MARTIN COUNTY STANDS TO LOSE MUCH BY IMPRUDENT FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT

The proposed 120 ft high cell phone tower at Sailfish Marina would be located in a Class AE floodplain, and would be about 6 feet away from a large in-out boat storage building that contains about 200 boats in racks. The electronic equipment for the tower would be located within the boat building. The boat storage building was built so long ago that the County has no records of its construction, but it was damaged during Hurricanes Jeanne, Frances, and Wilma, and one wall was substantially re-built after Wilma.  We have informed local officials that the tower is a hazard to the boat building, where the boats are required to be stored with full fuel tanks.  There is no automatic fire suppression in the building. The applicant himself stated at the Local Planning Agency hearing of March 5, 2015 that if the tower should fail, it would only hit the boat shed.

Why does the County seem to be determined to go ahead with this imprudent floodplain development by giving the tower developer zoning and planning permission, and then a construction permit?

As we understand the Local Mitigation Strategy for Martin County, the County is supposed to mitigate hazards, and is especially encouraged to mitigate them by not creating new ones.  Isn't locating a cell tower next to a boat storage building without automatic fire suppression in a hurricane evacuation zone that is also a floodplain just creating a new hazard that will become a disaster during the next hurricane that strikes this area? And better yet, the tower is not designed for flood loads, an issue that will be discussed in future posts.

Responsible governments are charged with the application of mitigation principles at all stages of a project's review.  The FEMA Flood Protection program regulations (44 CFR 59.22(8) and 44 CFR 60.1 (c) ) say that communities are required to "recognize and duly evaluate flood, mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and/or flood-related erosion hazards in all official actions in the areas having special flood, mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and/or flood-related erosion hazards " and "must take into account flood, mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and flood-related erosion hazards, to the extent that they are known, in all official actions relating to land management and use".  

Martin County staff have taken the position that these issues do not need to be evaluated until the actual building permit for the project is processed, and that they do not have to be considered during the zoning and development approval process, where the Board of County Commissioners vote.  Martin County residents should be very concerned by this practice, considering the risk that this facility presents to the residential neighborhoods that surround the proposed tower, which would be about 25 feet from the waters of the Manatee Pocket.

One casualty of such imprudent floodplain development management could be the County's participation in National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Martin County's homeowners and prospective home buyers need to be able to buy flood insurance at reasonable rates. Martin County's standing in the NFIP could be jeopardized. The NFIP will be discussed in future posts.

FIRE PREVENTION IN MARTIN COUNTY PART 4

Before reading this post please review the previous posts on Fire Prevention in Martin County by clicking on Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.

All of Martin County should fear a fire of catastrophic proportions generated by a 120 ft Cell Tower at Sailfish Marina.

Plans for the tower call for the hollow tower-base to be constructed a few feet away from one of the two large in-and-out dry-stack boat storage buildings at the marina. The second building is less than 50 feet away. The electronic equipment for the tower will actually be housed inside one of the storage buildings. This building is part of the tower project.

A request to the County for extant building records revealed that the County could not find or no longer has a copy of the original permit for the building. It is thought that the storage building was built about 1971. It has been damaged several times over the years by hurricanes and hail storms. Some repairs were made via building permit, some were not, so there is not a complete history of the buildings.

The buildings house some 200 boats with their engines and fuel tanks, stacked on racks that are up to 3-high. A conservative estimate would put 20,000 gals. of fuel stored on those boats.  There is no automatic fire suppression system in the buildings as required by the Florida State fire code.

Nine years ago the marina owner acknowledged that automatic fire suppression was lacking and made a written commitment to Fire Prevention Chief  Pasqualone to install the system "in the next 2-3 years". To date that has not been accomplished.

When the County performed its fire review of  the tower application, the reviewer said that only a 10 lb fire extinguisher and a Knox Box was required. When some of the intervenors met with the County reviewers for the application, they were told that this was a mistake and the fire extinguisher requirement was changed to 40 lb. Here is the intended purpose of a fire extinguisher (wiki:)

A fire extinguisher is an active fire protection device used to extinguish or control small fires, often in emergency situations. It is not intended for use on an out-of-control fire, such as one which has reached the ceiling, endangers the user (i.e., no escape route, smoke, explosion hazard, etc.), or otherwise requires the expertise of a fire department. Typically, a fire extinguisher consists of a hand-held cylindrical pressure vessel containing an agent which can be discharged to extinguish a fire.

