CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 A regular meeting of the City Council was held in the City ...
1 downloads 2 Views 75KB Size
CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 A regular meeting of the City Council was held in the City Council Chamber, 900 East Strawbridge Avenue, and was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Kathy Meehan. 1.

The Invocation was given by Pastor Mike Benowitz, First Baptist Church of South Brevard.

2.

Pledge of Allegiance.

3.

Roll Call.

Present:

Kathy Meehan Mike Nowlin Betty Moore Dan Porsi Debbie Thomas Molly Tasker Teresa Lopez Michael McNees Alison Dawley Kevin McKeown Cindy Dittmer

Mayor Council Member, District 1 Council Member, District 2 Vice Mayor, District 3 Council Member, District 4 Council Member, District 5 Council Member, District 6 City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Clerk Community Development Director

4.

Proclamations and Presentations

5.

Approval of Minutes – November 10, 2015 regular meeting. Moved by Moore/Thomas for approval. Motion carried unanimously.

6.

City Manager's Report Council Member Teresa Lopez asked for an update on the application to the Space Coast Transportation Planning Organization regarding an All Aboard Florida (AAF) passenger rail station near Downtown Melbourne. City Manager Mike McNees stated that a site exists on a vacant lot north of Daily Bread. The site meets all of the AAF requirements for a passenger rail station, including its size and redevelopment potential for the surrounding area. The property is currently owned by Florida Power & Light (FPL) and is for sale. Staff has made contact with FPL and will be submitting the site for consideration.

7.

Public Comments CJ Johnson, 1104 June Drive, invited Council to a Thanksgiving dinner honoring all veterans at Memaw’s Bar-B-Q, 600 E. Eau Gallie Boulevard, on Wednesday, November 25, from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The dinner is an opportunity for the community to show its support for our veterans during the holiday season. Wendy Brandon, Executive Director, Henegar Center, discussed the marquee sign outside of the Henegar Center. The sign has existed for 20 years and its contents are manually changed. Page 1 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 There is limited space on the sign to advertise all of the activities and events held at the Henegar Center during the course of the year. An electronic, LED marquee sign would be a great feature and would allow the Henegar Center to advertise more of its events. However, under the current City Code, such a sign is not permitted. Ms. Brandon requested that Council consider changing the City Code to allow the Henegar Center to install an electronic sign. Vice Mayor Dan Porsi asked the zoning designation of the Henegar Center. Community Development Director Cindy Dittmer stated that the Henegar Center is in a C-3 (Central Business District) zoning district with Institutional use. Vice Mayor Porsi commented that electronic signs on non-arterial roads were not permitted so they would not interfere with residential properties. He asked staff to evaluate allowing an electronic sign at the Henegar Center. Council Member Betty Moore stated that Council needs to promote the Henegar Center and that she would be in favor of finding an accommodation in this case. Moved by Porsi/Moore to direct staff to look at the existing sign ordinance to see how Institutional use areas in the downtown districts could be permitted to have electronic signs. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McNees asked for Council’s clarification on the motion. The understanding is that Council wants staff to research if there is some way to reasonably accommodate what the Henegar Center wants to do through amending the code that would not open the flood gates to allow electronic signs everywhere. Council confirmed Mr. McNees’ clarification. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8.

COUNCIL ACTION RE: Purchase of one Caterpillar front end wheel loader and related equipment for Water Production, Ring Power Corporation, St. Augustine, FL – $380,317. (Postponed – 11/10/15) Management Services Director Linda South reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. At the November 10, 2015 Council meeting, this item was postponed to allow staff time to determine if a refurbished unit is available for purchase. The vendor, Ring Power, has confirmed that a used/refurbished unit that meets the city’s specifications is not available for sale at this time. The vendor also advised that due to discounts offered to municipalities on new equipment as well as competitive government bids, a used unit may actually result in a higher cost. Moved by Nowlin/Moore for approval of purchase of one Caterpillar front end wheel loader and related equipment for Water Production, Ring Power Corporation, St. Augustine, FL – $380,317. Motion carried unanimously.

9.

