2025. We are at 100 Pulk Avenue in Cape Canaveral, Florida at the City Hall Council Chambers for a Cape Canaveral City Council special meeting. It is 6:01 p.m. I call this meeting to order. >> And with that, Council Member Jackson, would you please
lead us in the pledge? I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Council member Davis >> here. >> Council member Jackson >> here. >> Mayor Pro Tim Kellum >> here. >> Mayor Morrison >> here. >> Council member D um Willis, sorry. >> Here. >> Thank you council for being here. City
staff and all who's joining us here in the community. This time uh we have public participation. If anyone would like to speak, we do ask that you please fill out a public comment card. At this time, I don't have any uh cards, but if anyone did intend to speak, please come forward
or raise your hand. Okay, >> Mr. Hermanson, you can come. >> We've done that in the past. I don't have an issue with that. Happy to facilitate that. Yes, absolutely. That go for anyone after you hear us discuss. If anyone would like to speak after, um,
we do ask you please fill out a card. Thank you for completing these and we'll make sure you're heard. Does anyone want to speak during this point in the meeting? Before, prior. Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close public participation.
Right, council. We got one item tonight. It's a special meeting. Item number five, discussion titled Hotels Within the Economic Opportunity Overlay District A1A Corridor, Senate Bill 180 Impacts. This is discussion on hotels
and uh yes, the the reference Senate bill. This uh was on the last regular city council meeting we just had um in October and uh we we decided as as a
whole to take up Cape View Elementary uh another uh relevant topic right now in the city and this meeting was called to to facilitate it by council member Jackson who also submitted the item and so
council member Jackson whenever you're Petty, the floor is yours. >> Okay, just one moment. One moment, please. I actually am making progress with this PC. Okay, so
um city clerk, if you'll scroll down a little bit, I'll catch up with you on my doc so that I'm working from there. But >> you want to go to the actual agenda item? >> Yes, I want to go to the agenda item.
Okay. So, we've had citizens that have expressed concerns in regards to the highdensity uh hotel development we have in the north end of town along the A1A corridor. Um, and so this agenda item is to explain and focus on attention on
several zoning district regulations that allowed and governed the permitting of the hotels. Additionally, the agenda item mentions the current impact of Senate Bill 180 and the uncertainty regarding planning within the city. So,
um, we're going to take a look at how we got to where we are. I think that's been a big question for a lot of our citizens is how did how did we end up with all of the hotels in the north end of the city? Um so um the economic opportunity
overlay district and the hotels, the properties along the A1A corridor north of north um that is north of North Atlantic Avenue are mostly zoned with either C1 low density commercial or C2 commercial and manufacturing.
The A1A corridor is also subject to the ECO economic opportunity overlay district um which is a supplemental zone overlay zoning district regulation that was adopted by city council in 2012. Now,
the next sentence is rather key because the e the EOD is intended to be consistent with the 2009 community visioning plan and the 2012 community redevelopment plan. For those of you that may not have lived here
during the time that time um 2009 there was a community visioning event which I did get the results from that um through through our records and that community visioning event was held where people
could go in and discuss what they wanted the city to be like. And prior to that, we did have ordinances in place for development along the A1A corridor, which is now the
the um economic opportunity overlay district. Okay. So in that two 2009 visioning event um it resulted in our city engineer
Kimley Horn uh produced these results and then in 2012 the community redevelopment plan was developed in part to promote hospitality related commercial development that capitalizes
on the economic benefits of Port Canaveral and designed to create a unique identity for the A1A quarter with a distinct sense of place while attracting new businesses and customers and providing
for the comfort, convenience, and safety of workers, residents, and shoppers. And you'll see the Cape Canaveral code there. The EOD is intended to have the most intensive commercial and residential uses within the city.
And the EOD standards are in addition to and not in substitution of the underlying zoning district regulations and other regulations in the city code which still remain applicable for
certain businesses. So in this economic overlay um opportunity overlay district we had our code before and we're going to talk about some of those things that have changed due to the CRA and that uh
EOD. Uh but those things are still in place for thing for commercial that does not fall in the economic opportunity overlay district. Okay. So um let's see here. So
the EOD standards are in addition to and not in substitution of that zoning district. Okay. Um and other regulations contained in the city code also remains
applicable. However, the city council at that time established a clear priority rule that provides that the EOD standards will govern and rede govern development and redevelopment within
that EOD district and will control when there is any conflict with code provision. So our it will override our existing code in certain cases in that district.
So that CRA EOD document is it takes priority. Okay. So the EOD land matrix uh land use matrix provides that hotels and motel
are permitted use for properties with an underlying zoning dist district designation of C1, C2 and M1 and that's in our Cape Canaveral code. In addition with the EOD, there shall be
no minimum lot size for a hotel development within the district. However, there shall be a minimum of 150 units that must be constructed at the same time. So, that EOD document gave
developers the ability to build on any size lot. Um, it has to be 150 units. Okay? And that's and you see the code there. Furthermore, the EOD also permits
lot coverage as defined in section 110-1 up to 80% of the developable land area provided that the setback storm water and landscaping requirements are met. And you'll see 110 uh 628 is the code on
that one. Furthermore, hotels may receive approval for building height up to six stories or 65 ft in height 110-62 uh41B
on the code for that. So in summary, the EOD was established to encourage higher intensity hospitality and commercial activity along the A1A corridor by allowing hotel development without a
minimum lot size requirement, increased height, and permitting substantial lot coverage when other development standards are satisfied. And so with these provisions, they've s with
while these provisions have succeeded in facilitating the development of hotels within the A1A quarter, they've also produced development patterns that significantly differ from those that would have occurred under the under the old code or
the underlying C1C2 zoning districts alone. while the EOD standards prevail in any event of a conflict. So for example, hotels are not permitted to you uh are not a permitted use within the C2
zoning district. However, the EOD expressly added hotels as permitted use on C2 properties located within that EOD overlay. and that's one section 110609
Cape Canaveral code. Similarly, within within the C1 zoning district, hotels are a permitted use but must include at least 150 residential units. may not exceed 30 units rental units net per net
acre and must provide standards require a minimum site area of approximately 5 acres which would have been 30 units per acre times 5 acres to be able to put in
the 150 units. So that was the old code. So in contrast, the EOD provides that there shall be no minimum lot size for hotel development directly conflicting with the C1 requirements. The EOD also
permits building heights up to 65 ft in conjunction with community appearance board of static approval whereas the underlying C1 and C2 districts limit height to 45 ft. And that's section 110
6241B Cape Canaveral Code. Therefore, pursuant to the EOD's conflict clause, the overlay standards control allowing hotels within the EOD
to be developed on parcels of any size with greater lot coverage, taller building heights than would have otherwise been been allowed to be permitted under the underlying zoning district code. So, Senate Bill 180 is
now something that is um in it's been um of course passed up at our state level. And in the final days of the 2025 session, Florida lawmakers quietly passed Senate Bill 180, a bill described
as a hurricane relief bill, but it's packed with se sweeping restrictions on the ability of local governments to engage in community planning and proposed or emit land a land planning regulations. It went into effect July
1st, 2025. It may also further affect how our city considers amendments to zoning or overlay regulations. Generally, SB80 prohibits local governments from proposing
or adopting land development regulations that are more restrictive than um the regula or burdenome than those that are, excuse me, than those effective retroactive as of August 1st,
2024 through October 1st, 2027. Several lawsuits have been filed by local governments and 10,000 friends of Florida across the state challenging the constitutionality and scope of SB80 and the outcomes of those cases may
clarify or alter how statutes apply to local zoning authority. Until those issues are resolved, any proposed modifications to regulations within the EOD or the underlying zoning districts should be reviewed carefully for
consistency with the current provisions of state law. And I have attached in the agenda item the um a bulletin that was published by 10,00 which outlines some of the local uh government community planning concerns
about SB80. Now, having said that, and since there's been like two weeks for things to happen, things things happen fast in government when it's not supposed to or not normal. Um, but
the the whole fact of the matter is that we can't restrict anything during that period as defined with SB 180. Now, um you know, we have some things that are
occurring, you know, with some of our infrastructure that we've got to accommodate for and we've got to find ways to handle that. And one of them is our the upgrade of our water processing plant, which I've discussed before, and that sort of thing. But m I'm going to
ask our city attorney who has been all 180ed as can be to give us any updates because there are multiple cities within Florida suing the state of Florida over SB80 and
now there are multiple bills being put out there um so that if SB80 goes away they'll have some other land development bills. And before I ask our city attorney to chime in, SP 180 was
originally to set up supposedly to allow people who have hurricane damage to rebuild to the code that their property was built in in the first place in order to keep burdensome regulations from
keeping people uh giving them the ability to rebuild their properties. But it's so sweeping it goes out a 100 miles from any point that touched that hurricane. And in some cases those locations didn't even have any storm
damage and now we're all going by it. So it's um I think it's its purpose might have been noble um really and its application is uh somewhat questionable. Uh but if you would uh
city attorney mind giving us an update on any of that lawsuit information? >> I don't have any um recent updates regarding um the lawsuits in terms of any decisions being made on on either one.
