Loading...
05/20/1981 - Special j.~ , , ~' ", .' ""1; 'l ' '. ' L';'" "t..\ . ,I'. ,~ ..'. ,1, . ,'~ , : \ "':~" ',' ~ ",1/:.;.','. '; ,':.,: ~:; ',' 1 ,:. Official ,,,., RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES ,-. Special Meeting of May 20, 1981 '. :', "~mbers Prescntt j ~ .' .~.~ Il t George Buhmeyer, Fire Marshal Ream Wilson, Parks and Recreation Director Paul Rettig, utilities Director Don Meerians, Assistant Director, Traffic Engineering Cecil Henderson, Assistant Director, Public Works John Peddy, Energy Officer Phil Bennis, Permits and Inspections, Building Department John Richter, Planning Department Karen Wilson, Water Resources Specialist, Environmental Management Chris Cowles, Land Resources Specialist, Environmental Management Members'Not Present: , Elizabeth S. Haeseker, Assistant city Manager, Chairman Others Present: William Draiger, Royal Pool John Burket, Royal Pool Ms. Lynn Morgan, Corporate Attorney, Jack Eckerd corporation , George D. Buttery, Regional Construction Manager, Jack Eckerd Walter H. Melody, Architect " ,. . , . '. The special meeting was called to order by Ream Wilson, who was acting Chairman in Mrs. Haeseker's absence, at 10:05 a.m. in the Operations Center Conference Room. ~;/". ITEM '#1 ~ (Continued) Royal Pool Winter Retail Store - located on the South side of S.R. 60 'i':;' ',just West of Bayview Avenue. .>"..~' .REVISED PRELIMINARY SITE PIAN (Approved Conditionally) t~' ';' . . John Richter - Asked what the use of the building was at the Southernmost part of the property. "The developer said it was used for storage. Mr. Richter said that the area designated as space . #31 had no provision for backing out a vehicle. Also, more definition was needed for space "" .number,S l., 23, 27, and the handicapped parking space. Parking spaces number 1 through 22 are :"i' '. 'an extremely long corridor for parking and he said he would encourage the developers to break :,-.... itnp'w.i:.:th l.andscaping~ He understood from Dave Healey that they were limiting themselves to '::: .', 3400 square feet of retail space in order to provide the required parking I and tha t they were ,',.:. . going to apply for a variance for parking in order to provide more retail space. Should the ">. ,variance not be approved, he advised they would have to live with the 3400 feet of retail space. i:"' ',.' There was general discussion about parking requirements. ,.;", . . Cecil Henderson -. ~fuen they had received the revised plan they noted that the retention area .was, much ,deeper than they normally permitted retention areas to be and it was going to retain water. during wet periods and would be a problem to deal with. Consequently, they contacted the ", 'project engineer and met with a representative of the engineer and Mr. Burket on May'l9 con- ,~~>::". . 'cerning ,the plan. What they 'Were trying. to do was to ma~e the drainage retention area more ;{ @a:l;lOW yet still met the drainage requirements. The final result of the meeting was that \i<~'; :", e Engineering Department recommended that they change the character of the parking lot by r,'~:::"", providing some paved parking as well as some sodded area so that the runoff factor would be '::>,> :.changed, requiring less depth in the retention area--have the developer pave a portion down ~~~':' ..'th~~':1gh and including parking space #15 and the park.ing area from there toward the back of f:.'."' th~ property would not be paved but would be a stabilized, grassed area. l;I:<":':'.c: -1-. ':f;i:~', ,'~...~~ ,':r.:. Ceoil Henderson - (Continued) I~ia would protect aoma trees th~\are in tho area. In essence, they would like to see instead of a totally paved area, that part of the area be grassed. Ho presented written Engineoring comments, which ara attached. Also wished to reiterate their need for ~lO 10 foot of right-of~wny along Gulf to Bay and they would ,~qUaBt receipt of a deed for that bofore n cortificate of occupancy is issued. " Don Meerians - Said that they had covered most of tho items in tho previous day.s meeting. The old accesses and the asphalt on the right-of-way were to be removed and would be reseeded or resodded. They would have to got the Dccean permit from the state. The radius to the West would be cut down to 25 feot and the ono on the East down to 15 feot. Phil Bennis - No comments George BUhmeyer - No comments. ~~ Wilson - No cdmment. John Peddy - No comments Chris Cowles - With the proposed changes that Mr. Henderson outlined,no problems in protecting the large specimen trees on the site. He was particularly interested in the large specimen oak tree in the Southeast corner (space 20). Tree removal permit and landscaping will need approval before the building permit can be issued. Karen Wilson - Her main concern was that they maintain the area as a dry detention area and to dowhatever is necessary to Bee this done--sodding this back portion of the property would probably raise it up to that point. The developer said that they thought they could meet the fifty year storm and maintain dry. c, Paul Retti[ - Inquired about an existing water meter. The developer said there was a meter where a building was torn do\~. Mr. Rettig said they should apply for a water meter and get an account in their name even if the meter was still there. Al&o, dumpster location to be ,.