ORDINANCE NO. 2015-51/FOC-2015-08: (Second Reading/Public Hearing) An ordinance amending sections of Appendix B, Article IV, Section 4, Density, adding a new sub-section

Page 2 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 (C), to allow for the transfer of development rights for property along US 1 in the Midtown Activity Center. (First Reading – 11/10/15) City Attorney Alison Dawley read Ordinance No. 2015-51 by its title. There were no comments during the public hearing. Moved by Moore/Nowlin for approval of Ordinance No. 2015-51, based on the findings contained in the Planning and Zoning Board agenda memorandum. The roll call vote was: Aye: Thomas, Tasker, Lopez, Nowlin, Moore, Porsi and Meehan Motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS 10.

ORDINANCE NO. 2015-53 (AR-2015-250AD) AND RESOLUTION NO. 3526 (CPA-201507AD) PLATT RANCH PROPERTY: Ordinance providing for annexation and resolution providing for a Comprehensive Plan amendment for property located west of I-95, south of US 192, and north of the Palm Bay city limits. (Owners - F. Carlyle Platt, Janet Platt, Douglas C. Platt, Jeanne S. Platt, Sandra P. Lovett, Judith P. Arnold, Ronald C. Arnold, Caryl P. Ungerer and Robert Ungerer) (Applicant/Representative – City of Melbourne) (P&Z Board – 11/5/15) a.

Ordinance No. 2015-53/AR-2015-250AD: (First Reading/Public Hearing) An ordinance providing for the annexation of 3,979± acres of property, 34± acres of St. Johns Heritage Parkway right-of-way, and 24± acres of US 192 right-ofway, for a total of 4,037± acres, located west of I-95, south of US 192, and north of the Palm Bay city limits.

b.

Resolution No. 3526/CPA-2015-07: (Public Hearing) A resolution authorizing the transmittal of an amendment to the Future Land Use map of the Comprehensive Plan to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; proposing a Mixed Use Future Land Use on 2,422± acres and an Urban Edge Future Land Use on 1,557± acres, located west of I-95, south of US 192, and north of the Palm Bay city limits.

Attorney Dawley read Ordinance No. 2015-53 by its title. Todd Corwin, Planner, reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. Last fall, City Council directed staff to implement pre-annexation agreements, which included the Platt Ranch property. The property includes 3,979+ acres of private property, 34+ acres of St. Johns Heritage Parkway right-of-way and 24+ acres of US 192 right-of-way. A transmittal resolution is included with this item because F.S. § 163.3184 requires submittal of Comprehensive Plan amendments to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. An ordinance adopting the land use designation and proposed zoning will return for Council’s consideration at a future meeting, after the city receives approval from the Department of Economic Opportunity.

Page 3 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 Mr. Corwin described the adjacent properties and stated that the current estimated taxable value of the subject property will generate approximately $9,904.61 annually in city taxes. The property was designated as Platt Ranch Mixed Use District in Brevard County and development parameters were incorporated into the county’s Future Land Use Element in 2010. The city is proposing to adopt the same development parameters in order to avoid any increase in density or intensity. The entire property will be designated as a Community Activity Center (Platt Ranch Community Activity Center). In addition, approximately 61 percent of the property will be given a Mixed Use Future Land Use and approximately 39 percent of the property will be given an Urban Edge Future Land Use. In response to Council Member Tasker, Mr. Corwin stated that Urban Edge is intended to provide a transition area between urban development and rural, open space development. The city has spoken with representatives of the Platt family who want to continue their agricultural and ranching pursuits. The proposed zoning designation of Agricultural Estate Residential (AEU) will permit them to continue their agricultural pursuits until such time they are ready to develop. A conceptual master plan will have to be in place before development occurs on the property. Finally, Mr. Corwin stated that the Platt family submitted the Future Land Use Element to the county due to the construction of the St. Johns Heritage Parkway, which will change the land use character of that vicinity. On November 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of these requests. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Scott Morgan, City Manager, City of West Melbourne, expressed concern that the proposed annexation and Comprehensive Plan amendments are premature since the owners of the property are not prepared to initiate any near term development. The historic ranching operations of the property are envisioned to continue for several years. The City of West Melbourne believes the property owners would be better served by waiting to annex and establish appropriate land use and zoning designations until such time that development is proposed. If Council is determined to proceed with the annexation, Mr. Morgan asked that the concerns of the City of West Melbourne be taken into consideration. Mr. Morgan stated that as the city’s largest water customer, the City of West Melbourne is concerned with the lack of a plan for the future provision of Melbourne water service to the Platt property. While there is a contractual obligation for the city to provide water service to West Melbourne, the City of West Melbourne is unsure how the large capital costs of new service to the Platt property would be allocated to current customers versus new. Mr. Morgan requested an assurance from Council that increases in capital costs would not be borne by existing rate payers. Second, the City of West Melbourne is also concerned with the lack of plan for fire suppression services to the Platt property. West Melbourne is served by the Brevard County Fire Department via one fire station at US 192 and Pine Street. This station is the closest fire station to the Platt property. Melbourne’s closest fire station is a good distance away. If Melbourne’s plan is to ask the county to continue servicing the Platt property, then the City of West Melbourne is worried about the potential lack of fire service to West Melbourne property owners.