>> Okay. I know I know the administrative challenge um is is is um going to be decided on on briefs and there there won't be a hearing but um I don't have an outcome of that yet. >> Okay. >> With the Department of Commerce.
>> All right. And also just just saying this, we recently had 14 inch inches of rainfall and in that air in the area of North uh Cape Canaveral, we did have some flooding. Now, our hotel partners
have been great to install water tanks and that sort of thing. I can't imagine what it would have been like had that not been the case um where we had some of that flood water um being stored in the tanks. But that's another thing that's concerning because we're covering
a lot of uh surface with with pavement. And luckily uh you know our hotel partners are helpful in making sure that we get permeable concrete that we have storm tanks and that sort of thing. But
we still when in a downpour and that downpour was really something that you can't even estimate that it's going to rain like that. But we had um issues with capacity
on the plant and we have flooding issues that was a result of that storm. Okay. So, Mr. Mayor, I'll pass it back to you. >> Thank you. I I appreciate you um going through that,
Council Member Jackson. And I know that the economic overlay district, you know, prior to that district being created and even the CRA, Cape Canaveral
looked a lot different. Um and just the the amount of permits, the types of development, the tax base, everything sort of from that point on 2012 on we saw
growth and that has been applauded. I think it it has had some positive impacts. But today I I do echo the concern. It's not it to me it's about understanding
the flooding the wastewater capacity concerns and then the future projections on what's happening. Um I had a chance to go to the state of the port yesterday and I think few of us might have been
there as well and there is a I mean remarkable growth and success. I think we're seeing few years ago was 7 million cruise passengers and this year it's I think over 8 million. Um that number is
not right. Uh perfect but it it's growing and I think Cape Canaveral has been on the um supply side of you know providing the hotels due to the demand and the traffic. I I will say
it's in in the space program is contributing. It's not just one thing but the traffic is a little bit more difficult to communicate. I think traffic is sort of a part of life
especially in cities and cities much busier than us don't want to hear traffic problems. But when we start talking about wastewater issues and indirectly, but I I think there's a lot
our local school being closed down or the proposal to merge and close it down. I do have uh an issue with that and a concern on what we can do to reverse the trend. uh that
without you know interfering and stomping uh pro progress and and positive things for our community. And so you know we we got or received notices few weeks back from the city about
limiting our water use and you know that's a point to where the quality of life for residents has to be limited. you know, we can't take a long shower or, you know, just limit your use. That's a concern. And when we think about a thousand hotel
rooms, I know when I stay in a hotel, I use the uh might take a little bit longer shower than normal. I think that's just human nature. And and so I I don't think and I wouldn't want to limit my use if I was staying in a hotel. Um,
and it and it's to me something that I I don't know the solution, but there is more plans for more hotels coming and I think it's it's moving faster than this council I think is
comfortable and I can I can speak for myself when I say that. Um, and I think the process which has been brought up to the public of the PNZ board approving site plans, you know, the council takes
the heat or the questions, but we're really not involved in those um approval steps and that's something that we've talked about in the past, but this code obviously was directly involved in the council. So the intent of the council of
that time was looking at a different city, a different circumstance, a different economy. Since 2012, we've seen property values continue to grow and increase. And today I think we are
the way I perceive this agenda item is taking a step back and looking at it and and I'm I don't know the path but the one thing I can say is I don't want to get in the way of of development but I do question
the the studies and the capacity because we are flooding. We do have wastewater issues. We are having to limit our use. Uh Cape View residents are not moving to Cape Canaveral and and and the trend is
going down to to raise a family and to send your kid to Cape View. I mean, that's what's happening. And it's for good reasons. The property values. I think it makes no sense for for a family to to come here when when you can get the same house for a lot less money, you
know, closer to a school. And so I think it's about balance to me. And that's really my comments is I do feel a little out of balance right now with what the intent was in those 2009 um studies in that statement that or the
the code that you read and I'll wrap it up where it talked about really the introduction of the economic overlay district. It said I'm going to >> pull that up. It's that first line
>> where it says the intent >> was to capitalize on the the success of the I've almost made it there. Um 110.
Oh, here we go. Okay. So the introduction the A1A economic opportunity overlay district provides guidelines and standards for public and private development projects in commercially zoned areas along A1A
consistent with the intent of the visioning redevelopment is developed here it is to promote hospitality related commercial development that capitalizes on the economic benefits
of poor Port Canaveral and so that I mean that today does not feel I do not feel aligned with that as an individual that the success of the port is not transferring I think and we are
not made whole when we have to limit water use when we have wastewater issues when we have schools shutting down for what the goals and the vision of the city at Cape Canaveral is to be more than tourist resort town and the ports. We certainly I think we've accomplished
those goals and so I said I would stop and I will now. That's an example of out of balance. >> And um >> thank you >> Mr. Mayor. In those section that section 110 uh- 331 uh the intent and applicability
uh it's attachment one of the agenda item from October. Mhm. >> Um, you know, that was written with with an intention that this is what our people wanted our city to be like.
It wanted it to be a residential city by the sea. It's still in our city charter saying that about us. And um I spoke with our city manager one day and he made a very valid point and he said,
"Well, who do we want to be? Who are we? what do we want to be? Because we're headed in a direction that was a good direction to go in at the time because we needed the economic development, that sort of thing. But it but the EOD
um overlay district document superseding all of our code for those two zoning areas. means that we we literally wrote ourselves out a home rule.
We have no home rule. Uh when you combine that with SB80. So with SB180, for example, we could go into the EOD and modify it a little so that we can
make it applicable to the lots we have available now. You know what I'm saying? so that we wouldn't have so maybe we could manage flooding a little better or manage the wastewater better but we don't have the ability to do that with
SB180 so it becomes a problem and there are cities that are literally saying pound sand state of Florida that are putting in building moratoriums that are um rejecting uh developing uh wetland
areas and things like that that are taking a chance um on the state and they may be one of the ones some of the ones I've seen maybe they are ones that are involved in the lawsuits you know but the code before was so um stringent on
what could be done because that section 110-331 attent it's low density commercial on the city's official official zoning map is what it was. Further, those properties zoned C1 that are located within the
boundaries of the A1A economic overlay district shall be subject to the guidelines of that article. But when you look at it back then, it literally said, um, and I'm looking for where I have
that, but it literally said, it's in that section somewhere, under no circumstances will there be more than 30 units per acre. That's pretty specific with under no circumstances. But when we
did the visioning and then did the EOD that completely changed and I'm not sure how we got to that off the the uh visioning because I looked at the results and what I saw that citizens had provided on feedback is they wanted
a a walkable community they feel safe in. They wanted a downtown area which we still don't have. um and those those types of things that they could use. And so it it's uh we've
got the you know the development up there, but we really kind of overshot the runway and now we're in a situation where we can't handle the wastewater. >> Yeah. I mean the the benefits of the
district are very measurable. I mean, the tax base, the value of the the the port of Captain Murray touted, he specifically called out the city of Cape Canaveral and and put a value on it. And those I mean, there's no doubt the
impact fees, the advorum tax base. Uh, you know, those funds go to help build sidewalks, things that benefit our local residents. My my issue is that if
concurrency like at CO or or wherever. How do we ensure that the utilities can can handle it? Because I don't know what the calculations were, but it it seems like we're we're strained right now and stressed. And so if if it can be built
and constructed in a way that can handle it, I think you we we should encourage it. Um but the the port is full steam ahead and and promoting and expanding terminals. The
boats are getting bigger. 5 to 7,000 cruise passengers. You could evacuate almost the entire city of Cape Canaveral on one boat and it's just a lot of a lot of people and a lot of positive things. So what do we I
>> if Senate Bill 180 stands in the way. >> Yes. >> Okay. Let me just ask a big question and and I'm not going down this road but I want to see the effect is we understand the economic overlay district was a layer that was added in 2012.
>> Yes. that can that layer be completely rescended and amended and taken away or does Senate Bill 180 take no >> our ability away? Okay. In my view, um, and if taking what you mean by taking
away in its entirety, um, I I would say not not right now with Senate Bill 180. or if you did, you'd have to be prepared for whatever litigation costs may ensue from from the state coming after you because there are cities that are
definitely going against it, but they're lawyering up because they know that what they're doing is breaking the state statute currently. >> You also need to take into consideration that Senate Bill 180 may be amended in this session. What that means, no one
knows, but there may be some amendment to it. So, you know, while you're thinking in the context of Senate bill as currently written, it may not be written that way come March when the session's over. So, it's to be determined.
