Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1999-11-17 Emergency Meeting
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE 801 CITY COUNCIL EMERGENCY MEETING SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION PAGE 1 OF 5 CALL TO ORDER: - Mayor: November 17, 1999, City Council Emergency Meeting, 12 o'clock noon. 11. MAYOR, COUNCIL AND STAFF ATTENDANCE - City Clerk. Mayor James E. Kirk Council Member Noel A. Chandler Council Member Lowry Markham Council Member Robert Oliver Council Member Dowling R. Watford, Jr. City Attorney John R. Cook City Clerk Bonnie S. Thomas Deputy Clerk S. Lane Gamiotea Ill. AGENDA -Mayor. A. Requests for the addition, deferral or withdrawal of items on today's agenda. IV. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTION - Mayor. A. 1. a) Motion to read by title only, proposed Ordinance No. 736 creating a moratorium and suspension of applications for telephone or cellular telephone telecommunication towers within the City of Okeechobee - City Attorney (Exhibit 1). b) Vote on motion to read by title only. Mayor Kirk called the November 17, 1999 Emergency City Council Meeting to order at 12 o'clock noon. City Clerk Thomas called the roll: Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Absent (Administrative Secretary Bea Castorina filled in for Deputy Clerk) Mayor Kirk asked whether there were any requests for the addition, deferral or withdrawal of items on today's agenda. None were stated. Mayor Kirk opened the Public Hearing at 12:02 p.m. Council Member Watford moved -to read by title only, proposed Ordinance No. 736 creating a moratorium and suspension of applications for telephone or cellular telephone telecommunication towers within the City of Okeechobee; seconded by Council Member Oliver. VOTE KIRK - YES CHANDLER -YES MARKHAM - YES OLIVER - YES WATFORD - YES MOTION CARRIED. 802 NOVEMBER 17,1999 - EMERGENCY MEETING - PAGE 2 OF 5 IV. PUBLIC HEARING FOR EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTION CONTINUED. A.1. c) City Attorney to read proposed Ordinance No. 763 by title only. Attorney Cook read proposed Ordinance No. 763 by title only as follows: "AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA, CREATING A MORATORIUM, AND SUSPENDING THE OPERATION OF SECTIONS 201, 202, 203, AND SECTIONS 213 THROUGH 223 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA TO THE EXTENT INCONSISTENT WITH THE STATED GOALS HEREIN, TO -WIT: SUSPENDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY TO ACCEPT APPLICATION FOR SITING AND ERECTION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS WITHIN THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT; PROVIDING FOR TIME PERIODS FOR EFFECT OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR SUNSET PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." 2. a) Motion to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 736. III Council Member Watford moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 763; seconded by Council Member Oliver. b) Public comment. Mayor Kirk opened the floor for discussion among the Council. Council Member Watford expressed his concerns, commenting that he thought it was the Council's responsibility to consider these matters, and that the Council is not trying to stop anybody from doing business or harm anyone's livelihood. Mayor Kirk suggested that if the Council wants to look through the Land Development Regulation's that they should do so excluding any applications that are already in process. He continued further, I do not think we should interfere with that (pending variance application). I also want to say that I do not think that this (emergency ordinance) was aimed at stopping Nextel. I think this was done because this Council looked and said we do not have anything governing this (cellular towers) and we need to, and maybe our timing was not the best in the world. Council Member Oliver then commented that he agreed with the Mayor. Some of us did not know there was an application in the works when we first talked about this. I do not believe there was any malicious intent. Council Member Watford interjected, if you will recall, when we first talked about reviewing the Land Development Regulations regarding towers the same night that we denied the proposal (from Nextel) and it was our fault that at that moment we did not assign that review process to the Staff. Mayor Kirk, Council Members Watford, Oliver and Chandler disclosed for the record that they have had conversations with Mr. Bill Freeman, the applicant for the Variance request which is going before the Board of Adjustment on November 23, 1999 and to install a cellular tower within an Industrial Zoning District. NOVEMBER 17,1999 - EMERGENCY MEETING - PAGE 3 OF 5 803 :>::::>< ......:.... :'ABC DA::::::::::<:::::::>:::;:.:::::::::. C011AiCfLAGT1�Df ::R f 1 ::..B 1 ;VIC?TE:.' ` :. .:..:........::...:.........:........ I II IV. PUBLIC HEARING FOR EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTION CONTINUED. A. 2. b) Public comment continued. Mayor Kirk asked Attorney Cook, from a legal standpoint, can we legally do that (allow applications already in progress to go ahead), there is not a problem with that? Attorney Cook responded, as an overview, the interest a City has in Land Use and Planning on these issues is quite broad. If this Council wanted to enact a moratorium to include pending applications I believe it is within your authority to do so. Truth be told the pending application and location and the zoning classification and the height, it is fairly typical and consistent with other ordinances that we have looked at so you can not pre -judge these things but that particular site is probably a logical place but that remains to be seen. If you want to limit the application of this ordinance to any application after today's date you are free to do that. Council Member Watford moved to amend the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 736 deleting the language "pending applications" within the ordinance; seconded by Council Member Oliver. VOTE KIRK - YES CHANDLER - YES MARKHAM - YES OLIVER - YES WATFORD - YES MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED. Attorney Cook clarified that if this Ordinance, as amended, passes, then the Building Department will accept no more applications for telephone and cellular telephone towers, the other towers that are named in the existing Land Development Regulations are omitted, subject to a one hundred foot height limit. The Land Development Regulations would go before the Land Planning Agency for review, specifically to make recommendations regarding where telecommunication towers should be permitted within the City, height requirements, etc. The Land Planning Agency will then forward those recommendations to the City Council in ordinance form, the Council then has the first reading of the ordinance and then final public hearing. Discussion ensued between Council and Attorney Cook. Mayor Kirk then asked whether anyone from the public had any questions or comments regarding the emergency ordinance. Mr. Bill Freeman addressed the Council, distributing a copy of a letter from Mr. David Hazellief, Chairman of the Board for the Citizen Advisory Committee who reviewed the Land Development Regulations and read it in it's entirety: "As Chairman of the Citizens Advisory Committee, I feel it was our intention to include radio, television, telephone or any transmission type equipment that operates off a tower. We specifically put them in the Industrial Zoning because Okeechobee has many tall structures in the is zoning district at the present time." NOVEMBER 17,1999 - EMERGENCY MEETING - PAGE 4 OF 5 IV. PUBLIC HEARING FOR EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTION CONTINUED. A. 2. b) Public comment continued. III Mr. Freeman continued his comments stating, with the opinion that a communications tower is a radio facility which Is addressed in the Industrial Zoning District of the Land Development Regulations and he objected to the Council calling the emergency meeting and passing the proposed ordinance. Mr. Tommy Hoover also addressed the Council objecting to the emergency meeting and the proposed ordinance. The Council received a letter from Alan L. Gabriel, Attorney for Nextel South Corp., expressing their opposition to the proposed ordinance as it relates to the pending variance application. Council Member Chandler called the question. c) Vote on motion. VOTE KIRK - YES CHANDLER - NO MARKHAM - YES OLIVER - YES WATFORD - YES MOTION CARRIED AS AMENDED. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. Mayor Kirk closed the public hearing at 12:55 p.m. V. NEW BUSINESS. A. Motion to appoint Donna Reynolds to serve as the regular Board Council Member Oliver moved to appoint Donna Reynolds to serve as the regular Board Member to the Public Risk Member to the Public Risk Management Insurance Board - Interim City Management Insurance Board; seconded by Council Member Markham. Administrator (Exhibit 2). VOTE KIRK - YES CHANDLER - NO MARKHAM - YES OLIVER - YES WATFORD - YES MOTION CARRIED. NOVEMBER 17,1999 - EMERGENCY MEETING - PAGE 5 OF 5 ca-) G 1/� - �vr v� �� � Q ✓Lt-v U 5r die Zi1?- _— /mac_ i�, AOL _I'_ /li�`.T..-,-p, (i'✓Y��- /n2 � L C-4 av> � � 4-4h � � r _ 1 > III }'3 — ,fir • � ` rf ,' � a� . y, 4 �i � r't S-. r•- - `:. -.3� ' '�` �``� .c ::'S...�' j-.wC".'.:�"J'-M ''�...i�'�)�",`-� t ��� -� tt -�v� -a-,_• _••->�:.�.>�. �. 3C,�, .,,,�:-, � w-h-J \ -C y_.--'��c_. _may" . � ..�"_.: 'ira. > ��. � � .> -� q t� y rJ _ - - _ t � � � � � .F � �'-• � _ - -� � "� h �,r1:..1: + " r , t1 _-)``;*-� W�.+t.-• jj=;�. �1.i I � .. t �_A 1Y '`. t': kp. (. 4 ; �` .E. *t .7 _ �\ ��, 3�j I e> vow ol _- -- ^4~��^"` -- --- __ U ^ ---- ----- --'---- - ' � � ------ - ' _ /| . .� _____ �) . vo--&e, �0 CKEEc1° ipft CITY OF OKEECHOBEE CITY COUNCIL EMERGENCY MEETING � :s sae • OFFICIAL AGENDA PAGE 1 OF Z I. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor: November 17, 1999, City Council Emergency Meeting, 12 o'clock noon. II. MAYOR, COUNCIL AND STAFF ATTENDANCE - City Clerk. Mayor James E. Kirk Council Member Noel A. Chandler Council Member Lowry Markham Council Member Robert Oliver Council Member Dowling R. Watford, Jr. City Attorney John R. Cook City Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw City Clerk Bonnie S. Thomas Deputy Clerk S. Lane Gamiotea VII. AGENDA - Mayor. A. Requests for the addition, deferral or withdrawal of items on today's agenda. III. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTION - Mayor. A. 1. a) Motion to read by title only, proposed Ordinance No. 736 creating a moratorium and suspension of applications for telephone or cellular telephone telecommunication towers within the City of Okeechobee - City Attorney (Exhibit 1). b) Vote on motion to read by title only. NOVEMBER 17, 1999 - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - PAGE 2 OF 2 III. PUBLIC HEARING FOR EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTION CONTINUED. 1. c) City Attorney to read proposed Ordinance No. 763 by title only. 2. a) Motion to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 736. b) Public comment. • c) Vote on motion. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. IV. NEW BUSINESS. A. Motion to appoint Donna Reynolds to serve as the regular Board Member to the Public Risk Management Insurance Board - Interim City Administrator (Exhibit 2). V. ADJOURN EMERGENCY MEETING - Mayor. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND BE ADVISED that if any person desires to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this proceeding, such interested person will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose may need to ensure a verbatim • record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. City Clerk tapes are for the sole purpose of backup for official records of the Clerk. • EXHIBIT 1 11/17 AGENDA ORDINANCE NO. 736 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA, CREATING A MORATORIUM, AND SUSPENDING THE OPERATION OF SECTIONS 201,202,203, AND SECTIONS 213 THROUGH 223 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA TO THE EXTENT INCONSISTENT WITH THE STATED GOALS HEREIN, TO -WIT: SUSPENDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY TO ACCEPT APPLICATION FOR SITING AND ERECTION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS WITHIN THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT; PROVIDING FOR TIME PERIODS FOR EFFECT OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR SUNSET PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (The "Act") and the FCC provides Federal guidelines pertaining to, among other things, the approval and siting of telecommunications towers within local jurisdictions; and WHEREAS the Act provides for certain prohibitions, including prohibiting the enactment of ordinances totally banning of such towers within a local jurisdiction, and places restrictions on local ordinances that unfairly affect such applications; and WHEREAS applications are pending within the City of Okeechobee, with additional applications expected, to permit cellular telephone towers within sites in the City, and such application is made under section 400 of the Land Development Regulations (LDR's), which cites as a permitted use in industrial zoned categories "Radio, television, or cable reception, transmission, or operational facilities"; and WHEREAS the City of Okeechobee enacted its land development regulations (LDR's) on October 6, 1998, but through oversight, did not designate telephone or cellular telephone communications towers as a permitted use, or special exception use within any zoning or land use category in the City of Okeechobee; and WHEREAS the City of Okeechobee, Florida has not to date otherwise enacted an ordinance which governs the placement or erection of telecommunications towers in the City; and WHEREAS such telecommunications towers, by their nature of size and height, distance requirements between towers, and aesthetic considerations, will have a significant impact on the make-up and appearance of the local community when erected; and WHEREAS such towers also pose a substantial risk of injury and property damage to surrounding landowners in the even of structural failure or during windstorms or hurricanes common to this area of Florida; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS the City of Okeechobee, Florida possesses the legitimate municipal interest and authority under Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, to regulate planning and development, and land use designations within its boundaries, including the application, siting, plan review, and erection of telecommunications towers within its boundaries; and WHEREAS were the City to allow the approval and placement of telephone and cellular telephone towers within the City of Okeechobee at the present time without the necessary ordinances and land use categories adopted to regulate such activity, the interests of the City and its population would be severely jeopardized and substantially injured by future applicants that would consider an earlier approval as precedent to support their application, resulting in haphazard and incongruous land planning, and placement of such towers in different and incompatible land use categories in the City, with resulting injury to adjacent landowners who have no protection under current ordinances and land use regulations on the subject; and WHEREAS the nature of the present applications, and likelihood of similar applications in the near future, together with the cumbersome approval process for the enactment of ordinances and amendments to land development regulations will reasonably result in the placement of telephone and cellular telephone towers in the City prior to the time such regulations can be in place, unless the City enacts this ordinance in an emergency fashion; and WHEREAS Chapter 163, Florida Statutes permits emergency amendment to the comprehensive plan where there exists a threat which may result in substantial injury