Page 4 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 Finally, Mr. Morgan stated that the City of West Melbourne is concerned about the lack of an updated traffic analysis, including the impact of vehicle trips on US 192 as this is the primary roadway serving West Melbourne’s principal commercial district. Additionally, West Melbourne is concerned with the impact of vehicle trips on Norfolk Parkway, a West Melbourne roadway, which would need to be expanded to four lanes to accommodate an estimated 19 percent increase in trips to the I-95 and Palm Bay Road interchange. In closing, Mr. Morgan asked Council to consider all of West Melbourne’s concerns. Christy Fischer, Planning and Economic Development Director, City of West Melbourne, stated that West Melbourne would like specific coordination language added to the Comprehensive Plan text amendments. There will be adverse impacts to West Melbourne as a result of the development of nearly 4,000 acres resulting in 3,000 more additional residents. Ms. Fischer stated that Mr. Corwin provided Council a scenario of the ultimate limits of development, which is better than having no idea of the ultimate build out potential of a property. She expressed a desire to see the phrase “or detailed sector area plans” included in the text amendments since it contemplates meaningful coordination among surrounding jurisdictions. Charlie Nash, 440 S. Babcock Street, attorney representing the Platt family, stated that there are no immediate plans to develop the Platt property. Mr. Nash said that had the St. Johns Heritage Parkway not been forced on the Platt family, he would not be at this meeting. The fact is that the road is going in and the Platt family is willing and ready to become a part of the City of Melbourne when the Council deems it appropriate. There will be no development on the property beyond cows, hay and melons until something forces that development to occur. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Moved by Tasker/Moore for approval of Ordinance No. 2015-53, (based on the findings contained in the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum). Ms. Lopez stated that when development does occur, the concerns of the City of West Melbourne should be taken into consideration. Mr. McNees stated that language has already been added to the text amendments to address notifying West Melbourne. Additionally, staff will look at the technical recommendations that were submitted between now and second reading of the ordinance.It is the intention of the City of Melbourne to be a good neighbor and to work with the City of West Melbourne as the project develops. The question was called. Motion carried unanimously. Moved by Nowlin/Moore for approval Resolution No. 3526, based on the findings contained in the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum. Motion carried unanimously. 11.

RESOLUTION NO. 3527/CPA-2015-08 PLATT RANCH COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER: (Public Hearing) A resolution providing for transmittal of a Comprehensive Plan text

Page 5 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 amendment to establish a new Platt Ranch Community Activity Center (PRCAC) to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. Mr. Corwin reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. The entire property will be given the Platt Ranch Community Activity Center designation. Approval of a utility provision agreement and a conceptual master plan will be required once the owners are ready to develop. On November 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval. There were no comments during the public hearing. Moved by Tasker/Thomas for approval of Resolution No. 3527, based on the findings contained in the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum. Motion carried unanimously. 12.

