action by P Z; and then (2B) to add conditions. Mayor Gillmor and Mr. Hill agreed to amend their motion as advised by the City Attorney. MOTION by Mr. Wolff and SECOND by Mr. Hill to extend meeting passed with a voice vote of 5 -0. Mr. Wolff said the engineer should advise if the stack can be raised. The City Manager said the request to raise the stack is similar to the P Z requesting the two hour fire ceiling because there is a building code that stipulate the stack has to be three feet above the roof line so the stack height will be guided by the building and the code and Council was asking them to supersede that. The Growth Management Director asked what wall height Council would like to see. Mayor Gillmor said the wall would have to be above the eaves line of the Elks. The Growth Management Director said that would be 12 -14 feet and in response to the applicant she said that size would be considered a structure and have to meet setback. Mr. Hill WITHDREW his SECOND on the motion. The City Attorney said the height could be specified in the motion. 13 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Fourteen Mayor Gillmor said he would like to revise his motion. The City Attorney advised that this would be the 2B MOTION to apply P Z's conditions and modifying condition number five, in addition to adding the 10 foot high wall between the buildings. Mr. Hill questioned the need for the wall. For the record, the City Attorney clarified there was an original motion to reject the appeal and affirm the action of P Z; and a second motion to modify the P Z conditions with the addition of the wall. The Clerk stated that Mr. Hill subsequently withdrew his second to the motions. Mr. Hill confirmed that he had withdrawn his second. MOTION by Ms. Coy and SECOND by Mayor Gillmor to remand to P Z for further consideration, no action would be taken on the appeal. Mr. Hill asked if P Z has the ability to change its decision and the City Attorney said yes. Mr. Vocelle said that Mr. Young did not want to go back to P Z, will accept the 10 foot wall as proposed, and, if possible, install a fire alarm through a telephone line on the building. Mr. Wright noted that Mr. Young is willing to accept all of the modifications and sending this back to P Z does not make sense. Mr. Nichols said he did not think it was made clear that with a majority vote, Council may either reject the appeal and affirm the action of P &Z or remand to P Z for further consideration. Result of the roll call vote: AYES: Gillmor, Coy, Wolff NAYS: Wright, Hill Motion carried, no supermajority vote required to send back to P Z. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10.033 A. Collier Creek Dock, Fencing, Landscaping Guidelines (City Manager 197 -203 Transmittal, Draft Policy, Letter, LDR 54- 3- 11.4(fl(14)) The City Manager explained staff's plan included a Building Department permitted plan, centered on the property, and two feet away from the dock. Ms. Coy asked how staff arrived at the plan because jetting was not favored at the previous meeting. The City Manager said the contractor advises not to jet so his work isn't cancelled, which may be out in the extreme. He advised that Council can accept "no jetting" or "have the homeowner go out a little to jet." The City Manager confirmed that the Building Department would approve the design and inspect after installation. Ms. Coy said she could approve waiving the permit fees for those who did have permit. The City Manager said it is too hard to tell who already paid the fee. 14 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Fifteen MOTION by Ms. Coy and SECOND by Mayor Gillmor to approve staff's plan and have the homeowner's pay the $75.00 permit fee. Public Comment Vic Klein, 719 Wimbrow Drive, said the fee waiver is a tiny consideration as his seawall wasn't that bad, $30,000 worth of landscaping was destroyed, he was not charged for the fence permit and shouldn't have to pay for the dock. Damien Gilliams agreed there should be no fees. Result of the roll call vote: AYES: Gillmor, Hill, Coy, Wright NAYES: 0 ABSTAINED: Wolf Motion carried 11. PUBLIC INPUT Public input procedures are on the back of the agenda. A sheet is available on a table at the back of the chambers for people to sign prior to meetings. Signing is not mandatory and individuals who raise their hands will be recognized. If the Council fails to reach this item during a meeting, only those people who have signed prior to the meeting will have their item carried forward to the next regular meeting. Damien Gilliams, 1623 US Highway 1, suggested charging non profit organizations ad valorem taxes. He suggested that the City Manager talk to Waste Management about charging businesses for the recycling containers so the City can be more "green." 12. NEW BUSINESS 10.046 A. Resolution No. R -10 -07 Velocity Leasehold Release and Adjustment 205 -250 (Airport Transmittal, Infield Lease, Factory Lease, R- 10 -07) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO THE SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT; AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF OBLIGATIONS UNDER AN AIRPORT LEASE BETWEEN A B LEASINGNELOCITY AND THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN; AUTHORIZING A LEASE RATE INCREASE ON A SEPARATE AIRPORT LEASE BETWEEN THE SAME PARTIES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The Airport Director explained that the resolution would release Velocity from an infield lease at the Airport and in consideration of that, increase their other lease by 10 MOTION by Ms. Coy and SECOND by Mr. Wright to approve Resolution No. R- 10 -07. Result of the roll call vote: AYES: All NAYS: 0 Motion carried 10.047 B. Indian River County Discretionary Sales Tax Request (City Manager 251 -255 Transmittal, Letter) The City Manager said this was a request from the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners requesting a formal response, noting if it is refused they County will look 15 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Sixteen to Emergency Services District tax to fund improvements to municipalities. He recommended that Council reject the request. Mr. Wright reported that he spoke to Mr. Brown and asked why the County couldn't use impact fee monies and Mr. Brown reported that they needed to replace existing facilities and the impact fee monies were for new facilities. It was the consensus of Council to reject the County's request and the City Manager advised he would write back to Mr. Brown. 