or harm to the population; and Chapter 166 Florida Statutes permits emergency enactment of ordinances without compliance with section 166.041(3)(a), so long as the ordinance to be adopted does not amend zoning map designations, or change the actual list of permitted, conditional, or prohibited uses within a zoning category; and WHEREAS the City determines that an emergency does exist requiring emergency passage of this ordinance; that such ordinance is not designed or intended to prohibit telecommunications towers within the City; that such ordinance does not amend any zoning map designations; that such ordinance does not change the actual list of permitted, conditional or prohibited uses within a zoning category, as the current LDR's have omitted the designation of telephone and cellular telephone towers as a permitted use within any land use category; and WHEREAS due to the emergency as set forth herein it is necessary to suspend authority for the City building department to accept, process or approve any permit for the siting and erection of telephone and cellular telephone towers, and in effect, cause a moratorium until such time as the City, planning board, planning consultants and staff can recommend to the City council an ordinance regulating the placement of such towers in the City; and Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS it is imperative to enact such regulations as expeditiously as possible to minimize any economic effect or inconvenience to any entity or citizen desiring to place a telecommunications tower within the City of Okeechobee; and WHEREAS it is the intent of the City of Okeechobee that this moratorium and effect of this ordinance be in place for a minimal period of time, with a sunset provision for its repeal; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA: Section 1. THAT those sections of the land development regulations, City of Okeechobee, Florida, namely sections 201, 202, 203, and sections 213 through 223 that set out the procedure and authorization of the building department to accept, review and issue permits within the City are hereby suspended, such suspension being limited to applications for telephone or cellular telephone telecommunications towers within the boundaries of the City of Okeechobee. Section 2. THAT this suspension of the cited ordinance shall be applicable to any pending application for siting and erection of a telephone or cellular telephone telecommunications tower, as well as any future application by any person or entity, until such time as this ordinance is repealed, as provided herein. Section 3. THAT this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon first reading and approval by at least a two-thirds majority vote of the City council. Section 4. THAT upon final adoption of an ordinance by the City of Okeechobee that regulates the siting and erection of telephone and cellular telephone towers within the City, this ordinance and suspension of accepting, processing and approving such permits, shall thereupon be repealed without further action by the City council. INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED this 17" day of November, 1999. ATTEST: Bonnie S. Thomas, CMC City Clerk REVIEWED FOR LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: John R. Cook, City Attorney James E. Kirk, Mayor Page 3 of 3 941-334-63e4 LARIJE PLANNING & MGT 335 POI NOV 17 199 11:00 LaRUE PLANNING & MANAGEMENT SERVICES, Inc. w Tidewater Building • 1395 Wkwn Street • Suite 206 Fort Myers, Florida 33901 (941) 334-3366 a (%1) 334-6444 a FAX (941) 334-M e-mail: j1arue11W04ol.c(= Memorandum To: Bonnie Thomas, Interim City Manager/Clerk, City of Okeechobee From: Jim LaRue Date: November 17, 1999 Subject: Nextel Telecorunications Tower Our interpretation of the City of Okeechobee Code with reference to Nextel Communications is as follows: 1 } "Radio, television or cable reception, transmission or operational facilities" as permitted uses in the Industrial zoning district does not specifically include towers for telecommunications. While the Code permits reception and transmissions for HAM radios from such a tower, it does not support cellular telephone communications. 2) Maximum height limitations for structures in the Industrial zone is limited to "100 feet, where normally there are no workers." The applicant is requesting approval to build a monopole 150 feet in height. Many towers in excess of 100 feet exist in the City of Okeechobee, however, none of these are at the height of 150 feet. 3) Exclusions from height limits in any non-residential district, "do not apply to spires,.belfries, cupolas, water tanks, ventilators, chimneys or other appurtenances." Monopole towers are not included in this listing. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 favors growth in the area of wireless communications. This tower, supported by this Act, would provide a service to meet the growing demand of cellular phone subscribers in the City of Okeechobee and the surrounding region. However, as Planning & Zoning Director, I am bound.hy the regulations as set out in the City Code, which upon my interpretation, do not currently support the construction of a telecommunications tower at the height of 150 feet. As such, we are not recommending approval of the 50 foot variance for the tower to the Board of Adjustment. 