ORDINANCE NO. 2015-54 (FOC-2015-10/Z-2015-1226AD) AGRICULTURAL ESTATE USE: (First Reading/Public Hearing) An ordinance amending Appendix B, Article III, Section 3, Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, by adding the Agricultural Estate Use Zoning District as an allowable district in the Mixed Use Future Land Use classification (Applicant City of Melbourne) (P&Z Board – 11/5/15) Attorney Dawley read Ordinance No. 2015-54 by its title. Mr. Corwin reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. This ordinance adds AEU as an allowable zoning classification in the Mixed Use Future Land Use category. On November 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed amendment. There were no comments during the public hearing. Moved by Moore/Nowlin for approval of Ordinance No. 2015-54, based on the findings contained in the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum. Motion carried unanimously.

13.

CONSENT AGENDA: Moved by Nowlin/Porsi for approval of the consent agenda. Motion carried unanimously. a.

Renewal of the Interlocal Agreement between the City of Melbourne and the Melbourne Airport Authority for police services at the Circles of Care Harbor Pines facility at a reimbursement rate of $35,000; and authorization for the City Manager to execute the agreement.

b.

Right-of-Way Use Agreement with Baymeadows Lakes Development LLC to install a landscape island, irrigation and a call box/gate controller within the Grand Meadows Boulevard Right-of-Way.

Page 6 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 c.

Transfer of 1949 Tyler Avenue from Community Housing Initiative, Inc. to Homes for Independence Space Coast, Inc. for rental to a very low-income household; and authorization for the City Manager to execute all documents.

d.

Purchase and installation of playground equipment for Wells Park, Playmore West, Inc.; Fort Myers, FL - $49,169.28.

e.

Resolution No. 3528: A resolution allowing the City to enter into agreements with private property owners to use private property for fire, rescue and law enforcement training; and authorizing to the City Manager to negotiate, accept and execute such agreements.

f.

Resolution No. 3529: A resolution adopting fourth quarter budget review recommendations.

14.

ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA

15.

COUNCIL ACTION RE: Purchase of Cisco VDI software, hardware and support services, Presidio Networked Solutions, LLC, Orlando, FL - $123,145.63. Ms. South reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. Moved by Nowlin/Moore for approval of purchase of Cisco VDI software, hardware and support services, Presidio Networked Solutions, LLC, Orlando, FL - $123,145.63. Motion carried unanimously.

16.

ORDINANCE NO. 2015-52 (FOC-2015-09/Z-2015-1225AD) HOTELS/MOTELS: (First Reading/Public Hearing) An ordinance amending Appendix B of the City Code, entitled “Zoning;” amending Article V, Section 2, District Use and Dimensional Standards. (Applicant – City of Melbourne) (P&Z Board – 11/5/15) Attorney Dawley read Ordinance No. 2015-52 by its title. Ms. Dittmer reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. On November 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request. Council Member Mike Nowlin asked why we care what size the rooms in a hotel/motel would be and if the size restriction could be eliminated for the entire city. Ms. Dittmer stated that the concern would be going too far, such as allowing 100 square foot rooms, and calling the development a hotel when it would more closely resemble a rooming house. Mr. Nowlin stated that the developer would have to abide by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. Ms. Dittmer stated that new developments would have to meet ADA standards but the concern is allowing rooms that are too small. Staff believes the size proposed is applicable to Melbourne. Mr. Nowlin stated that he would be in favor of removing the requirement entirely.