--, .:~)proved by the Sanitation Division. OonMeerians - There is a sidewalk to the West of the developer's proposed sidewalk and he ..(. . wanted to make sure they hooked up to that and not offset the other one. ~ r. Cecil Henderson - Said they would try to expedite the project by making a motion for approval subject to their revision of the plan so they could be scheduled on the next Commission Agenda, ,::,<' . but they would have to coordinate through the Planning Department and would have to have the plans hand.delivered and signed off by the various people who have concerns about the plan ,by May 26. (The people.to sign off on the plan before it goes to the Planning Department are Cecil Henderson, Chris Cowles, Karen Wilson, Don Meerians, and the Sanitation Superintendent.) ; .~:,. . , ~ :~. . ,. , ' <~ d " John Richter - Would like to see parking space #1 squared up. If they did not have a parking space opposite space #31 so people could back out paralleling the West property line that would be fine, but if there were parking spaces opposite #31 in what was now designated as a green area, there would be no provision for backing out of #31. The developer said he would not put a parking space opposite #31. .' , c, , . ~ -. . Cecil Henderson - MOTION Moved for approval of the Site Plan subject to the following conditions. <'. , ':'1" ".. 1. That the retention area be modified to a dry detention area as shallow as possible, ,., . meeting those design requirements that are common in the Engineering Department. ,-:.; -,. 2., Spaces which lie South of space #15 and which include #16 through #22, and #23 :l."UroUgh #30 be constructed as a grassed, stabilized parking area, and the remainder of the ;~ . parking be as proposed, an asphalt parking area. r ~:~, ',. . (':~, ," . ~~:; \. ~(:..:. '( . . .~ ~ . -2- ~c 5-20-81 *'~!'r"!' 'C "':>: i; Cecil Henderson - ,~ (Continued I ' ,.-, 3. Tho dedication of a ten foot ~ight-of-way across the North end of the property along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, with tho dedication to be provided before tho Ccrtifi.cnte of ~cupancy is issued. 4. A dumpster location being provided which is satisfactory to the Sanitation Division. Motion was seconded by Mr. Rettig. Motion voted on and carried unanimously. ITEM #2 - Eckard Drug Store #2218, Walter U. Malody, Architect, located West of McMullen-nooth Road and North of Daniels Street (County). REVISED PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN - (Approved Conditionally) Lynn Morgan, Corporate Attorney for Jack Eckard Corporation had an opening statement. Ms. Morgan said that this application was slightly unusual in that it is in the County and they have already received Site Plan approval and a building permit from the Pinellas County author- ities. There are a number of differences in what the City requested and what has been approved by the County, which will cost Eckerd's additional money. They had applied to the city for a sewer hook-up at the request of the County and were told they had to file a request for annexation to get the sewer hOOk-Up. She said they just wanted to get all the differences between the two plans and go forward and wanted to show the Committee the plan which had been approved by the County. Cecil Henderson - Asked what kind of sewage system did they have on the plans approved by the County. Mr. Buttery replied that the Building Permit was issued on the further requirement to get a letter from the city saying that they would hook into Clearwater's sewer system. There was some general discussion about the differences in the plans for the County and the City. . -:-\hn Richter";' Said it would be appropriate to have the right-of-way dedicated prior to the 'lfecond ordinance reading which effectuates the annexation. He would also recommend that approval of the plan be conditioned upon either vacati.on or relocation of the easement which is 'existing underneath the proposed location of the building. Mr. Melody said that the County would have to vacate the land. As it is now platted there are five foot easements at the rear of the old lot lines. Ms. Morgan said that the County had not required them to give the right-of-way easements and the County was not sure where the right-of-way line would run. She said they were hoping the County would come through and take the right-of-way because it would Eckerds a good corner but she did not want to advise her clients to give a right-of-way deed because it might not be until 1984 when they would be funded and decide exactly where the line would be. Don Meerians - Said it looked like all the changes had been made as far as the parking and dimensions. Questioned the note about the wheel stops being installed under protest and the ,. City assuming liability. Mr. Melody said he would rather not have bumper curbs b~cause they were a hazard. Mr. Buttery said they would rather have wider sidewalks. Don Meerians said they could eliminate the bumper stops as long as they left the paved width 19 feet. There was some"discussion about City and County requirements. Mr. Buttery said that the plans they were looking at had narrowed the main entranceway from 40 feet to 30 feet and it was Eckerdts desire " to maintain 40 feet. Also the plan eliminated one of the drives off of Daniels at the rear of the store. One of those entrances had been specifically designed ,so they ,could back to the rear door and off load stock from the truck without obstructing traffic at the other entrance and was preferable to them and had been ~pproved by the County. They would appreciate the Committeets consideration of the changes in the entry ways based on safety alone. Don .' 