941-334-6384 ARUE PLANNING & MGT 0333 P02 NOV 16 '99 11:35 Staff Report Variance Request -- City of Okeechobee Applicant: 11 NW 8* Street #13 Okeechobee, Florida 34974 LLegal Description of East './4 of lots 15 and 16 inclusive of Block 58, City of Subject iProparty: Okeechobee, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 17, Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. Introduction: The applicant is requesting a 50 foot variance from the 100 foot maximum height requirement to allow a 150 foot structure in order to receive and transmit radio and teleaonununieadons signals. Background: The sub'ect property is approximately6,982.5 square feet fronting on NW 8* Street. The applicant intends to erect a 150 foot monopole with antennas. The adjoining property users are as follows: North: Vacant industrial tots South: Vacant industrial lots East: Commercials lots with vacant building West: Vacant industrial lots Discussion: After reviemi this application, Staff has determined that the request generally does not satisfy the criteria outlined below for granting the variance. 1. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved, and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. The Industrial Zoning District limits the maximum height requirement to 100 feet. However, for state-of--the-art telecommunications, a height of at least one hundred fifty - feet is required. While other structures in this same zoning district are greater than 100 feat in height, there are none at the height being requested. 2. The special conditions and circumstances are not the result of actions of the applicant. The special conditions and circumstances are basically the result of actions of the applicant as these are the height requirements. 3. Literal interpretation and enforcement of the Land Development Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed byother roperdesinthesameZoning District under the terms of the Land Development Code, and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. 941-334-6364eE PL" I NG & MGT 0333 P©3 NOV 16 '99 11:35 City of Okeechobee Variance Request Nextel Comanurticatioxs Na 99-M4 Y Literal interpretation would not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties. Although a tower that is 100 feet in height or less does not provide the elevation rewired to transmit radio and telecommunications signals, it might be necessary to provide the appropriate safeguards as public protection if such a height is to be granted. 4. The variance, if granted is the minimum variance necessary to make possible the reasonable we of the land, building, orstructure. It is hard to determine whether this variance is necessary to assure the reasonable use of land. S. Graming of the variance request, will not co►tfer on the applicant any special privileges) that is denied by the Land Development Code to other lands, buildings, or structures in the .tame Zoning District. Granting the variance might confer special privileges on the applicant which are not available to other properties. 6. The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the land Development Code, and will not be injurious to the surrounding properties or detrimental to the public welfare. The variance, if granted without proper safety protections, might be detrimental to the public welfare. Recommendation: Staff does not recommend approval to allow a 50 foot variance from the 100 foot maximum height requirement to allow a 150 foot monopole with antennas. Submitted by: James G. LaRue, AICP Planning Consultant 11 / 15/99 2 400 INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS 1 Industrial zoning districts shall be permitted only on land designated as Future Land Use category Industrial in the Comprehensive Plan. 2 Uses in Industrial zoning districts shall be subject to the following Regulations: 401 PERMITTED USES The following principal uses and structures are permitted: 1 Business office 2 Business school 3 Retail service, Retail store including outdoor display of merchandise 4 Research laboratory 5 Manufacturing, Processing, except those which produce explosives 6 Mechanical and repair services 7 Bulk storage of non -hazardous material 8 Off -site sign 9 Outdoor sales and storage, Building contractor 10 Wholesale sales and distribution 11 Enclosed warehouse and storage 12 Commercial laundry, Dry cleaner 13 Printing 14 Auto service station, Car wash 15 Drive -through service 16 Parking garage, Parking lot 17 ' Radio, television or cable reception, transmission or operational facilities 18 Veterinary service 19 Railroad facilities 20 Public utility 21 Public facility 402 SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES The following uses and structures are permitted after issuance of a special exception use petition and may have additional conditions imposed at time of approval: 1 Manufacturing chemical or leather products 2 Bulk storage of hazardous material and flammable liquid 50 --- - - - 405 1 Minimum Lot Area All uses: Area As needed to comply with, RWW 00. set out herein Width None 2 Minimum Yard Requirements Except where a greater distance is required by these Regulations for a particular use, minimum yard setbacks shall be as follows: All uses: Front 25 feet Side 15 feet; 40 feet abutting residential Zoning district Rear 20 feet; 40 feet abutting residential zoning district 3 Maximum