Page 7 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 In response to Vice Mayor Porsi, Ms. Dittmer confirmed that the current square footage of hotels in Melbourne is 300 square feet. Vice Mayor Porsi suggested that the 230 square feet requirement be implemented city wide and allow individual businesses dictate their own needs. Ms. Dittmer stated that would not be a problem. There were no comments during the public hearing. Vice Mayor Porsi stated he would not support the ordinance unless the smaller room size requirement be expanded city wide. Mayor Meehan stated that the requirement should stay in the CB-OZ as staff suggested. Council Member Debbie Thomas asked if anyone outside the CB-OZ has expressed interest in the smaller room size. Mr. McNees replied no and added that there is no objection from staff in expanding the size requirement city wide. In response to Mrs. Thomas, Mr. McNees confirmed that Council could pass it as stated and return at a later time to examine the opportunity to expand the requirement city wide. Ms. Lopez asked the reason for the smaller room size. Ms. Dittmer explained the reasons behind the trending change in hotel room sizes. Millennials are more concerned with larger common spaces and entertainment areas than room size, and cost is always a factor. Research shows that these trends are being seen nationally and internationally. Council Member Tasker stated that she would like to see a level playing field so that builders throughout the city could have the same requirements. Mr. McNees stated that the primary issue is that Downtown Melbourne land is considerably more expensive than other parts of the city. Therefore, developers need more density to make a decent return on their investment. The change is being driven by people who spend their own money to build these hotels. Council is trying to help them find a return on their investment by making this change. Mr. McNees asked Council to consider approving the ordinance and allowing staff to take a look at whether it makes sense to expand the requirement city wide. Mr. McNees stated that this issue is similar to Council’s previous decision to change parking space size requirements in Downtown Melbourne only. Moved by Nowlin/Moore for approval of Ordinance No. 2015-52 based on the findings contained in the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum, with an amendment to the ordinance to include the entire city, not restricted to the CB-OZ. Motion carried. Council Members Thomas and Lopez and Mayor Meehan voted nay. 17.

ORDINANCE NO. 2015-55 (CU-2015-08/SP-2015-09) MELBOURNE COMMONS: (First Reading/Public Hearing) An ordinance granting a conditional use to allow a multi-family residential development in a commercial district on 2.87± acres of property zoned C-P (Commercial Parkway), located on the east side of South Babcock Street, north of Florida Avenue and south of University Boulevard (3299 South Babcock Street). (Owner – Torbjorn Arnheim Winscott Company) (Applicant/Representative – Vaheed Teimouri, P.E., Teimouri & Associates, Inc.) (P&Z Board – 11/5/15) Page 8 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015

Attorney Dawley read Ordinance No. 2015-55 by its title. Ms. Dittmer reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. On November 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval. There were no disclosures by Council and no comments during the public hearing. Moved by Lopez/Nowlin for approval of Ordinance No. 2015-55 based on the findings and conditions contained in the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum. Motion carried unanimously. 18.

ORDINANCE NO. 2015-56 (CU-2015-02/SP-2015-04) CONSTELLATION RACETRAC CSTORE: (First Reading/Public Hearing) An ordinance granting a conditional use to allow the construction of a convenience store with gas pumps on 2.91± acres of property zoned C-P (Commercial Parkway), located on the southwest corner of Constellation Drive and North Wickham Road. (Owner – CBL & Associates Management, Inc.) (Applicant – RaceTrac Petroleum, Inc.) (Representative – Andrew Peterson, P.E., Bowman Consulting) (P&Z Board – 11/5/15) Attorney Dawley read Ordinance No. 2015-56 by its title. Ms. Dittmer reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. On November 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request. Ms. Lopez asked for clarification on the concerns expressed by the public at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Ms. Dittmer stated many of the concerns were in regard to a bus stop location on the south side Constellation Drive. Though the city does not control where bus stops are located, staff has worked with the School Board on this issue. Additionally, there were some environmental concerns relating to wildlife on the undeveloped tract. In response to Ms. Tasker, Ms. Dittmer stated that the developer is working with the School Board to relocate the stop to the north side of Constellation Drive. Mr. Nowlin commented that Constellation Drive leads to a gated community; therefore, access to the bus stop location is most convenient on Constellation Drive. There were no disclosures by Council. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Philip Nohrr, 1795 W. NASA Boulevard, attorney representing the applicant, stated that he followed up on the bus stop issue and it will be resolved to the satisfaction of any safety and School Board requirements. Mr. Nohrr discussed the proposed new school bus stop location on the north side of Constellation Drive and stated that his client’s property will have nothing to do with the bus stop if it is changed to the north side of the road. He assured Council that city staff and the School Board appear to have resolved this issue. Additionally, Mr. Nohrr commented that there is a distance of 475 feet between the western property line of this property and the overall plat property line, as well as 685 feet between the gas pumps and the western residential lot line, with a large, highly dense vegetated/natural buffer. He closed