>> And I know there are multiple bills as well that are being written that are similar to 180. >> Mhm. >> And that that makes me question whether 180 will be rescended and it'll go to these other bills. I have the numbers of those that I can share with council. Um
and um Mr. Mayor, when you said that we're we're going to have a new terminal at the port, who is processing the waste water for the port? Do they have their own waste plant wastewater plant? >> No, it was Cape Canaveral through the '9s and then in Cocoa Beach has absorbed
it since. >> They have a 10-year contract with the city of Cocoa Beach. >> Okay. Okay, >> Mr. Mayor, >> let's hear from the Yes. Council member Willis, >> as the chairman of the Space Coast League of Cities Legislative Advocacy
Committee, >> Senate Bill 180 is being reconsidered by Di Senator Diggley. He's making changes. All of the leagues of cities in state of Florida are submitting suggestions and
recommendations on editing and rescending portions of SB 180 that uh that has been ongoing for the last couple of weeks. It will continue. Uh we'll be going to Tallahassee first part
of December to meet with legislators. Uh there'll be a group from the League of Cities that um I proposed SB 180 as being one of our priorities and the majority of this board didn't want
to do it because it impacts everything. It doesn't just impact some resident. It impacts everything that we want to do. And the as far as home rule goes, the EOD
was part of home rule. I mean that that uh the council at the time set that up. That was not something that uh was taken away by the state, but it was a choice by a past council. Now, we can't do
anything about that. And then with the Senate Bill 180 and its current structure, we can't do a moratorum on any construction. We can't um improve any of our construction
that might have to be done. So, we're basically stuck at past uh regulations and past standards. But as far as the uh the wastewater, I think we should
approach the port and see if there's some partnership that can be done to improve our wastewater. >> So, we can't suspend or or strike Sen uh the economic
overlay district. No, that was my question. And >> no, no, sir. So, so we we created a a >> we can't go back to the just the C1. >> No, we can't make any >> stuck with what we have.
>> I mean I mean Senate Bill whatever Senate Bill 180 means and I guess that's to be determined. I mean the city cannot adopt more restrictive and burdensome land development regulations. So when you say strike out the EEOD to the extent that somebody were to successfully argue that they're more
that striking out is more restrictive and burdensome regulation then Senate Bill 180 says you can't do it until October 1, 2027. Well, I think that that the argument that if that layer that we have the
commercial, it was 45 ft. It was 30 units per acre and that was resulting in no commercial development in the commercial district that complemented the port and all of that, right? And so
then the economic overlay district was created. we saw uh over the past 13 years I guess uh you know that now we're in double digit hotels it accomplished its goal
and so we can't suspend that that district or or I think that >> okay yeah that's u >> now
as as we say that if we follow SP 180. We cannot do that. However, I'm looking at an article right here. Central Florida Public Media acting against legal advice, which we would be acting against our city attorney's legal
advice. Edgewater keeps a development uh moratorum that they had put in in January, and this was August that they did this. So, there are cities bucking that. We may not want choose to do that. Um, >> but that's a moratorum. I mean, I don't
even agree with that. I'm not saying a moratorum. I'm saying we keep we don't touch our commercial zoning. >> It's a whole another layer. >> Absolutely. >> That goes above and beyond. And in my opinion, in many respect specs, there are components of the economic overlay
district that are more restrictive. >> So, we would actually be relaxing the code. Obviously not acres and not height, >> but but a lot of the hurdles with uh you know uh >> and this for theirs was dealing with
permits um for some of the land use because of flooding, you know. So our flood, we were really blessed. We had one area of town that got hit really hard and that
was the north part. Unfortunately, luckily our, you know, our partners here in town that um have businesses that are hotels have underwater storage tanks and things to have helped mitigate that. Um but when we come to the wastewater
plant, you know, we can't get to capacity on it. >> You know, we need to provide wastewater service. So, that is what what is the biggest problem or concern of mine. And so as we build because we've got, you
know, waves develop, uh, waves district that's, you know, potentially going to build um, and all that, we have to to look at what we're going to do with that that wastewater. And I think it was important for everyone to realize that the code before
was much more restrictive. And if we didn't have SB180 in, we could go in and modify the EOD. But we can't because we would literally have to go against our city attorney's advice and that means spending legal potential legal money for
breaking a state statute. >> Okay. And I share the concern on wastewater. Um let's hear from the the council member Willis. I I know I responded to your statements about Senate Bill 180. the economic overlay
district you were talking about was created and you know exercising home rule I think is is what you you're you as I understood. Um was there anything else at this time? Council member Willis. >> No.
>> Mayor Pro Tim Kellum or Council Member Davis? >> Uh yes, Mayor. Um I just a couple questions. When we designated the EOD district, how
were how were these lines developed? Was it because this is the area we wanted developed? Do you know, Anthony, how they come up with? I don't know how the exact boundaries were determined, but the city had a consultant working with
the staff at that time and I think predominantly they were trying to capture the um commercial corridor along A1A for certain, but it kind of bled over to um some of the industrial properties further to the east.
Well, I know that um you know when you look at this and and what what it was the redevelopment plan um was to promote hospitality related commercial development that capitalizes on economic benefits of Port Canaveral. Well, they
have far exceeded our expectation of what's going to happen out there and they continue to do that. But it also says that they designed to create a unique identity for A1A Carter with a distinct sense of place. I don't see
that in the A1A Carter. I don't see a distinct sense of place. Um attracting new businesses and customers with uh shopping and residents and things like that. That's what people
wanted in 2009. They wanted shops. They wanted a small town feel. They want um restaurants. Um and I think that we've kind of dropped the ball on that. And now we have doubledigit, like mayor was
saying, hotels that also affect um the traffic from the port. I live off of uh North Atlantic where the kids wait for school buses. kids are crossing the street to go to Cape View. And the traffic on North Atlantic has it's
unbelievable. Um, and the gas prices are higher here on the island than they are in land. And this all affects our our residents. Um, and it's a shame. I mean, I hope
something can be done with this Senate Bill 180 because I think that we need to adjust the EO district. What was good in 2012 is it's a different city now. Um, >> we just need to make sure we move with
in that direction as things develop because we can't keep it the same forever. We need to make sure we're modifying just like you're saying, >> Mayor Bro, I agree. >> And the and the flooding here is a problem. And like you said in on the
north area and now there's a proposed hotel that's going to be 150 rooms on 2.47 acres. That's a lot of pavement. And um I just think that uh again, you know, short-term rentals have really
affected our community. Our bedroom community has been really changed. We're losing the school. We have a 6.2 2 million recreation center that if we're if it's all short-term rentals, who's
going to use it? Um, I mean, these are just things that the that residents have said to me and um I just think it's important that we try to find a balance before it's too late and and do what we can to
um fix it. >> Mr. Council member Davis, did you >> No, I'm fine. >> Okay. >> Um, Mr. Mayor, and the the only other thing I wanted to say is we we talked about this with the adjustment board
>> and planning and zoning and how sometimes they are not on the same wavelength as the council and I don't know if we need to look at they're approving plan site plans and the board
of adjustment. I know we've done what we needed to do with that, but um maybe final approval has to always go to the council because now this council and future councils have to deal with what
happened in 2012. So I just think that's important >> and I mean I am really talking openly and transparently but one of the things you said here was the 150 room minimum, right? That's a big hotel
>> minimum. What's up with these big hotels? That's all we've allowed. And we've said that here and but to Okay, let me let me just test the Senate bill 180 can't be restrictive. If the hotel's going and there's and there's and it's 150 rooms
and we are at capacity issues and I want to circle back to the whole wastewater thing, but to me it would be better to lower that number. It'd be less rooms. I'm just talking, right? I mean, so so is with and I'm
literally talking in theory here. Would Senate Bill 180 stop us to reduce it from 150 to 100? That's more lenient. >> Yeah. No, pro um on that proposal, that specific proposal, probably not. >> Okay. >> That's less that's less restrictive than
a minimum 150. >> Okay. As far as utilities going, uh the wastewater issue, um if we are at uh our capacity right now is a concern. >> Yeah. Well, council, there's a lot to
talk about with with um wastewater treatment and we currently process 1.2 1.3 million gallons a day and uh our capacity is 1.8. We are in the middle of the study that we are going to bring to
the council in the form of a workshop potentially in December. Um but the reason why as you probably know and the public knows is when we have to issue that you know reduce consumption order it's because we've had a lot of intrusion into the system that is
operating at a high capacity. So, uh, circling back to, uh, Council Member Jackson's comment, um, the question is really three-fold. Who are we? Where are we headed? And what's it going to take to get there? And the answer to the third question should come first. What's it going to take is vision from this
council. It's going to take revenue, obviously, but it's also going to take sewer. And our sewer system is more important that we maintain its current infrastructure, maintaining what we have uh by scoping out our lines underneath
so that we can determine where the intrusion is coming in underground because it comes in multiple ways above ground and underground. Uh and we have uh important incentive to scope out the um the underground infrastructure. uh we understand that SpaceX is wanting to in
you know do the super heavy rocket launches and we don't know what the vibrational um you know vibration of those launches will do. We don't know what the sonic booms will do. Uh so it's imperative that we take a look at those lines in advance of any super heavy
rocket launches so we can document any damage, aging pipes, whatever, be it for sewer or storm water and and so we can document pre-existing conditions prior to any super heavy rocket launches so that we at least have a baseline to go
from in the event that they get damaged due. We can prove damage done by vibration and perhaps get some you know recoup some cost to replace repair replace but more importantly we can see where as far as the sewer system is
concerned where the water is in you know is is intruding in the system repair that um so that we can reduce the amount of storm water intrusion. If we reduce that then we ultimately can incre we we were able to increase our existing
capacity by eliminating that foreign intrusion into the system. We only want sewer water to treat not storm water intruding into the system. And so I think uh it's important for this council to focus on in the future with our
budgets and any appropriations that we can get, any grants that we can get, focus on repairing our infrastructure underneath so that when our land owners want to develop their property, we can properly service them through our storm
our sewer system. you know, they have a right to develop the property and we want to be there for them when they when they come knocking regardless of what we do with the the district or whatever with Senate bill. We have to take care of what we have now to be ready for whatever future, you know, we may be in
store for >> when that study, do we have any idea when that will be finished? >> We anticipate uh being able to present it to council potentially in January um in the form of a workshop. We did discuss this at one point in a previous
council meeting. Um, you know, and and you mentioned the port. We have been in conversation with the port for months now about uh wastewater treatment. They do have a contract with Cocoa Beach and they have 10 years to go on that.