Martin County residents, do you think this is sufficient fire protection for a 120 ft. cell tower and a boat storage building housing perhaps 20,000 gals. of fuel?

Why was this application permitted to go forward when the installation of an automatic fire suppression system in the boat storage building intended to house all the electronics for the tower is an outstanding deficiency in the County's records?

Fire fighting equipment can approach the marina from both directions of St. Lucie Blvd., but a fire at the tower itself, or a fire in the electronic equipment inside the building, could only be accessed by going through the boat storage building. Boats stored on trailers and posts block access to the proposed tower site. Why was this application permitted to go forward when the only access for a fire truck to get to a fire is through the boat storage building which has no automatic fire suppression and stores 20,000 gals of fuel?

A catastrophic fire in the boat storage buildings would not only the require the evacuation of nearby residents but perhaps people enjoying Sandsprit Park. In order to exit Sandsprit Park people would be required to actually drive towards the fire to flee it!

Building this tower at this location is a risk that no one can afford to take.

BOCC POSTPONES CELL TOWER HEARING AGAIN

The September 22 meeting of the BOCC went pretty much as expected for the first 5 minutes. The Board approved a continuation of the Tower hearing until Nov. 24, 2015 and moved on to public comments. After intervenors objected to the postponement during the 3 minutes they were permitted to speak during the public comments, the Board reopened the discussion for a continuation. 

The applicant got the continuation until December 15, 2015. The November 24th date was quite objectionable as it is just 2 days before Thanksgiving. Only the attorneys are permitted to select dates for rescheduling the hearing. Rarely are the intervenors even notified by email that a postponement is even in the mix.

The BOCC did hear just a few of the many issues that have yet to be raised about the application and project. Those issues will be posted here on the blog every few days. They will astound you.

The County staff said that the applicant is thinking that he can abandon the long process taken so far and just ask for a building permit. The reasoning is that he would be asking for a replacement tower. There is a provision in the Florida code that says that wireless companies don't have to jump through all the hoops if they just replace one tower with another. 

This is a very reasonable law, but it is not at all clear that they can do it in this case, because (1) there is no building permit for the existing tower, (2) the tower has not been registered by the FCC, even though there has been a requirement to do so since 1996,  (3) they would have to dig up the entire foundation for the old tower to install a new one,  (4) the existing tower is owned by Mr. Bayley, while the new one would be owned by DTI, and (5) the current application for construction of the proposed tower states explicitly that neither  Mr. Bayley nor DTI owns any wireless telecommunications towers in Martin County.

Commissioner Scott is to be commended for realizing that the applicant is now trying to move the tower project to a process that would not be voted on by the BOCC and the invervenors would be denied due process. Her insistence on a date certain hearing of December 15, 2015 is very much appreciated. Thank you Commissioner Scott.

The postponement made the front page of the Stuart News today.

BOCC HEARING TOMORROW-UPDATE

On the advice of the YCC lawyer, the Intervenors have written to the BOCC to object to yet another Applicant driven postponement. The response to these objections given to us by Assistant County Attorney Krista Storey was that the County staff are going to go forward with the recommendation for a postponement despite our objections. The YCC lawyer felt it was not in our best interest to have many people come to the hearing tomorrow as it will very likely be postponed. You will be needed to attend the actual hearing which may be in December. Thank you all for your comments and support. Unless you feel very strongly about the treatment we are receiving from the County and wish to state this to the BOCC about 9 AM tomorrow, enjoy your morning.

Ms. Storey is currently consulting with all the attorneys for a date to schedule the next hearing. It is looking like that will be scheduled for sometime in December.

Read the blog for an update about the hearing tomorrow.

GETTING PREPARED FOR SEPTEMBER 22 HEARING

Many supporters have expressed their outrage at the idea of another postponement to the hearing for the Postage Stamp Zoning and Construction of a Cell Tower at Sailfish Marina currently scheduled for September 22, 2015. The questions becomes "What can we do?"

Write/email to the Commissioners and tell them you want the hearing to go forward.
Write to the Newspapers, too.
Come to the September 22, 2015 meeting of the BOCC and take your allotted 3 minutes before the Commissioners to express your opinion. This would occur at about 9 AM.

To get prepared for that meeting think carefully of what points you want to make before the Board.

Write down your thoughts now.

On the Day of the hearing, you will be requested to fill out a form with a brief of what you plan to say before the Board which is given to an officer to bring forward.