Page 9 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 by stating that environmental issues are highly regulated and the applicant is willing to address all of the issues. In response to Ms. Moore, Mr. Nohrr stated that there is a signal at Constellation Drive and Wickham Road that will assist with the traffic and entrance into the gas station. Discussion continued on the entrance into the gas station and the school bus location. In response to Ms. Lopez, Ms. Dittmer stated that the plans for the gas station have already been reviewed by Code Compliance for fire regulations and will be reviewed again during the construction plan review process. The applicant is meeting the requirement for fire protection. Representatives from Bowman Consulting and Racetrac responded to general questions from Council regarding site plan layout and fire safety precautions. Fire Chief Chuck Bogle commented that Station 77 is closest to this location. Additionally, safety precautions were reviewed during the construction plan review process. Chief Bogle also detailed safety precautions built into each gas station. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Moved by Nowlin/Moore for approval of Ordinance No. 2015-56 based on the findings and conditions contained in the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum. Motion carried unanimously. 19.

FINAL PLAT (SD-2004-09C) CONSTELLATION AT NORTH WICKHAM: (Public Hearing) Request for final plat approval for a one-lot subdivision on 14.23± acres, zoned C-P (Commercial Parkway), located on the southwest corner of North Wickham Road and Constellation Drive. (Owners/Applicants – Constellation Commons, LLC and CBL & Associates Management, Inc.) (Representatives – Andres Peterson, P.E. and Phillip Nohrr) (P&Z Board – 11/5/15) Ms. Dittmer reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. On November 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request. There were no disclosures by Council and no comments during the public hearing. Philip Nohrr, 1795 W. NASA Boulevard, attorney representing the applicant, was available for questions. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Moved by Nowlin/Moore for approval of SD-2004-09C and the subdivision variance, based on the findings and conditions contained in the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum. Motion carried unanimously. Page 10 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015

20.

FINAL PLAT (SD-2013-05) CROSSINGS AT BAYMEADOWS LAKES, PHASE 2: (Public Hearing) Request for final plat approval for a 33-lot subdivision on 8.13± acres at an overall density of 4.06± units per acre, zoned R-1B (Single-Family Low Density Residential District), located on the southwest corner of North Wickham Road and Grand Meadows Boulevard. (Owner/Applicant – Baymeadows Lakes Development, LLC) (Representative – Jake Wise, P.E., Construction Engineering Group) (P&Z Board – 11/5/15) Ms. Dittmer reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. On November 5, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request. There were no disclosures by Council. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Jake Wise, 2651 W. Eau Gallie Boulevard, applicant, stated that this project was down zoned from a multi-family to single-family development resulting in a significant reduction in density. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Moved by Moore/Nowlin for approval of SD-2013-05, based on the findings and conditions contained within the Planning and Zoning Board memorandum. Motion carried unanimously.

21.

ORDINANCE NO. 2015-57 VEHICLES FOR HIRE: (First Reading) An ordinance providing for the repeal of Chapter 60 of the City Code, entitled “Vehicles for Hire;” providing for the deregulation of the vehicle for hire industry in the City of Melbourne. (Approved by City Council - 11/10/2015) Attorney Dawley read Ordinance No. 2015-57 by its title. Assistant City Clerk Kevin McKeown reviewed the agenda report and read the recommendation. Don Morgan, 1270 N. Wickham Road, #16, Cab-To-Go, stated he has a problem with this ordinance. He said that representatives from the airport told him they don’t know how deregulation will change their current process. Mr. Morgan discussed his experience driving with Uber and insurance challenges with Uber. He concluded by stating that Uber does not have a (business tax receipt) and that issue should be handled by code enforcement. Attorney Dawley clarified that a business tax receipt is required for businesses that are physically located in the city. Vehicles with Uber that are traveling through the city are not considered offices and therefore are not required to obtain a business tax receipt. A car driving through the city does not have an office in the city. There may be businesses that operate in the city but that doesn’t mean every Uber driver qualifies as a business located in the city.