They're not opposed to speaking with us right now, but their current and their current capacity and their anticipated needs can be accommodated through their agreement with Cocoa Beach. So, what that means to us is that
maybe there's no incentive to talk with us about using and helping us with our our sewer. That's not to say that they can't be brought to the table to talk about what would it look like in, you know, when that contract expires. That's
why it's of interest to speak with us now. They don't know where they're going to be in 10 years with the existing provider being Cocoa Beach. Uh so these are important conversations. Right now, the current cost we anticipate for a wastewater treatment plant is about 60
million. What's that going to be in 10 years? And how is the city going to pay for that? you know, I mean, you can always take out a bond, but nobody likes that. Uh, so maybe there's some partnerships that we can engage in. So,
but again, these conversations, our existing system is really where I I strongly recommend this council focuses >> in that existing system today. Let's assume there's a point the study I think where we we would have to expand or
improve. Yes. >> To your point. >> Yes. In the event uh permits D, Department of Environmental Protection, are we forced to issue permits and COS
even though we're at capacity or is that something outside of Senate Bill 180 to address the issue with wastewater once we're at capacity that that the next big development comes in and we don't have
the capacity today. Um, is that is that separate from Senate Bill 180, environmental concern, wastewater? >> Well, I mean, in my in my view, I mean, we the city has by law, required by law,
has a concurrency evaluation process. >> That concurrency evaluation process measures the availability of several different types of services including sewer. So um that process is on the books and must be applied in accordance
with law. The technically I mean when every development project comes through the city, city staff is supposed to run that project through the current concurrency evaluation process and no development permit should be issued by
the city unless and until the staff completes the concurrency review process and certifies compliance with available services. And if the services are not available, then a development permit is not issued.
Okay. So, that to me is where when I said I I don't know what goes in that concurrency piece, um it would be very helpful to see the latest and maybe this upcoming project of where we are the the
most current concurrency review because I I think I don't have a good grasp on that. and use if if we're at 1.3 of a capacity of
1.8 million and then you know there's a project going to be proposed somewhere on the north side of town. They're looking at the lift station, the capacity issues and I know there was some issues on the norththeast side up there. Um and today
uh that's a concern. uh I don't and I think that I take responsibility to become more familiar with that concurrency process and maybe we can learn a little bit more
about that. Um, for example, uh, the there's a well I think the Hilton Garden in was the last hotel. There was a concurrency review done for
that project. And >> you have to ask staff that question. I'm assuming so. And I think that if maybe if this council understanding how that one where we were at that from a wastewater standpoint would be I think very
educational informative to the to us in the community and then we can see the next one. Yes, Mr. Touchberry. >> Well, I was just going to to clarify to the the study that's being done by our consultant is accounting for all per all projects under permit or that we've been
made aware of that are anticipated. So, it's not like there's a, you know, we're cutting off any development today. The study is accounting for projects that are permitted and under consideration. Um, >> that's great. >> But we have 14 in of rain in the north part of the city.
>> Mhm. >> And I couldn't flush my toilet. >> We had intrusion. >> I understand >> we had intrusion. >> But until we get the intrusion issues fixed, >> adding to the situation is not going to help in my opinion. And so no matter
whose permit. So we have to address that part of it because you can't allow a downpour to stop city services like our wastewater. >> I 100% agree with you and we are we are
ongoing with the improvement of the uh below ground infrastructure. We have $100,000 uh capital improvement uh dollars this year to repair replace. We're lining uh some pipes as we speak. We're replacing a line uh north of
Oaklane as we speak. Uh and we're going to continue to do that. We're we're on a 5-year timeline based on a law that passed a few years ago that is having us do this. Um, but again, I go back to the importance of CA running the camera through these lines to determine their
current status and what it what so that we know exactly what we need to repair uh or replace and we can bring that to council and effectively budget. >> Um, also, Mr. Mayor, thank you city
manager. Also, um, for council, you may want to look up because there are people that are going around SB 180 because you don't have any choice. There are cities and counties that are doing that. Sarasota County is one. They
just rejected 126 homes on a 50 acre site because it was in a flood plane. Now, that's a different situation than us. You know, we're kind of we kind of live in a flood plane as far as being in between two
bodies of water. Um they also um rejected a 58 unit apartment complex. So there are people that are rejecting and doing what they need to do for their cities. Now what the legal
ramifications of that are is what the you know I'm not looking at that but that's what is happening. So just so you know. >> Sure. Oh good. Thank you. Okay, we're good. So, yep. Conor Ford,
senior planner, each hotel or major development is required to complete that concurrency, and the mayor is correct that in terms of permits and everything being received, the Hilton Garden in is the last one that's gone through that process. So what that entails is
essentially a long packet of approvals that goes to agencies such as WastePro. It goes to Bvard County Solid Waste. It goes to the community development department to look at roadways, roadway
capacity, level of service. It goes through the sanitary sewer system. um and June Clark and the public works department review that section. The questions that the concurrency packet asks are is the site within an existing
service area because obviously you need to be able to serve it to allow for concurrency. It asks what is the maximum sewer discharge of the specific project. So those numbers get run typically by the applicant. It asks for the average flow plus the new construction
reservation. It asked for the design capacity and for what the flow of the system will be after the project, what the impact will be. And so what June has the power to do there is if a project allows if a project would cause the
waste system to go over capacity, then that would be a denial because it would not be in alignment with the concurrency of the city. But since we do have that buffer zone right now, that's why projects continue to get approved because with concurrency, you're making sure that you have the capacity, not
that you have plenty of capacity for projects after that. So, we're still working through with that hotel on the north side of town that you know you alluded to. They're still working through the permit process. So, none of that is finalized yet in terms of concurrency site development permit and
building permit, but you are correct that the Hilton Garden in was the most recent one and that we do have a concurrency pro uh concurrency process. But if something isn't causing it to kind of hit that upper limit, then the city uh is kind of expected to approve
it through a legislative stance. >> Thank you, Connor. Do you have any idea what the one hotel gallons per day is? Just estimate. >> I don't have it off the top of my head. I'm sorry, but I'm sure the public works department could get the numbers to you.
>> Just trying to see if we're at 1.3. What were we before that? And I know that. >> Um, okay. So, we have concurrency for sewer, water, traffic. >> Sounds like all those areas. >> Yeah, it's those plus a few more like
drainage. I know that Tim Carile works with the city engineer. >> Um there's also the parka review where they look at recreation level of service as well. And then the city of Coco looks at uh the portable water as well.
>> That's great. And I I think that does anyone have any questions for Connor? That was helpful. Obviously I I know that that those things were required. I guess where I'm going is can we
be made aware or be involved in those approvals before the permits issued with concurrency. Uh the city council um I I'm not the the best person to make any those end up
being public records. So I think if you know something's approaching permit it's always you know within y'all's rights to say hey guys can I look at currency on this and then we can provide that to you. >> Yeah I think just we don't there's no notice.
