ORDINANCE NO. 2015- --- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 60.11 OF TITLE VI, ZONING ORDINANCE, IN THE CODE OF THE CITY OF VERO BEACH RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Vero Beach sets forth the regulations and requirements for each zoning district established in accordance with the City comprehensive land use plan; and WHEREAS, such regulations and requirements were and are established with reasonable consideration of, among other things, the prevailing land uses, growth characteristics, and the character ofthe respective zoning districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and to encourage the most appropriate use ofland throughout the City; and WHEREAS, section 60.11 ofthe Zoning Ordinance provides that no building, structure, land, or water within the City may be used or occupied except in conformance with the regulations specified for the zoning district within which such use or occupation is located; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that section 60.11 should be amended to clarify the purpose and intent ofsaid section that the use or occupation ofproperty that is not in compliance with the regulations for the zoning district in which the property is located is unlawful and subject to enforcement action to obtain compliance; and WHEREAS, section 60.11 is generally enforced by way ofthe City's Code Enforcement Ordinance procedures which are designed to provide an equitable, expeditious, efficient, and effective method for the enforcement of, and to encourage compliance with, the codes, ordinances, rules, and regulations ofthe City; and WHEREAS, with the City's emphasis on encouraging compliance rather than merely punishing violators, section 2-300 of the Code Enforcement Ordinance establishes substantially reduced civil penalties for code violations that a violator does not contest, unless the assessment ofa specific penalty is otherwise provided by the Code provision violated; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that these reduced civil penalties when assessed for violations of section 60.11 are of such an insignificant amount that violators typically will still derive a significant financial advantage from continuing their unlawful use and occupation of a property and may consider payment of such penalties merely a cost of continuing the unlawful use or occupation and, as a result, there is little or no incentive to cease the unlawful use or Page 1of4
occupation and the intended encouragement to obtain compliance with the Zoning Ordinance is ineffective; and WHEREAS, the City Council thus finds that in order to establish a more effective deterrent to unlawful use and occupation of property in violation of section 60.11 and to more effectively encourage compliance with the Zoning Ordinance, it is necessary to establish a specific and separate penalty to be assessed for such violations; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that adoption ofthe amendments provided for in this Ordinance serves a municipal purpose, is in the best interest of the public, and is consistent with the standards provided in subsections 65.22(i)(l) and (3) ofthe Code ofthe City ofvero Beach, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA: Section 1 - Adoption of "Whereas" Clauses. The foregoing "Whereas" clauses are hereby adopted and incorporated herein as forming the legislative findings, purpose, and intent ofthis Ordinance. Section 2 - Amendment of Section 60.11. Section 60.11 ofthe Code ofcity ofvero Beach is hereby amended as follows: [Words strieken are deleted; words underlined are added]. Sec. 60.11. Conformity with regulations required Noncompliance with regulations unlawful; penalties. (a) It shall be unlawful for any Ne building, structure, land.._ or water, or any portion thereof, shall hereafter!q_be used or occupied and no building, structure, or part thereof shall hereafter be erected, constructed, reconstructed, located, moved, or structurally altered except for any use not allowed in the zoning district in which it is located. in conformity vlith the regulations specified fur the district in v:hich it is located and other applicable regulations of this title. (b) It shall be unlawful to erect, construct, reconstruct_, locate, move, or structurally alter any building or structure except in compliance with the regulations specified for the zoning district in which it is located and all other applicable regulations ofthis title. (c) The penalty for violation of subsection (a) shall be $500.00. The penalty for violation of any other provision of this title shall be as otherwise prescribed in this Code. Each act of violation and each day upon which any violation shall occur shall constitute a separate offense punishable by such penalty. Page 2of4
Section 3- Conflict and Severability. In the event any provision of this Ordinance conflicts with any other provision of the Code or any other ordinance or resolution of the City, the provisions of this Ordinance shall apply and govern on the subject matter ofthis Ordinance. Ifany provision, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions of this Ordinance, which shall be deemed separate, distinct, and independent provisions enforceable to the fullest extent possible. Section 4 - Codification. The City Clerk shall cause the amendments provided for in this Ordinance to be codified in the Code ofthe City ofvero Beach, Florida. Section 5 - Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon final adoption by the City Council. ************************************************** This Ordinance was read for the first time on the _ day of 2015 and was advertised on the day of 2015, for a public hearing to be held on the _day of 2015, at the conclusion ofwhich hearing it was moved for adoption by Councilmember and adopted by the following vote ofthe City Council:, seconded by Councilmember Mayor Richard G. Winger Vice Mayor Jay Kramer Councilmember Pilar E. Turner Councilmember Amelia Graves Councilmember Randolph B. Old ATTEST: CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA TammyK. Vock Richard G. Winger City Clerk Mayor Page 3of4
Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Wayne 1 ' Coment City Ahdmey Page 4of4
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE TO: FROM: Chairman Larry Lauffer and Planning and Zoning Board Members Timothy J. McGarry, AI~/J Director of Planning ancfrflv fof ment DATE: March 6, 2015 SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Draft Ordinance to Amend Section 60.11 of the City of Vero Beach Code Relating to Compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and Providing Penalties for Noncompliance Overview At the request of the City Council, the staff has prepared the attached draft Ordinance which would increase civil penalties for violations involving uses not allowed in a zoning district. The catalyst for the requested change is the direct result of the issues related to enforcement of the ban on vacation rentals in residential zoning districts. The draft Ordinance is scheduled for First Reading before the City Council on March 1 ih. The City Council will be informed of any revisions to the draft Ordinance that may be recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board. Background The civil penalties assessed for code violations, except where expressly provided elsewhere in the City Code, are prescribed in Section 2-300. Ifa violator does not contest the violation, the violator is eligible to pay a reduced civil penalty. With payment ofthe reduced civil penalty, the violator is admitting to the violation. The reduced civil penalty ranges from $50 for the first violation, $100 for first repeat violation within five years, $150 for the second repeat violation within 5 years, and $250 for the third repeat violation within 5 years. A violator is typically given ten days from the date of receipt or posting of the citation to correct the violation; however, this period of time is at the discretion of the code enforcement officer considering numerous factors listed in the Code. This period of time reflects the period of time during which the violator may appeal the citation to the Code Enforcement Board (CEB). Before a citation for a repeat violation may be issued, the alleged violator must have been previously found violating the same provision of the Code. A violation is official if the violator pays the civil penalty (admitting guilt) or if the CEB determines at a hearing that a violation has
Planning and Zoning Board Amend Section 60.11 March 6, 2015 -Page 2 occurred. Should the violator fail to pay the civil penalty or appeal the citation, the CEB still must make a formal order finding a violation. Ifthe violator does not come into compliance within the time allowed in the citation or by Code Enforcement Board (CEB), the CEB may assess continuing violation penalties for each day the "correctable" violation continues past the date set for correction. The daily civil penalty is the same amount as prescribed for the first violation, except that for a continuing repeat violation, the additional civil penalty for each day of the continued repeat violation is double the amount due for the first day ofthe repeat violation. The Code Enforcement Board may assess a civil penalty of more than the reduced civil penalty in the citation up to maximum penalty of $500, but only in situations where the violator appeals the citation. Each act of violation and each day upon which any violation occurs constitutes a separate offense punishable by the maximum penalty. The system of reduced civil penalties prescribed in Section 2-300 generally works well for most violations as the intent is to bring a property into compliance, not necessarily punish the violator; however, in the case of vacation rental violations, reduced civil penalties are insignificant compared to the $2,500 to more than $5,000 per week that can be earned from short-term rentals. Therefore, violators may find that it is in their financial interest to simply pay the reduced civil penalty and bring the property into temporary compliance. Subsequently, the property is again rented for the short-term until code enforcement is able to uncover sufficient evidence of a repeat violation to issue a citation. As long as the violator is able to meet compliance dates and pay the civil penalty, the violator may feel empowered to continue to flaunt the Code unless significant civil penalties come into play or the City is forced to seek an injunction from the courts. It is only in situations where the violator is unable to meet the compliance date that the Code Enforcement Board may assess daily penalties for a continuing violation. However, depending upon the initial reduced civil penalty, the amount of daily fines may not be sufficient to deter further violation unless the Code Enforcement Board increases the civil penalty. Approach As provided for in the City Code, civil penalties may be separately established in the Code for specific types of violations, which are not tied to the system of reduced civil penalties in Section 2-300. For example, the Code establishes specific civil penalties for unlawful removal ofprotected and specimen trees and boardinghouse violations. The staff decided that the most prudent and effective approach would be to establish a special civil penalty for all types of use violations, as such violations are difficult to detect and may provide substantive financial advantage to the violator. Therefore, in addition to vacation rentals, which are not an allowable use in residential zoning districts, other use violations would be subject to these provisions, such as illegal conversions of single family dwellings to duplex or multiple-family uses in single family zoning districts.