'Meerians said he could approve the plan they were lOOking at if the note about the bumper :~~bs was removed, but that the 40 foot width for the drive was against City code and the 30 ~ot width shown on the plan would meet with Traffic Engineering approval. Cecil Henderson - Distributed and discussed written Engineering comments which are attached. Building Dept. - Mr. Bennis inquired about the Building Permit Number from the County. '.';',' > Mr.. ~elody said the number was 141600 dated May 18. -3- ,.,.','}' '~! ':'''1,1 ,'.:: :.,.\"\.,-I'....::!'...'/:',\:\~11 ~~1 .," , , !':..;: '.:,'1.:.,'1 ,I ':.,,~~,-........,.... '. ",' '. ',",', ':'j " ,'. ~:'.I~,' 'I'~~'~,~',.:'...,~:~:,(:\:,," ::I~:.j,'.,\I~',,<.., Phil Bennis ~ (Continued) Sq~he was sure that they undorst~.,the County would perform all i~spoctions and the County wou_.. t seal the building. Fire Department - No comment. ~hn Peddy - Would recommend thnt all outdoor lighting-security and parking lot-be high ~ntensity. Mr. Melody said that had been changed already. Also, Mr. Peddy said he would also suggest that they attempt to hold to a maximum of two foot candles on the parking lot. ~en Wilson - Dry detention areas are satisfactory. The slot in the outfall structuro should be 4 to 6 inches abOVe the bottom. Mr. Meloday asked how the water drained out. Mrs. Wilson said it percolates out. They get some total retention of the afternoon storms and anything in excess of that flows out the slot or over the top. She said she would like to see the slot raised to 6 inches above the bottom. The architect said they would do this. Also, they would like to see the landscape plan approved by the City Forester. Paul Rettig - They would be served by the County for water but were annexing into the city and would be served by the City for garbage pick up. There was some discussion about the dumpster location,and this must be approved by the Sanitation Superintendent. Ream Wilson - Wanted to reiterate again the 10% Parkland Dedication requirement for annexations. ~said they had submitted their request for a waiver and it had been approved by tne Plafinl~g and Zon1ng Board to go before toe City Commission. Mr. Wilson advised that if the waiver was not approved by the Commission then the parkland dedication--money in lieu of land--would be required prior to the finalization of the annexation. Cecil Henderson - Said that the pavement they were coming off on on saD was no more than 24 feet wide as this was the standard width for a state highway. He said that an extreJnely wide entrance that the developer wanted causes cars to stack up in the entrance and was not safe. Mr. Buttery asked if they narrowed the entrance to 30 feet could they get favorable consideration to two entrances on Daniels Street. There was considerable discussion about the right-of-way '~ng 580 and McMullen-Booth Road. Mr. Henderson said if they dedicated a right-af-way easement ;~stead of just giving the property, they would be able to continue using the property, and it would provide the potentia~ of having the roadway built on the property some time in the future. The attorney said if they could get the entrances they wanted on DanielS they could give a right-of-way easemen~ on the property. MOTION: Cecil Henderson moved for approval of the Site Plan subject to the following conditions. 1. A 30 foot entrance along state Road 580 that is shown on the revised Site Plan. 2. The removal of a note in the center of the revised plan which reads: uBumper curbs as shown will be installed under protest and City of Clearwater to assume liability if they are required." 3. The dedication of right-of-way easements for State Road 580 and McMullen-Booth Road as indicated on the Site Plan but as precisely described by the Engineering Department of the City of Clearwater. .\ ". '. 4. The outfall structure being modified to provide a six inch filler in the bottom of the slot, which is indicated on the plan. ., 5. The installation of a second entrance on Daniels Street as provided in their original Submission. 6. An effort by the owner to request the vacation of easements which are under the proposed building. ~ 7. Ten foot utility easement along the East side of the property as indicated in the \~e Plan dated 5-15-81. ~~. ; Motion was seconded by John Peddy. The motion was voted on, with Don l>leerians and John Richter I , ~ . ;;- opposed.. Motion carried. ,. There being no further business before the Committee, the meeti , adjourned at 11:50 a.m. Respectfully Submitted, . Patricia Phillips, Secretary -4-