Lot Coverage by All Buildings Maximum s v 04 All uses: 50 percent85 percent .ImperviousSurface Maximum Height of Btrvctwis Except where further restricted by these Regulations for a particular use, maximum height shall be as follows: All use6: 45 feet, where workers are employed, unless a special exception is granted --:>100 feet, where normally there are no workers ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS Additional Regulations which shall apply to all uses include but are not limited to: 1 Concurrency Regulations 2 Parking and Loading Regulations 3 Landscaping Regulations 4 Sign Regulations 5 Accessory use Regulations 6 Supplementary use Regulations 7 Environmental and stormwater Regulations 8 Utilities Regulations 52 0 • r •� 2 Exception: Previously Issued Development Permits and Development Orders The provisions of these Regulations and amendments thereto shall not affect the validity of any lawfully authorized, issued and effective development permit or order if the development activity has been commenced prior to the effective date of these Regulations, or will be commenced after the effective date but within six months of issuance of the building permit; and the activity continues without interruption until the development is complete. If a development permit or order expires, further development shall occur only in conformance with the requirements of these Regulations. 106 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS The provisions of these Land Development Regulations are the minimum requirements necessary to accomplish the intent and purpose of the Act to protect human, environmental, social and economic resources; and to maintain, through orderly growth and development, the character and stability of present and future land use and development in the City. 107 ABROGATION These Land Development Regulations are not intended to repeal or interfere with any easement, covenant or deed restriction recorded in the public records of the City or Okeechobee County. 108 RULES OF INTERPRETATION Responsibility for Interpretation In the event that a question arises concerning the provisions of these Regulations, the Planning and Zoning Director/Building Official shall be responsible for interpretation and shall look to the Comprehensive Plan for guidance. Appeal from an interpretation of the Planning and Zoning Director/Building Official shall be made to the Board of Adjustment 2 Delegation of Authority When a provision appears to require a City officer to perform some act, it is to be construed to authorize delegation to professional level subordinates to perform that act 3 Computation of Time Time within which an act is to be done shall be computed by excluding the first and including the last day; if the last day is a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, that day shall be excluded. 3 Okeechobee city council will consider a moratorium on all cell rphone towers within the city. The city planning board is set to hear an application to place a tower off north parrot avenue near north west 9.th.street November 23rd, City councilman Dowlin0atford says its in the best interests of the city... (outcue; ' M f6e, * ; 20) ?decently city council turned down an applicaion to place a cell tower at city hall, They negotiateA with nextel but could not reach.agreement. A special meeting to he held November 170i at noon'to vote on.the moratorium, Ir wr Okeechobe city council is ready to impose a moratrorium on towels. Weeks after turning down. Nextels request to construct a tower at city hall, the council wants to protect residencitial neighborhoods from similar projects, As of right now' tiie city`s land development regulations place no restrictions on towers, City councilman Dowling Watford says theres a real potentiek for towers being built-in the city„ (otcue; 'looked at'- ;25) One tower is proposed on north parrot avenue near nor.'th.we.st 9th street wh.ic the city planning boar d considers November 23rd, The council to meet November 17th to vote on. the moratorium, IMW City looks at tower moratorium...A proposal to build a tower off north parrot avenue behind the car cirsus might be out of luck. City -council will meet next wednesday, to vote nn a moratorium on all towers in the city. Councilman Dowling Watford says theres a real potential, fQr*-towers in residential neighbohoods (outcuet before then'- ;15)_WatfQrd says the city should have an ordinance r Mulating toners i.n,place sometime nextyear Witiil Until then its unlikely any can.be built, Okeechobee city council,is close to a moratorium on all towers in the city. After turning down.a proposal from Nextel to build one at city, hall, council, says they want. to protect residential neighborhoods from towers. Councilman Dowling Watford says the potential will ovverri.de the public criticism..Coutcu; "dictates this :13) Council to meet next Wednesay only days before the city polanning board considers a tower pr9fect off north parrot avenue near north west 9th street. E 40V ff t� LAW OFFICES • ALAN L. GABRIEL INTERNATIONAL BUILDING * PENTHOUSE EAST 2455 EAST SUNRISE BOULEVARD FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33304-3119 ALAN L. GABRIEL TELEPHONE (954) 561-2230 SORAYA HEVIA KASPER FACSIMILE (954) 561-7489 DAVID L. WILENS E-MAIL agabriel24®aol.com VIA HAND DELIVERY November 16, 1999 Mayor James