>> Mhm. I think maybe a good a good point to check in on it would be after a planning and zoning board approval because then it could be on the radar of hey this went before the planning and zoning board. they recommended approval because that typically means that permits might be coming in the months to come. Could
we remove the P&Z or make them recommending power on site plan and and uh make it less stringent that you don't have to go through P&Z you just go straight to the council and then that way we can review all the expert
opinions on concurrency and if PNZ must be involved as a land use planning agency instead of making the final decision on site plan can the council make that final decision? ision based on a PNZ board recommendation.
>> Well, perhaps it'd be better to let P&Z review it for concurrency, make their recommendation like they do everything else to this council and then you approve or not uh based on whatever the situation is that's compelling you to feel the way you do about concurrency at
that moment. >> Just let it go through the normal process. In other words, with concurrency as a factor during the PNG review and then you'll have all the information. Well, I mean it is a factor. So, and as you know, the council, you know, directed that we kind
of streamline the process. So, that's in that's in the works. Um, but it is inherent and explicit. It's more than inherent. It's explicitly stated in the code and by law that during the development permit process, concurrency
is a condition of approval. So, you know, that that concurrency evaluation needs to occur, needs to be signed off on um as a condition of approval >> before any permits
>> before any permit is issued. So, you know, there's no need to tinker around with it because it's already enveloped in the process. So, um I mean chapter chapter 86 of the code
spells out the whole concurrency management system consistent with with the requirements of state law. >> I think 163 state the concurrency I was looking at. >> Correct. And and then um
yeah, this is what mayor for Tim Kellerman I think the little council is the PNZ makes that decision and it is a m I mean it's a multi-million dollar massive development decision and you're right if we're following PNZ board meetings but it's more about
the liability on a massive project like that is on an appointed board who I think have made some decisions where the council is is not aware. And uh what that results in is the
public becomes aware or the public reads a a recent news article about a name uh hotel and we're over here going, "Gosh, I guess I should have watched those PNZ board meetings." But I feel that with decisions that big, with that much
weight, we should really consider that. And I know like you said, our city attorney we have that's one way by all means. Uh I'm not claiming it's not about the the the subject matter expert, the the the intelligence here, but it's
about accountability and and liability. I would not want that if I was a PNZ board member to make that. And but it always comes back to the council, right? I mean, we we make the decisions to appoint them. We ultimately it ends and begins and can always be traced back to
us. And I think that what we've seen is seven, six, seven hotels. Add all that up, multi-million dollars. And the council did not make one of none of us made any of those decisions. It was that 2012 council that that kind of laid the
groundwork with some good things and Like I said, it has been successful and we're now at this point. City manager, thank you for the study update. I think that's going to tell us a lot. What I don't want is another hotel to come
through or not hotel, any major development that's going to hit some big concurrency numbers or impacts that the council couldn't be involved in. >> Well, mayor, just some um calculations from staff. Um, a 150 room hotel is
estimated at 15,000 gallons per day. And as I stated before, those projects that are under permit or projected in the near future are already being worked into this study uh by our consultant.
>> 15,000 gallons per day is an average 150 room. >> Yes. Per day. >> And so, but and we can handle 1.8 per day. That's a million per day is is what we can process. This is 15,000 per day
coming from one hotel. We're already we're processing 1.2 to 1.3 million per day currently. That's just 15,000 more a day on top of 1.2 or 1.3. >> Wow.
It's I mean it's not even 1% 008% 15,000 divided by 1.8 I thought it would be a lot more >> and hotels aren't always fully occupied. So >> is there a process to essentially verify
that the concurrency? Uh could we as a council require annual reports on what those projections are are actual actually actually doing with because to me the engineers don't always get it right. Uh and and actually
many times it's off. Um sometimes it's for under it's over. But that I think that's the whole essence of of what council member Jackson's put here is on paper we've seen success
but I don't think that 2012 vision ever so wanted the flooding issues and if it's not this we need to figure out but I think we are getting close if we're at one point uh
1.3 three. You should know this. This isn't divided by 1.8. So, we're at that's 72%. >> Roughly. Yeah. We we hope to have Well, we will have more definitive numbers when the study is complete.
>> Okay. And and there's a threshold that the state says, hey, you know, you don't >> Yes. >> You don't go past this. It's not 100 like 80. No, it's in 85 percentile range, but you always have to and that's because you always have to account for
intrusion, you know. Okay. Yeah. June Clark and I have been talking about this for a couple weeks now and and it's it's her position that if we address our infrastructure we can drastically
reduce the amount of intrusion into the system >> which would obviously help with our capacity for sewer >> which could aid you know and allow us to be able to make decisions about growth and development in the manner that
government should because we can we can service that development. >> So regardless of Senate Bill 180, we we have the authority and it sounds like obligation under state law to and we are enforcing concurrency. I'm questioning
I'm questioning can council get involved in that process without tripping Senate Bill 180 and then can we also consider essentially auditing the calculations?
Um maybe the study will address some of that. But the what are the actuals on so just for example the hotel uh keep it there the the the most recent one that's passed big ribbon cutting it
the Hilton garden in how do we know at the end of the year at the end of a few years are we can we put in an implementation to certify and to check that concurrency levels are being at city attorney.
>> The the concurrency evaluation is for purposes of determining whether to issue a development permit. The dem the sewer demands from a hotel um you know I I mean that's a little bit different issue once it's constructed. I
mean the I think the sewer flow is from an actual um business is based on it's a derivative of the water really um that that that is that the property consumes um because I think that's going to I
think that determines the the sewer charge um you know the actual inflow into the plant is I think what you're maybe honing in on is you know what what is that what is that inflow you know, that's coming into the plant
and um making sure that that measurement is accurate. Um so you have a good baseline of data what's going into the plant. Um >> you're talking about in total >> in total. >> No, I'm saying okay, we use we let's say
the next it's 15,000 gallons per day is an estimate. We we measure the plant. We do have that number in the study and we know why is it so much higher? Well, we how do we know if it's there's
10 hotels, there's one that's no, it wasn't 15,000, it was 25,000 gallons per day or 30,000 gallons per day. And it was no fault of the the calculations, just there is something going on there
on a per site large site basis. uh that that we would be able to to verify because I I think that that's and maybe that's not needed. But to me, from an accountability standpoint, it gets approved based on projections. How do we
get actuals on a per not every parcel but these larger I'd just say if if you're going to hit a certain percentage threshold threshold could we have some sort of um
annual verification or certification that it's per that it is uh not exceeding the thresholds that we forecasted because I think we've ran into this with with um we've had some issues where our plant was taking a hit
and we like figured out some of the issues. There was the the brewery I think comes to mind and they had to go on and but the way we found that out was a weird way. It was cuz I think the alcohol levels
were really high and there's only one I mean >> it was killing the bugs and whatever was going on. >> I don't know. But I think that >> red >> so we have concurrency projections. My questions are around are there any other cities that are doing concurrency
actuals on on certain sized projects? Um and it's really about enforcing. I think we don't want to get that wrong at this stage until we get this study. Well, and I'm curious how many how much um the
usage is per day for households. Um because we just we have 11 hotels, I believe, in the north end of town. >> And at 15,000 a day, we're not close to meeting that 1.8 million a day, which is
our capacity. Is that per day? That 1.8 million. >> That's what our capacity is. Yes. >> Okay. So that's a small percentage of that 1.8 at 15,000 is the true number. >> 08 it's less than 1%.
>> Yeah. Uh so how on earth with 10,000 pe households are we getting to 1.8 million. 08 excuse me it's 8 ten of a percent. >> Yeah. I mean, if it's 500,000 of
capacity remaining divided by 15,000, that means 33 more hotels essentially could fit. That's assuming there's no other development, no residential. Um, I mean, that's >> But I when we look at this
and we do evaluations on it, I think we need to look at the condo complexes in that equation. Because the condo complexes are similar to a hotel. Some of them in size, they're up to six stories. Some of them
have 108, 125 units. And they have people there that live in them full-time. And so when we're looking at the actual capacity,
you know, this makes the hotels look like a and it is a small percentage on the wastewater, but we need to evaluate everything we have as far as consumption
or the use of the plant to really have a better idea of how it can impact us since. But here's here's the bottom line. Bottom line is if we're at 80% we've got to do something. >> Yeah. >> Because Kay wants to flush.