Page 11 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 Ms. Lopez stated that she is against deregulation and that Council should be supporting the taxi businesses and conducting more extensive background checks. Additionally, the city should be educating its residents not to use unregulated vehicles for hire. Downtown merchants should be recommending only those companies that are properly regulated by the city by posting their telephone numbers in their businesses. Ms. Moore clarified that the airport has a separate set of rules when it comes to vehicles for hire and stated that she would stick with her original vote against deregulation. Moved by Nowlin/Thomas for approval of Ordinance No. 2015-57. Mr. Nowlin stated that the best thing that can happen for business is for government to get out of its way. Mrs. Thomas agreed. The question was called. The roll call vote was: Aye: Thomas, Nowlin, Porsi and Meehan Nay: Tasker, Lopez and Moore Motion carried. 22.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION RE: Police Department use of body cameras. (Requested by Council Member Lopez) Mr. McNees stated that the goal of this presentation is to walk Council through the menu of issues related to body cameras. Mr. McNees stated he would discuss the perceived benefits of body cameras while the Police Chief, City Attorney and IT Manager will cover issues related to their departments. Mr. McNees commented that the National Football League (NFL) decided to use video cameras to remove any potential error in the officiating process. Though the process has been helpful, the vide is not always conclusive, even in a highly controlled environment with multi-million dollar investment. Perceived benefits include:     

Cameras provide an unbiased witness in some circumstances. Improved officer safety and protection from unfounded accusations. Potential reduction in improper or excessive use of force. Improved public confidence. Enhanced report writing.

The city has been through a similar situation through the implementation of police car mounted video. In some cases, the benefits listed above have fulfilled themselves in car mounted videos while in other cases, they haven’t.

Page 12 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 Police Chief Steve Mimbs discussed operational/policy issues, including: 

Access to and retention of video for evidentiary purposes. The video has to be presented in a format that is evidentiary in nature, which has a specific legal meaning. As with most of these systems, many attorneys want access to the software operating system allowing them to view the video on the platform in which it was originally recorded. The videos must be maintained in a format where they are unedited and cannot be changed once recorded.



Controls to ensure video cannot be edited (chain of custody). In some cases, a redaction of the video may be necessary. For example, an officer forgets to turn the camera off and records a private moment or conversation that needs to be redacted. Defense attorneys will require knowledge of why and when the edit took place, what was taken out, and ultimately making motions to throw the video out in its entirety because of a simple mistake.



Time and staffing required to review, tag and index video. The Sanford Police Department, with 70 cameras, generated 75,000 videos in one year, each of which may be considered evidence requiring review, indexing and lengthy retention.



Control – When should the cameras be turned on and off and who decides those policies? The officer, based on policy guidelines, would be the one to turn the camera off. But unlike a car video system that can be hardwired to the actual vehicle, automatic triggers for body cameras have not been developed yet. Additionally, Chief Mimbs expressed a desire to see body cameras that are compatible with the current car mounted video systems so that there is compatibility among video recordings.



Video doesn’t always provide clear or conclusive evidence. It cannot record the state of mind of the officer. The camera is a one-dimensional view of the situation. It does not take into consideration what happened or is happening outside the frame of reference of the camera lens.



Community engagement in program development. Chief Mimbs concluded by saying that the primary objective of such a program should be to capture evidence of a criminal activity.

Page 13 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 Attorney Dawley discussed the legal issues surrounding body cameras, including:        

An officer’s body camera recording is a public record. Each recording is unique and each must be retained for a minimum of 90 days. The public has a right to inspect and copy the recordings unless the record is otherwise confidential or exempt. Portions of the same body camera recording may be confidential while other portions of the same recording must be made available. Redaction of protected portions of recordings is critical. Privacy. Legal/legislative framework still in flux. Sixth Amendment challenges (right to face accuser). As a public record, the video must be produced. There are certain portions of a video that would be considered confidential (such as inside someone’s home or inside a medical facility) or in other places where an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Attorney Dawley discussed redaction of a public record by blacking out portions that are confidential or exempt. The same method cannot be done with video (additional software would be needed), and staff would have to examine each video frame by frame to determine what parts meet the definition of confidential or exempt. Additionally, as each video comes in, it cannot just sit on the shelf; it needs to be reviewed, tagged and indexed in order to anticipate potential public records requests. Putting cameras on law enforcement officers essentially video tapes the general public’s activities. This is important to Council to consider, because questions are raised when the video is turned off. What you video tape will be just as important as what you didn’t video tape.