10.048 C. Award Professional Services Agreement for Evaluation and Appraisal 257 -322 Report to Outlier Planning, LLC in the Amount of $37,486.00 (GMD Transmittal, Agreement, Exhibit A, Scores) This item was moved up to 9A on the agenda. 13. CITY ATTORNEY MATTERS 10.049 A. Litigation Update (Memo) 323 -324 The City Attorney explained this is the memo he was asked to provide to the City's auditors and noted there are a number of foreclosures and bankruptcies that are not listed. Mayor Gillmor and Mr. Wolff thanked him for including it and asked for it to be provided quarterly. 14. CITY MANAGER MATTERS none. 15. CITY CLERK MATTERS Mayor Gillmor welcomed the Clerk back from her medical leave. She thanked her staff for doing a great job while she was out. 16. CITY COUNCIL MATTERS A. Council Member Coy None. B. Council Member Wolff Mr. Wolff asked if any of the Council Members responded to the traffic sign at Fleming. Council discussed the confusing nature of the intersection. The City Manager said the intersection is marked correctly and the trouble is that people don't pay attention to the signs, he didn't know what the answer was but he offered to take it to the traffic committee. Mr. Wolff gave kudos to the Public Works Department for the work at Schumann Tennis Courts and said they look great. 16 Regular City Council Meeting March 10, 2010 Page Seventeen The City Manager said that would be a great item for the recreational impact fee workshop. E. Vice Mayor Hill Mr. Hill said it was an amazing night as he had misinformation twice. 17. Being no further business, Mayor Gillmor adjourned the regular meeting at 10:32 p.m. C. Council Member Wright None. D. Mayor Gillmor ved at the April 14, 2010 Regular City Council Meeting Richard H. Gillmor, Mayor ATTES Sally A. Maio, M City Clerk Mayor Gillmor said people have asked him for a racquet ball wall or court and he asked if it could be included when they rebuild the skate park. Mr. Wright said he tried to get one and was unsuccessful before Council. 17 FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME —FIRST NAME MIDDLE NAME ki oLW Ev Eren)6 :I NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE Sedasri4i OW CPC/NUt MAILING ADDRESS 7 S' Ni m ciO Qt i THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: CI Y COUNTY OTHER LOCAL AGENCY CITY COUNTY 5 f g (Mh) 11 t e-'vEQ •_+iV NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED MY POSITION IS: ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea- sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one -acre, one -vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father -in -law, mother -in -law, son -in -law, and daughter -in -law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min- utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side) CE FORM 8B EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 1 APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST �f 7 t CF hereby disclose that on /1 fi /0 'r'' (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of whom I am retained; or inured to the special gain or loss of is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: 1 €t.v( 1 Cee �.r l ochs 6 6AceS o, -t a 61 Cl ee !t 1114 IA -6-kg :s frivol 4,4 Ocfr, 4/b /erfy /Jere a✓v t k_R c -J thofLo Date Filed ,20 /0: by which NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. CE FORM 8B EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 2 Alfred Minner From: Brian Nolan [bnolan ©ircgov.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 11:26 AM To: Alfred Minner Cc: John King Subject: Saewinds Crematory Mr. Minner This email is in reference to our march 8th discussion regarding the Seawinds Crematory. As you know, we have reviewed the submitted building plans for the crematory and crematory machine. Upon completion of our review, we found the need for additional fire protection features within the structure. The additional fire protection features require that we receive a set of revised plans for further review. We will be receiving revised plans today and will complete our review today as well. We requested that the revised plans show the exhaust stack enclosed in a one (1) hour fire rated enclosure. In addition to this, we are requiring one fire sprinkler head at the top of the enclosure and one fire sprinkler head near the base of the enclosure. We believe that additional fire protection features will provide a reasonable amount of fire protection. The contractor agreed to the additional fire protection features that are beyond what is required by the National Fire Protection Association Code for a structure of this type. The exhaust stack shall be installed according to Florida Building Code requirements and per manufacturer's specifications. The Florida Building Code will address the height of the exhaust stack. In addition, we have reviewed the Site Plan for the proposed structure and found that the plan showed an adequate number of fire hydrants in the immediate area and easy access to the property for responding fire apparatus. Water supply and building access for responding fire apparatus were the only two areas that were addressed on our review of the site plan. It should be noted that building distance setbacks in relation to property lines are of concern to Planning and Zoning and are not part of the review process of the Fire Prevention Bureau. I am satisfied that I have addressed all of the fire protection concerns that pertain to the Fire and Life Safety Bureau. Should you have any questions, please contact me. Brian Nolan, Fire Marshal Indian River County Fire Rescue 3/10/2010