>> So just to go back to sewer use and consumption, there are estimates that say that you know the average per person per day is 60 to 80 gallons per day. So if you do the math uh times 10,000 residents, you're looking anywhere from
60 to 80 um what's the number? 60 to 80,000 per day. Hang on. >> I think that's a >> but this is the purpose of the study. Uh 600 to 800,000 per day to be processed
for up to 10,000 residents. And and again, these are just average numbers. Uh but this is you know what the study is going to to do for us is is let us know where we currently are and what you know our future you know what kind of
future we have in store for us. I mean to to the manager's point I think based on my experience and I'm not a you know I'm not a sewer operator but I mean that seems to be a a fairly reasonable number but the city's level of service standard
in its comprehensive plan for sanitary sewer is 118 gallons per person per day which is higher than that number >> right >> so when when the city does its concurrency evaluation I would assume that, you know, we're we're using the
level of service standard in the comp plan of 118 gallons per person per day to determine the estimated um, you know, sewer that will be generated from a new development project. And then that gets factored into the treatment capacity, right? Whether there's adequate
capacity. So, >> so that would be and for a hotel be not rooms, it's they would have to figure out there's two people in a room as >> Yeah. I mean, if you took Yeah. Yeah, if you did I mean >> 130 gallons per day. >> Yeah. If you two people per room, 150
unit hotel, that's 300 people and you got 118 gallons per person per day. That's like 35,400. Um, you know, whether they're applying that on the on the commercial front, I don't know. There's no there's no distinction in the comp plan. It's 118
gallons per person per day. Yeah, to me the >> for estimating purposes, >> I mean the actual may be more in line with the number >> that that the manager put out there somewhere in the 60 to 80 range. >> 60 to 80 per person. I mean there are studies that show about 400 per
household. But again, how big is the household? These are all variable numbers. I mean, hotels aren't going to be fully occupied all the time. Who knows how many people are going to be in the rooms? Their estimates. Um so understandable. >> Exactly. So I think the message you know
that I'm getting is that we need to be able to process uh based on those estimates and then some uh and then some means in the event that we have more than we anticipate and then some also means to be able to
account for any potential growth that we will have in the city. I mean, if our study that we come that we get back says that we'll be able to handle everything that's currently permitted or under consideration that we know of, then we're fine. But we won't be if we don't
fix the intrusion. So, so that's what we're looking at right now. It's again fixing that intrusion uh so that we can be ready for the anticipated growth. But we also know that the city of Cape Canaveral is estimated to be 90% built out. So, what does that other 10% look
like? And how long will it take to do that? And will we need to increase our sewer capacity through the construction of another facility or through maybe the conversion of a storm the um water reclamation? I I haven't talked to June
about this, but it can be done where you convert water reclamation facility to uh sewer um you know treatment instead. It can be done. I don't know if if we can do that, but it's something I'd like to probe. And then again, the the other feature here
would be expanding. Do we have the land to do that? Um or would we have to relocate a portion of the facility somewhere else? And that's where we start having these conversations with our partners and and who wants us to service them and what kind of you know
um you know agreements that we can enter into. >> Thank you. Well, I got some cards here. I think we've chatted and we've definitely talked about the concerns and issues. Yes, Mayor Perim Kellum, >> I just just want to circle back to what
you were saying about lowering the minimum uh capacity like less than 150 room hotels. >> Oh, the minimum room size >> room. Yeah. >> Oh, yeah. I think if we can do that and
not trigger the U 180 that that's something we should think about. >> It might have a different >> and then also as far as covering land mass smaller hotels would and more green space.
>> Yeah. But it also I mean it the goal is to try I mean this stud is going to tell a lot and I think that >> it might end up netting out more hotels because now >> the whole challenge the developers have
is trying to figure out how to make a 150 room hotel work. >> Yeah. on on limited acreage and it was uh >> and so if we lowered that threshold >> and then we'd have more hotels.
>> Well, I don't Yeah, I don't I don't know. I I think >> and the only other thing >> I wanted to say is um this is my next to last meeting but you know we do the budget and we have the CRA money that's
allocated for the presidential street master plan and which is great. Um, it'll be a beautiful project if we can afford it. And the sense of urgency with the infrastructure intrusion
to me is more important than beautiful trees along the presidential streets. I know part of that redevelopment is looking under the streets, but I think intrusion into our wastewater is more
important than and like I think it was the bed board said which made a lot of sense. You know, people come here, they don't go down the presidential streets, they go down A1A. So, you know, we're going to spend a lot of money to make those streets look nice when our basic
infrastructure is failing. So I think that's something you all need to handle. >> Thank you. And noted and and agreed on the level of priority. >> Thank you. >> And we know how much you love trees. So
that took a lot for you to say. >> I do got some public comment cards here. I And council member Willis is here. >> Well, I I just wanted to you know lowering the minimum from 150 to 100. We have to be careful that we don't to uh
Mayor Pro Tim Kellum's point propagate even more hotels. But I think the 150 makes it a serious player that is going to really be working towards the hotel. The the U
kind of ensures financial sufficiency to make the project. It doesn't less likely to be a peace meal development. I mean, we have the possibility of some peace meal development
>> u that I'm not too thrilled about, but um you know, you would like to see it be taken from start to finish, but just we need to consider that. So, >> absolutely. the minimum. I think that was always the intent, council member Willis, is that during the 80s and 90s,
you had a lot of, you know, 6, 8, 10 room hotel motel. They became >> major drug problems and issues. Today, they're renovated and actually little vintage cute. A lot of them still stand in it and they're nice and >> people I think I see it. But yes, I when
I said that, that's why I said I I don't know. I'm just trying to think. I was really trying to test Senate Bill 180 to see how >> Yeah. like we're going to relax the code. I mean, how restrictive is it? So, thank y'all.
Council member Jackson, I want to touch before we go to the public and council member Davis if there's anything else this time. council. >> Um I just the thing that that um concerns me when
you look back at the legislation and how this happened is that 2009 visioning citizens were pretty clear on what they wanted. And Mayor Pro Tim said it earlier, we really kind of missed the mark um because a lot of the things that
they wanted that isn't the case. It's not a sense of uh place for people that live here. Um it's it's a sense of it's a place for you know our travelers coming through the port that is with the
numbers that they have is definitely needed. But, you know, as the city manager said, we have to find out who are we as a city because it it's uh kind of looking back at what
how that occurred because we had the 2009 visioning um event and then 2012 here comes the CRA and really didn't pay any attention to those vi that visioning in my opinion. And so um you know I
don't know if it was saw common denominators in both documents um and the council may not have been uh aware thinking further than far enough in the future to understand that we may need to
modify how things were done. So now we get to deal with that and try to make our citizens happy and our our businesses and that's not an easy challenge. >> Thank you. Okay, let's um council and let's suppose
we're going to go to the public and hear them. I we kind of amended the agenda. They want to hear us speak first, which I understand. I actually like that. I find it to be helpful. I've got the uh cards here for Mr. Hermanson, Mr. Bogger, Miss Dr. Roberts, and Miss King.
I'm Please. I can get that note. I'm sorry. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Tom Hermanson. Is this on? Good evening. Uh a lot to unpack. I'm not quite sure where to start. Uh my
name is Tom Hermanson. I'm a business and property owner here in town. Uh with developed site and sites to be developed. Uh I was definitely very active participant in the 2009 and 2012 visioning sessions and uh and the
conclusion really was uh around the commission at that time recognizing that they had a tax base issue that they'd had a darth uh a total lack of growth over many many years u because of overly restrictive ordinances and zoning and
restrictions and and out of that plan came uh a desire for an increased tax base and an allowance for commercial development in a specific defined area uh with uh increased um allowable density and height. And it was a
success. As the mayor said, you wanted more tax base and uh the city council really has one tool in its belt. It comes down to one tool. It's allow or deny. And that council at that time had
a goal in mind with the input from the residents and they wanted to allow commercial development on the A1A corridor and the first couple miles and and it was a success on the back of the growth of the port. So applaud them and
the participants in that process because it was a really successful project. Uh I think the number of hotels and the number of uh and the the number of hotels you know whether or not that's good or bad I think is a matter of opinion. Um I was concerned to hear a
number of sort of tenuous arguments with respect to issues that the city is facing and and the and the attempt to pull those directly to hotel development. Uh I think it was very uh
illustrative the discussion around the sewer system. It seems like we have a leaky sewer system. Uh and based on those numbers and the capacity issues at 72% at current capacity uh that does not seem to necessarily be a problem. I
would also put forth that sewer and utilities are a service that we all use. Hotels and residents and time shares and condominiums and overnight rentals as well. And so if you have a funding issue with respect to your sewer system, you
probably should look at your sewer fees. Um the impact fees that the hotels uh contributed were by your code. Uh it's very simple. You can go to MUN code and I do it all the time. You can go to the bottom section and you can look at the
fees and schedules and impact fees for storm water are based on something called ERC. Uh that's something um something equivalent unit. So you take a toilet, you take a sink, you take whatever you have and you multiply that out. >> Can I have another minute?