Glenn Harmon, Information Technology Manager, stated that he contacted the City of Cocoa as they have experience with body cameras. With this information, he presented the following technology issues:      

Individual units cost $300-$700. Assuming the city initially purchases 100 units, that cost becomes $30,000-$70,000, plus 25 percent for ancillary equipment. The cost of “cloud” storage is roughly estimated at $50,000 annually to start. Ongoing hardware and software maintenance is at least 18 percent of the acquisition cost. The city would need an estimated two (minimally) additional support staff members, which equals $150,000+ with benefits. The city is currently midstream in a significant technological “makeover;” implementing a new program like body cameras would be an additional challenge. No system currently exists that would fully integrate with today’s vehicle-mounted video system.

Mr. McNees concluded by recommending that Council continue to evaluate the use of body cameras, particularly in the areas of: Page 14 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015   

Results of early testing, policy review and development within other early-adopter police agencies; Evolution of legal/legislative framework within which these systems are used; and Continued technological development and compatibility with our existing systems.

Council expressed support for the City Manager’s recommendation to continue evaluating the topic. Mr. Nowlin asked how fast the city could make this happen if the dynamic suddenly changed and we decided to move forward. Chief Mimbs detailed some of the necessary steps required before implementing such a plan. Ultimately, he said that this is not something the city can do overnight. 23.

COUNCIL ACTION RE: Board Appointments. a.

Appointment of one member to the Library Board. Ms. Moore nominated Diane Bryant for reappointment. There were no further nominations. Council unanimously reappointed Diane Bryant. (Term: December 3, 2015 – December 2, 2020; five-year term)

b.

Appointment of two regular members to the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Mr. Nowlin nominated Charles Jackson and Dennis Mannion for reappointment. There were no further nominations. Council unanimously reappointed Charles Jackson and Dennis Mannion. (Terms: December 3, 2015 – December 2, 2018; three-year terms)

c.

Appointment of three regular members to the Planning & Zoning Board. Ms. Moore nominated George Lebovitz, Donald Laird and Nathaniel Clement for reappointment. There were no further nominations. Council unanimously reappointed George Lebovitz, Donald Laird and Nathaniel Clement. (Terms: December 3, 2015 – December 2, 2018; three-year terms)

d.

Appointment of one regular member to the Melbourne Housing Authority. Council approved the Mayor’s reappointment of Richard Freeman. (Term: December 9, 2015 – December 8, 2019; four-year term)

24.

PETITIONS, REMONSTRANCES, AND COMMUNICATIONS Council Member Lopez apologized to Ken Warren, a military veteran, and his family for the insult they felt while attending the Veterans Day parade. She stated that the parade

Page 15 of 16

CITY OF MELBOURNE, FLORIDA MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 24, 2015 celebrates an official federal holiday and should not be honoring any veterans that fought against the creation of the United States of America. Additionally, Ms. Lopez asked for Council’s support to submit a resolution to the state legislature regarding the regulation of plastic bags. Council Members Nowlin and Moore stated that they could not support the request. Mayor Meehan stated that the issue could be brought up at a later time for further discussion. Vice Mayor Porsi commented that he recently used the crosswalk outside of City Hall and cars did not stop. With the holiday season approaching and more pedestrians frequenting Downtown Melbourne, he asked for pedestrians and motorists to pay close attention. 25.

ADJOURNMENT Moved by Moore/Tasker for adjournment. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:04 p.m.

Assistant City Clerk – 12/1/2015

Approved by Council:

December 8, 2015

Page 16 of 16

Suggest Documents