E. Kirk and City Council Members City of Okeechobee 55 SE 3rd Avenue Okeechobee, Florida 34974 Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 736 (Moratorium on Applications for Telecommunication Towers) Dear Mayor Kirk and City Council Members: This office represents Nextel South Corp., a provider of wireless telecommunication services licensed by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to provide such services throughout Florida, including the City of Okeechobee, and elsewhere. I am writing to express Nextel's serious opposition to the proposed ordinance referenced above and scheduled for consideration on November 17th. As you may recall, the City and Nextel recently entered into negotiations for the placement of a telecommunications facility, including a tower structure of at least 150 feet, at City Hall. This facility was sought by Nextel due to its urgent need to enhance the coverage and/or capacity of its telecommunications network within the City and surrounding areas, as required by its FCC license and for the benefit of the users of its system and others. The Council rejected the proposed lease on October 5th apparently reacting to public opposition to the tower structure, but without any discussion regarding an emergency or a moratorium. Subsequent to that rejection, and due to Nextel's need for a site in the vicinity, it entered into negotiations for a tower site on private property owned by the Freemans and located at 119 NW 8th Street #B. This property is industrially zoned, and the uses permitted in that zoning classification include "radio, television or cable reception, transmission or operational facilities". In conjunction with Nextel's submission to the City for building permits for the latter site, Nextel has filed for a height variance for the proposed monopole, which request is presently scheduled for public hearing before the Board of Adjustment on November 23rd. It appears that the Council's direction to the City Attorney to create a moratorium ordinance on November 9th was directly related to the pending Nextel matter. Mayor Kirk and Coun 1 Members November 16, 1999 _ Page 2 The proposed ordinance provides for an immediate moratorium on the acceptance by the City building department of applications for siting and erection of telecommunications towers. This moratorium has no definite time limit, and it is worded to apply to pending applications already in the approval process. The "emergency" being cited has interestingly materialized only after the lease between Nextel and the City was rejected; after the City learned of the new proposed Nextel site on private property; and despite the passage of more than three years since the enactment of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, which opened the telecommunications marketplace to competition thereby creating the demand for greater numbers of telecommunication sites. While Section 704 of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 generally preserves the authority of local government over decisions regarding the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless service facilities, it declares that any such regulation "shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services"; "shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services"; and that a local government must act on any request for authorization to construct a personal wireless service facility "within a reasonable period of time after the request is duly filed..." One of the effects of passing the proposed Ordinance, thereby preventing Nextel from enhancing the coverage and/or capacity of its service area in and around the City of Okeechobee for an indefinite period of time, will be to discriminate between Nextel and the more established, competing service providers whose infrastructures are already in place and whose systems are "seamless" and do not need enhancement. The Ordinance will also effectively prohibit the provision of quality service by Nextel in the Okeechobee area. There is federal caselaw that indicates that a moratorium, enacted more than 16 months after the Federal Act, deemed necessary by the local government to allow it time to develop an ordinance to regulate telecommunication facilities, was not valid and effectively prohibited service in the area (Sprint Spectrum L.P. v. Farminaton, 1997 WL 63104 (D.Conn.)). Relatedly, the failure to act on siting requests for an indefinite period of time which could easily become six months to a year or more will clearly not meet the requirement of acting on applications within a reasonable time. In addition to potential violations of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, the application of this Ordinance to matters that are pending, like the proposed Nextel site on the Freeman property, appears to violate Florida caselaw relating to "zoning in progress", the leading case being Smith v. City of Clearwater, 383 So2d 681 (213CA,1980). Essentially, that case declared that it is improper to apply changes in zoning regulations, which would include moratoria and any eventual regulatory ordinance relating to tower siting, to matters previously submitted to local government for approval in reliance on existing regulations, if the applicant is without knowledge, at the time of application, of the intention of the government to change