>> Council. >> So those impact fees for roadways and everything else are established by code. If you're not generating enough money with respect to residential or hotel or any other development, look at your fee schedule. If you have to build a $60
million, I would I would if I if I may give some advice. If you have a potential $60 million nut to cover in 10 years, you may want to think carefully about limiting development. You have your
growth your your impact your impact fees for your streets, your uh your uh West Central, your North Atlantic Avenue, your city hall, your community center. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I'll work on them. Those were all in large part paid by the commercial
development that came in the last 15 years. Without that, you wouldn't have the funds and you had the genius at the time and drawing a large CRA. So, you kept the majority of those funds. Now, those funds will continue to acrue, but the costs are going to continue to go
up. And so before you limit development wholesale, keep in mind that those development, new development, new building permits generate income into the future where homes that are capped at Save Our Homes exemptions will not.
So, um, thank you for your time. >> Thank you, >> Robert Bogger. Bob Bob Bacher, Cocoa Beach. Uh I'm a long-term business owner and operator. Um yes, I plan to build more hotels in
this city. Uh I personally think uh what I'm doing is good because it will help the storm water. We have a severe storm water problem and most of my land is already developed. uh all the land west of
uh A1A or Astronaut Boulevard uh from about a quarter mile here to the port is all pumped up land. So that land does not perk. What I mean is they just pump the land
up over the the uh river bottom and that was muck. So when you dig down the water does not go anywhere. Okay. So it saturates immediately. U so we need to redevelop
and and and and bring everything up to a higher standards. A lot of your problems I see is I was shocked to hear that the overlay districts overrides all the codes because
when I submit a site plan uh I feel we are held to a higher standards than other site plans and and and I see that they uh do changes and I say that Because
uh when I look at like the Rison overall site, master sites, it's 26 12 acres. Uh under the old code, it would be 795 units developed out on all 26 1/2 acres.
Okay. And we're looking to add another 450, three hotels there on 12 1/2 acres. The town place in Spring Hill was built out there on seven and three/4ers acres.
Mo, that's about uh uh an acre more or an acre and a quarter more than the last three hotels that you guys approved. You guys being the city, not you all personally.
And what's happening when I see the codes is that they ignore some of the overlay districts or they ask staff to change them. Uh or they just totally ignore it. But
the next one that's going to be built that was approved, I'm just shocked when I look at the site plan that it was approved because they got uh uh like 25% or 30% of the parking or stack parking.
In other words, the three there's three parking lots backed right up and and so that requires violation. >> Mr. Ber, let me just pause you there. I think it was about 3 minutes plus one in
a minute and a half. I just if everybody will have that same opportunity to speak. So maybe we just put four minutes on it first. Thank you. Please continue. So, so anyhow, when I look at what we do when we build something and and we read
your codes and how we interpret them and then when we submit plans and then we actually build them. >> Mhm. >> We we live here. So, we care when I and so uh uh when it says you want a hedge bush there, it might not be when you
build it, but it should be there a year and a half later. >> Okay. And and so when you give relax the parking requirements a third or 40%, you allow them
to put a a a hotel on a on a site that shouldn't have been approved for a site in my opinion because if you looked at all the overlay rules, they ignored a big chunk of them and they went back to
the other rules. So when you know if you're going to live under they pick and choose which rules they want to run under. So so in my opinion you're about an acre short acre and a half short to getting
everything you want in that was when we did the overlay uh uh and promised that we would have extra uh uh walkability and all this other stuff. If you go look at what we're doing, we have
all those sidewalks in place. We're we're putting them all in place. We're putting the hedge bushes in. We're putting the extra stuff in. And I see the other ones just crammed right on the lot. And it's basically a uh
a hotel off the interstate plucked right downtown. And that was not the intent. >> Thank you, Mr. Bugger. >> Okay. So, so anyhow, we do have a storm water problem and it's directly related to your sore problem because rising water is getting into the source system.
>> Thank you, Andrea King. I want to learn more about that. >> Hi, Andrea J. King. um Orange Avenue, Cape Canaveral. Um my points are more philosophical, theoretical than um detailed. The first one is um how is
Cape Canaveral benefiting from Port's success? Port Canaveral success. I haven't heard any reason how. I mean, maybe there are, but I don't know how we are benefiting from the port's success. We're not getting a bed tax from these hotels. That's going straight into the
county's coffers. We don't see any of it. Traffic out here is it's getting worse. I mean, we work out at the port and we we go out there in the mornings and in the mornings it is busy busy busy out there. You got people coming out of
the hotels who don't understand the traffic, you know, the way the traffic moves. They're not used to it. So, it's a hazard. Okay, that's the other thing. the evacuation route. This is the only access we have to get off of this island in the event of a hurricane or or some
kind of other catastrophe and the infrastructure. Now, that is a huge problem and I agree with you, city manager. We need to be addressing that and I'm glad to hear that you are. But I think my opinion nothing more should be
done until that is taken care of. that as Kay said, Kay wants to flush. We all want to flush, including the hotel years who have their customers, their guests there. I mean, imagine if we have a backup. That's not going to be pleasant. In any event, those are the points that
I wanted to bring up primarily. How are we benefiting from the port? We see we were out there all the time and we see all of the construction going on. It is booming out there. How are we benefiting from that? Perhaps we should be getting
a a stipen for every passenger that comes in and out of the port. Would would that be fair? I think it would be just as much as if we got a bed tax for every guest that these gentlemen have in their hotels. that would help us enormously to
underwrite the and fix the the challenges that we have facing us and in the meantime make it easier for the hotel years to provide the services that they guarantee to their guests. That's all I have to say. Thank you very much and thank you K Jackson for bringing
this forward. Thank you. Thank you, Shannon Roberts. And if anyone else wanted to speak that this would be the last card I have, please let me know. >> Uh Shannon Roberts, Salana Shores here in Cape Canaveral. And I would like to
add some perspective if I could. First of all, thank you so much for addressing this huge, huge issue for the city. And we've heard the residents talk about this. So, thank you so much for the attention you're giving it. I was on council, as you all probably know, from 2006 to 2010. So, I had the honor of
hearing the residents, as many of you did, express their heartfelt vision for this city. I was not on the council in 2012. As you may know, we had a change of city managers that became more of a city manager
city than my opinion than councilled. And at that time we had sort of u the advisory boards were put sort of on hold and in that regard in my opinion a lot of the residents uh desires were put
on hold as well and the 2012 plan was put into place and in my opinion that represented more of the economic interest of the city than the residential character protections that the 2009 visioning effort had been so strong And you all, I'm sure, saw that
in the pictures and everything else that came from the residents. So, in my opinion, we had a changeover just historically. This adds to uh council member Jackson's historical perspective. When we had to change the city managers and we had a city manager city model,
that's where we lost the heart of the city in my opinion from the residents. Um the PNZ board authority, I know we've talked about that before. We in during the time I was on council, we had the PNZ recommend to the council decisions,
we never were surprised by a major project. And now when we're hearing the residents talk about these hotels that I'm hearing us talk about more hotels, I mean, the residents do not know about this. It's like you was saying, Mr. Mayor, we learn about this in the paper
and it's not on the council's agenda. So therefore, we can't see that in the weekly notes or whatever as to what's coming up in the uh oncoming council meetings. So from a historical perspective, as was mentioned, you know, the residents were very intent on 45 ft
and very intent on the reduced density per acre. Um the decision-m process, we've talked about that. I think that we're we're not clear on the decision process that's underway right now. PNC apparently proving things without the
council having process in place to approve. You all have mentioned that. And just as Miss King just mentioned, the return on investment to the residents of the port. I don't know where the port the city became port centric, but that appears to be the case. And we're very hotel centric now,
not residential centric. In my opinion, that's a huge cost to the city. Huge cost in the traffic, as you all pointed out, the North Atlantic artery, as was mentioned by council member Kellum and Shore Drive. You know, we we can hardly
get out at Shore Drive because of the new terminals that they put up. And that's a major artery for our city on the northeast. Um I'm wondering where Cong State Representative um Sir Roy is in this whole thing when you all are bringing up the Senate Bill 180. I still
hope that he will be representing the municipalities that he represents interest and I I have never seen him here and I'm not it's nothing personal cuz he's a kind ring but I would love to see him participating in our discussions about issues as significant as this. So,
I just wanted to mention I'm so grateful to you all for addressing this, taking us back to 2009, not to 2012, which is where we had a city manager, and I I just feel like we really turned the wrong turn. There is where I personally
saw us venturing differently. And I think we need to go back to 2009 and seeing where the residents were speaking. The residents were speaking. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. That is the that concludes all the uh public comments at this time. Very
valuable. Thank you all. Each one of your uh perspectives is is very helpful and I think um just a few things I wanted one of the comments uh Mr. Hermanson know hotels
has been used and and that's why I think is important one of the last things I said is any big development right I mean that is absolutely wherever you have a lot of land something big potentially could go there's some intense uses on small land and so I think it really is
fair to say that it's it's about uh the intensity of the use of the property and um and hotels are obviously uh desire. This is a desirable area for
hotels. Uh and so the the in in the statements around the success of the port um I think we all know that the increased tax base would we have the demand for the the
hotels? Uh no without the port I I don't think we would. However, the the question, Miss King, that you'd brought another way to ask it and frame it is
we benefit how we benefit. You can the impact fees upfront, the all of the utility fees as Mr. Hermanson said that goes in the total revenue in and then the ongoing ad valorum taxes every year,
right? That's very measurable number. But those hotels also they do pay a bed tax, right? And that's an excellent point is that does not come to us. And so a lot of the money in the tourist development space is promoting tourism
to Cocoa Beach and Port Canaveral. And Cape Canaveral is obviously unavoidable. We don't get a lot of love. I don't necessarily think we want a lot of love, but we're here. We love it here. We love our visitors. It's always been a part of the vision is is for our visitors. And I
think that we have to step up and and make the case to the tourist development. Uh we have to make the case to the port. And I've got two more years left in my term. And I'm willing to step up and and
do that with this council's support. And because the port handed a little gift out to everyone who came to the state of the port. It was a little plant, small little, it was a
like a little vase, a hydroponic plant, and it was super cute. It said, "Thank you for helping us grow." And I think that we help the port as well. And I'm not one to just go off emotions. It'd be interesting to see the
numbers. And there's some the gentlemen here know the numbers better than me. I know they're very involved in that. And um I think that would be a good conversation is, you know, should Cape Canaveral
be a part of the cruise passenger 678 million? Should Cape Canaveral be a part of the bed tax? I think so. And the port used to have mayors and city representation on their commission going
back when they were first incorporated. And today, I'm not sure that the port commissioners, they're pursuing the vision of the port. It is not, like I I said in the last meeting, I don't know if it aligns with Cape Canaveral's vision. We are a
residential area and we love our beach and we love the same amenities here, but they're really getting on a boat and enjoying other parts of the world. And like I said at the beginning, it's just a little out of balance right now.