Planning and Zoning Board Amend Section 60.11 March 6, 2015 - Page 3 The civil penalty proposed in the draft Ordinance for such violations is $500. Each day that violation exists is a separate offense punishable by the $500 civil penalty. As the maximum civil penalty under the City Code is $500, the provisions for doubling the amount of the civil penalty for a repeat continuing violation would not apply, nor would the Code Enforcement Board have the authority to assess a civil penalty higher than $500 per day. Proposed Amendment The following amendments were made to the text of Section 60.11: The title of Section 60.11 was revised to more appropriately reflect the fact that penalties are to be included under the section. The section has been reorganized by amending existing text under new paragraph (a) and creating two new paragraphs (b) and (c). Under new paragraph (a), the existing text was amended to separate use violations from other violations ofthe Code. New paragraph (b) was created to contain existing language from Section 60.11 related to other violations of the Code. New paragraph (c) was created to establish the provisions for the $500 civil penalty for use violations identified under new paragraph (a). Staff Review and Analysis The staff reviewed the proposed text amendment in the draft Ordinance based on the standards outlined in Section 65.22(i)(l) and (3) of the Vero Beach Code. The staffs analysis and findings are as follows: Justification for the Amendment. The proposed text amendment allows the City to assess special civil penalties for uses not allowed within a specific zoning district. These types of violations, such as vacation rentals, are difficult to enforce. The current system of reduced civil penalties in Section 2-300 is insufficient to deter or punish violations, especially as the civil penalties for these types of violations may be significantly less than the revenue that may be derived from such unlawful activity. The proposed civil penalty of $500 per offense addresses this problem, which isn't addressed well under the current system. Therefore, the staff finds the proposed text amendments to be justified and warranted pursuant to Section 65.22(i)(l). Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The staff finds the proposed text amendments to be consistent with the one relevant objective and supporting policy of the Land Use Element ofthe Comprehensive Plan as discussed below:
Planning and Zoning Board Amend Section 60.11 March 6, 2015 - Page 4 Land Use Objective 3. The City shall establish and maintain land use/development regulations that will reduce and prevent land uses that are inconsistent with community character and incompatible with acijacent development. Land Use Policy 3.1. Residential neighborhoods shall be protected and/or buffered against encroachment from higher density residential uses and from commercial uses. A primary planning principle in designation of zoning districts is to establish groupings of various land uses in a specific district designation that are compatible and complementary with other uses allowed in that district. Unlawful uses in residential zoning districts, such as vacation rentals, conflict with this principle and create development that is inconsistent with the community character and incompatible with adjacent development. The weakness in the current system of civil penalties for addressing unlawful uses creates difficulties in protecting residential neighborhoods from higher density residential and commercial uses. An increase in civil penalties for these types of violations will help deter violations of the Code and provide more suitable penalties for such violations. Consistency with Land Development Regulations. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the provisions in the City Code that allow specific civil penalties to be assessed for various code violation, outside the system of reduced civil penalties prescribed in Section 2-300 of the Code. Due to the nature of the violations related to unlawful uses and difficulties in enforcement of such violations, increased civil penalties for these types of violations is very appropriate and consistent with the Land Development Regulations. Recommendation The staff recommends Planning and Zoning Board approval of the draft ordinance with or without further revisions for transmittal to the City Council for favorable action. TJM/tf Attachment