Make sure you take no more than 3 minutes to make your case.

More about the process of addressing the Board will be posted.

Thank you all for such a great response.
Yes, hiring a bus to take people to the meeting is very much a possibility.

CONFUSION CORNER AND I DO NOT MEAN THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE IN STUART

September 22, 2015 that was our date. We thought we would finally be able to present our case to the BOCC in a logical and thoughtful manner. Then a message. We were led to believe that the County Staff were going to propose another postponement of the Postage Stamp Zoning and construction of a Cell Tower at Sailfish Marina "in order to get it right". Mr. Aycock had already agreed to the postponement.

Now we are understand that it is Mr. Aycock who is requesting the postponement. According to Martin County's own regulations he has used up his allotted postponements. So what is the problem?

Is a postponement even on the table?

A new tactic is unfolding. We are being told that maybe Mr. Aycock can build the tower without changing the zoning and without a hearing if they just replace the existing tower by getting a building permit. Is this not where we started? Why has the County changed course about requiring a zoning change and a hearing? Other cell tower proposals get to be heard. In fact just last month an existing lattice cell tower went through a mandatory rezoning (spot zoning by the way) in order for it to be replaced. What is the difference? What is going on here? We just don't understand. There are regulations and guidances for all of these procedures but we only seem to get attempts to work around them.

But it gets better. Mr. Aycock's certified Professional Engineer stated and stamped on the application to Martin County that the existing tower is 75/80 feet tall.  But fortunately for Mr. Aycock, the existing tower is really 120 feet tall. How good is that? He can build a 120 feet monopole replacement tower by just getting a building permit. I hope Mr. Aycock gets all the money he spent on those engineering studies, plans, simulated photos, and drawings back from that certified Professional Engineer who was off by 40/45 feet on the height of the tower.

And will the County be held responsible for refunding the application fees to Mr. Aycock as well? If he did not need the rezoning and construction hearing, shouldn't he be reimbursed? And reimburse him for all his lawyers?

What has changed? What information do they want to keep back from the citizens of Martin County by stopping the public hearing on September 22, 2015? What information is pending that they do not want to see televised to the entire County?

Please plan to attend the hearing whether the rezoning and cell tower is up for postponement or not. Each member of the public is permitted to speak before the BOCC for 3 minutes at the start of the meeting. Ask why you are not being given a public hearing about this matter. Express your concerns about this whole process. Whatever happened to Government in the Sunshine?

The BOCC meeting starts at 9 AM on September 22, 2015
The hearing room is on the ground floor of the
Martin County Administrative Offices which is next to Blake Library
2401 SE Monterey Road
Stuart, FL 34996

We are looking into hiring a bus to bring people to the hearing. Stay tuned.

IT IS SEPTEMBER AND TIME FOR A CELL TOWER HEARING----OR IS IT?

We were informed that the Board of County Commissioners would hear the Postage Stamp zoning request for Sailfish Marina and the construction of a cell tower at that site on September 22, 2015. But will they?

Here is the history of the 2 application submissions and their postponements:

August 27, 2014 Mr. Aycock requested per Section 10.2.D.3, one time request for new
application, 60 days allowed

March 5, 2015 Local Planning Agency unamiously approved the 2 applications despite strong objections on the part of the Intervenors. Application moved forward to the BOCC for a hearing.

BOCC hearing was scheduled for April 7, 2015 but was postponed at the request of Mr. Aycock. It was rescheduled for May 19, 2015.

The County Staff requested a postponement of the May 19th hearing. The hearing was rescheduled for June 23, 2015.

At the request of Mr. Aycock, the June 23, 2015 was postponed. It is rescheduled for September 22, 2015.

Now the County Staff is suggesting that they will request to postpone the hearing again. This is not definite.

Why is this happening? What are they trying to do that they do not want the public to know about? We are up to 4 or 5 postponements depending on how you count the August 27, 2014 request.

Has any other cell tower request been subjected to so much opposition and received so many postponements in order to get it right?

More than 700 people have signed a petition against the cell tower. Why stop the hearing again?

Continue to let the BOCC know that you oppose postage stamp zoning and the construction of a cell tower in a residential neighborhood.

Contact the BOCC by email at:

efieldin@martin.fl.us
ascott@martin.fl.us
sheard@martin.fl.us
jhaddox@martin.fl.us
dsmith@martin.fl.us