And I want to be on the right side of this. I want to support our economic development efforts. But Miss Roberts, I mean, you've been saying this for a long time is that the residents voices has
has been diminished since then, and our job is to represent the community. And I've got a lot of residential concern that echoes what we heard from our residents today. And the the gentleman who spoke today, um,
they're local. They've been involved. They know the pulse of this community. You can go back to the 2009 vision. You see Tom in there and he's up there, you know, pointing fingers. And Bob's, if he's at a meeting, he's engaged. He's speaking. And so, we have a respect for for you. And Eric, I think back there. I
see you guys. And I know you work very hard. I heard so many compliments about the improvements made to the Rison. I mean, what you did there did not go unappreciated or unnoticed in the community. You can see people, oh my gosh, you know, the snowbirds come down.
What happened to that place? Look how amazing that looks now, the tree, and that fulfilled many of those things in the vision. And I also hear you on the uh the concern with you have the economic overlay restrictions and then
you have the code and the sort of the picking and choosing which that that that's a concern. And so if Senate Bill 180 is true that there are more restrictive things in the economic overlay district that we would not
trigger Senate Bill 180, right? So, does that mean we can But what about the things that are more restrictive that require trees and and and all the landscaping requirements and and all the long list
of aesthetic features and the reviews, community appearance board? Do we have to keep can we get rid of the restrictive, but we still have to keep the the less restrictive? I I think and so if we can't
you know, move that around or amend. It's all I hear it's all in debate. The legislative delegation meeting, Senate Bill 180, the understanding for my talk is you don't even bring it up there because
that whole panel, Sir Roy Mayfield, all of them know they know there it's the count all not only all the cities, the counties are are pushing back on it as well. And so here we are today. Council member Jackson, thank you so much for putting this this on. It is a hard
conversation to have because, you know, we don't we want to respect private property rights, but it it's not this side's wrong or this side's right. I think we can we're all telling our truths and I think
we've got a way to maybe make adjustments whether it be as some of the ideas is maybe we do need to increase our our our rates. To me it's not necessarily a money issue as much as it is a um a capacity issue which certainly
comes back so to dollars always does. If we can balance it out, I think Cape Canaveral small. We have $6 million roughly in6 to 7 million in advorum
revenue. That's uh that's I've said this and I'm going to keep saying it until I guess somebody tells me to stop saying it and I agree. But there's 6 to 7 million cruise passengers and it's $1 per passenger to Cape Canaveral for a tariff or a fee.
That's a decision the port commissioners, I think, could make. And if they watch our meetings, they hear this. But Cape Canaveral's on the front lines of this. And I don't think one dollar is going to deter one visitor who's going to be spending thousands of dollars on a
cruise ship. And that's just on the per capita. And then um that's that's the uh the thank you for let helping us grow that I think would would pay and we are going to
invest in nice beaches. We but we really can't make those improvements when our city manager is talking about wastewater. can't make the entire presidential streets master plan was about the people the experience of our visitors come is they go down
presidential streets and that's what they experience and then they f from Orlando it's an hour ride or however far they're coming their final destination if they're coming to the beach that is their experience at Cape Canal or from A1A and then you get to this beach
parking spot and you have arrived and we talked about that opportunity when you get out and you look around and the growth and our team works hard, but we can really improve that a lot and I think that helps our tourism that helps the ports and so if it means earmarking
money for those types of improvements to really enhance our beaches, that to me is really important. Um and the bed tax is a whole another side that obviously the county makes those
decisions but um I think today Cocoa Beach I would say is is another uh or and obviously we have Rocklitch, Coco and Titusville the the five cities and unincorporated Bvard that I don't know I
know Coco wanted uh transportation Bright Line Right. I don't think the port wants that. The port has discovered parking revenue and the piece of the pie chart continues to grow and that's a big part of it. I don't think that that's
necessarily a good thing or a bad thing. It's their independent decisions and I'm not here to speak for other one anyone other than Cape Canaveral and our residents but
we appreciate the port and I think we need an opportunity to to meet with them and uh we don't need to be strategic in my opinion. We just need to be open and honest and there doesn't need to be any
uh I'll go meet with them. I think if this council when we're ready, we can invite them here or we can go to their meeting uh and and talk to them. But that's it. I've said enough. It is a tough issue. I know our city manager stepped into this
since day one and our city attorney's been with us for a while seeing these issues, but the economic overlay district was a success and today we are strained in some areas that we can address
without necessarily making a bunch of changes. And but I think the biggest thing is accountability with this council that if it once we get this report and it's certified whatever it is is as long as we're enforcing the concurrency as
strictly as we possibly can right now and if the numbers we really do have that much capacity that's great. Um that'll be my my hope. So thank you. If there's anything else, Council Member
Jackson, this was your item and I want to give final say. >> Um, I appreciate everyone's time. I'm I know that um for what was laid into place in
2012, it has been successful as far as getting our our partners that have, you know, put hotels in and that sort of thing. I do think um Senate Bill 180 kind of hamstrings us because we could
make changes to that plan and anytime something starts developing out you may have to modify those things. Now as we talk about the money situation, Mr. Hermanson's exactly right. It wasn't pl
in my opinion. It wasn't planned for for um expansion of our water processing plant back then. They didn't know how the port would grow, what the demands would be on our city potentially. And
those things are left with at the rates that we've built ourselves into our own code just like Mr. Hermanson said. Now, when you look at the tax revenue, tax revenue on these hotels, they're paying
around average of an average of 235 to $250,000 a year on Avalorum taxes. And if there are 11 of them, that's given us a little over $2.6 million a
year for all the hotels that we have. So um however our tax base has gone up in the residential areas because of the rise in the cost of insurance or the rise in the cost of the properties and market value for our residential
properties. So as we look at these things he's he Mr. Hermanson was exactly right. It's what was put into place back then. And we're in a situation now where we have to look at those things and
determine what we can do because it didn't give us anything to have in the bank for expansion of a plant. It wasn't thought out to generate income that would have
been sitting in a reserve somewhere. So now we're faced as current council members with how we handle these challenges that we have. So I appreciate everyone's time tonight and I'll pass it back to you so you can ask the rest of the
>> I've said enough. I'm finished. Thank you. Council member Davis, Council Member Willis, >> good. Mayor Pro Jim Kellum, city staff, city attorney, >> city manager, >> council member Jackson, if you've accomplish what you wanted this, I think we can adjourn.
>> Yes, I have. Thank you. >> Yes. Thank you. All right. With that meeting adjourned,