the Mayor Kirk and Count Members November 16, 1999 Page 3 regulations. That would be the case in regard to the already submitted Nextel matter. As discussed above, the timing of the City's direction of the creation of this Ordinance also raises questions regarding the actual existence of an emergency justifying the abbreviated enactment procedure being used. �r Based on the foregoing, it is requested that the Council seriously consider these issues and decline to enact this Ordinance. It is suggested that the City could decline to enact a moratorium but make clear its intention to amend the land development regulations to provide for telecommunication siting. Arguably, under the principle of "zoning in progess discussed in the Clearwater case, a future applicant (one who is not already in the approval process), with actual or implied knowledge of the intended zoning changes, could not argue reliance on existing zoning and would be subject to any future changes or additions to the City's code. At the same time, Nextel would be permitted to proceed with its variance hearing and, if granted, its building permit application. At the very least, the Council should decline to apply the ordinance to pending matters and should limit it to a definite time not to exceed 90 days within which time City Staff will surely be able to review the numerous siting ordinances already adopted by nearly every local government in Florida to find a model that can be adapted to meet the City's regulation needs. Due to the lack of notice to Nextel regarding the public hearing scheduled for the 17th, I will be unable to attend due to a conflict. I would ask as a courtesy that my comments herein be incorporated in the record of the hearing. ery my y s, ALAN L. GABRIEL 38641 1 16.okee cc: All City Council Members City Attorney John R. Cook City Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw Nextel South Corp. William Freeman November 16, 1999 From: David E. Hazellief 1200 South Parrott Avenue Okeechobee, F134974 To: Okeechobee City Council Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members, As chairman of the citizens advisory committee, I feel it was our intention to include radio, television, telephone or any other transmission type equipment that operates off of a tower. We specifically put them in the industrial zoning because Okeechobee has many tall structures in this zoning district at the present time. Sincerely Yours, David E. Hazellief 0 CITY OF OKEE EXHIBIT 2 11/17 AGENDA 941)763-3372 CITY DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM Submitting Deparment: 'ri'v N- tic, - 0— by ,Col,* (),qt-Ker MEETING: REGULAR SPECIAL ❑ WORKSHOP ❑ DATE: /9- 7" PLEASE STATE THE ITEM YOU WISH TO HAVE PLACED ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. ,PO4-Al+ D+ b6AI41 L R-Q-VNoItS -1-6 /9-:j2&hArl ?Vem6r" QA/ .disk /77WNI¢-5irnsnrf--, x14c�r c.P. -a to rc ce. Mpg Rria�sk ia.ul. II avy- kirk Srrv,-s N.S Alterkva.��-' PLEASE STATE RECOMMENDED ACTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. RC [,0 M2*.A/d l AJc5 ei'%�Ge,��-eAjt — PLEASE SUMMARIZED EXPLANATION/BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND ATTACH APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS. IF PRESENTATION IS TO BE MADE, HOW MUCH TIME WILL BE REQUESTED? oRre�yoi '��ot MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and Council From: Bonnie S. Thomas, City Clerk/interim City Administrator Subject: November 91 Minutes, Item H. Date: November 12, 1999 Attached herewith please find an excerpt from the November 9, 1999 Minutes, specifically New Business Item H regarding Cellular Towers. This copy is for your information. Also, in response to the Council's request at the November 9th Meeting, the Florida League of Cities is sending us a booklet of Grants that are available to Municipalities. Thank You NOVEMBER 9,1999 - REGULAR MEETING - PAQE OF VIII. NEW BUSINESS. - 47 H. Discuss Cellular Tower Ordinance - Council Member Watford. Council Member Watford addressed the Council regarding an application for variance that is scheduled before the Board of Adjustment on Tuesday, November 23,1999. This variance is to increase the height of a cellular tower that is being proposed for 319 B Northwest 8"' Street (Block 58, East % of Lots 15 and 16, City of Okeechobee). At the October 5,1999 City Council Meeting the Council voted unanimously to deny a request from Nextell to construct a cellular tower on City property. The Council has instructed Staff to begin the process of obtaining information to draft an ordinance for the City to adopt regulations on cellular and telephone towers within the City. Council Member Watford wanted to know what could be done to put this variance application on hold until the City Land Development Regulations could be amended to specifically address these types of towers. p v Attorney Cook advised the Council could enact a moratorium on granting any permits of this type. He also added that applications regarding towers to be approved until regulations were adopted by the City, would set a by allowing any app eg g pp e9 P precedence of how the city ordinance would have to be written. Discussion ensued. Council instructed Attomey Cook to draft an emergency ordinance imposing a moratorium on cellular tower applications and hold the ineeting on November 17,1999 at 12 o'clock noon.