Loading...
08/11/1983 r;"e'~ '.', ,~ i . rnt;.~'~ .,.; " ~:'" , 1:.. ., , , ' , , ~.' ~ /.... ,. " >.. ..1.... . .,.. ". . I,. ., ';f~: '. >< . .- ~\ ".':., . .~1;:,." ,; ':'-{ '/1' . ' . . . ,~\>':: . .t' ~ . '" . ~~.:: ::<'e::.> .' '.' :Jl-~ ~;8 ...:.,. ."'0. ~C:).,".:.:~,.~' '. Ir~[;i;.......'... ........ ~ ... , B':~'\:..:., " ',. .'. , il':} , .... ~~::..,,-'.' ,. . .. I. ' :~ ~ < ' . > i:;-:. ,-- . k:",'.. ,I.. . ~~~~.:~: .: > A i;}~;.......... q: \''0 . . :'.' ~ ,........... 1 ,-. I OFFICIAL MINUTES RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE City of Clearwater, Florida / .August 11, 1983 /./ rI'.~' MEMBERS PRESENT ~ . Elizabeth Haeeeker, Assistant.City Manager, Chairman Roy Ayres, Building Director Keith Crawford, Traffic Engineering Director .Cecil.Henderson, Utilities Director David Healey, Planning ~au~a.Harvey, Representing Planning Department Ream ~i1son, Parks and Recreation Director Nick. Lewis, Representing Fire Department Joh~,Rooks, Representing Public Works Department . '\1 I' .NON-MEMBERS PRESENT: .!'\'> ..John P ~ Ehrig, Mudano, Associates George Knight, International Control, Inc. Stephen G. & Lee Beneke, Owners, Myrtle Avenue .. Ed ,Walker, Will~ams and Walker Architects . Curtis DeYoung, DeYoung & Associates . , Redevelopment No. 1 . .... , ~ : . 'The meeting was called to order by Chairman Haeseker at 10:10 a. m. in e the qperatio~s Center Conference Room. ~ . ... ~ Minutes of July 14, 1983 ROC Meeting Minutes of the July 14, 1983.meeting were approved as submitted. Mtnutes!of July.28, 1983 ROC Meeting The'minutes of the July 28, 1983 meeting were approved with corrections noted o'n .page 1;" Page 2, paragraph 2, motion #3; and page 3, last sentence. :.,ITEM #1 SUNSET, SQUARE (Located Highland Avenue and Sunset Point Roadr ,Continued from 7/28/83.) , "j . SITE PLAN.AMENDMENT : Nick Lewis:, No Comment. 1'\ 'leI.' ,~ . .. '", " .. .\ , ...~ .....~:~ ,. " .' . .>: . ~. c'.: j Ol". ......:. ~/ 00":< . "',. .~. \ . ( :i . ~., :~\.::i.::.' ~}~. ~. . ~;:~~.:- \'; . l:. .': . ,; _; ~....f. : .r:... . . ~.. t:~ "~.. ".' f~} -:.. ", ~.. .. I . ... l~ 1 :;~., . ." I >~ ~.~:>: <' : . :~ .;:. " . ~ ~~:,f:; \,- . :\~: ~ .... f';: :. (:' ': c ~. ~}~~}..,,, . ., . "<\, If': ' 'I." . ~'.' I' I,' r" ~ .: c ." . ,je. ";.: ;-. . ":\" T '1, .I.~ '; ~. (',I., " W\'.~8::':.;' ~. . \. . t~ it: . . "'" . .'; j " t~..:':/::.< :.. }\....:.. " 1 '. '1" ~ih;. '-;..' .... @{~i'C'\' '. :, ~ .-. ITEM #1 - continued ~ Roy Ayress Asked Mr. Ehrig to outline changes for amendod sito plan and list them on site plan. Changes br,iefly described are aD followBS 1. Depth of stores 203-206 changed from 50' to 60'. 2. Several stores that have already signed leas~s will need depth of 100 I . J. An additional 2800 square feet of building was added, but it has not changed the depth of the building. 4. Parking was increased by 13 spaces. John Rooks: Presented written comments prepared by the Engineering Department with an additional note from nill Sheppard that the existing water main easement needs to be picked up on the plat. (Attachment #1) Keith Crawford: Parking on the South side scales out at 20.. Stalls need ,to be 22' 110n9, especially for parallel parking. Cecil Henderson: No comments. David Healey: principal recommendation is in the form of a suggestion that where developer has had to introduce parallel parking on the South side, Planning suggests you seek a variance to the parking requirement . t::hat .wewould support and endorse, to lower the parking from 5 spaces., per 1,000 to 4.5 spaces per 1,000. I . A concern .that the impermeable coverage seems to have increased. Mr. Ehrig responded that the actual change was 3!100th of a percent. Insistence that future expansion be removed from the site plan. Ream Wilson: No comments. MOTION:, Dave Healey made a motion that the Committee reconunend approval of the amendment. to. the Sunset Square site plan, having reviewed it and found'it consistent with our guidefines for site plan review subject to the following conditions: 1. If the intent was to sell or lease separately Parcel A, that a plat be"prepared, and that the preliminary plat be approved prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the now approved shopping center. 2. That the lines and wording with respect to the future expansion be deleted. Motion was seconded by Ream Wilson and carried unanimously. -2- !~:tJ{";'i~" ,', ;'.;~;,~ ~;i>'::\. ...... .. :~)t.~~<;..: .. ~, ' , c;. /"""" . ."'....'.... o ITEM #1 - ContinuoJ1 David Healey made a second motion in the form of a recommendation, that the doveloper seek a variance to tho roquired number of parking spaces so as to have a minimum of 4.5 space a per 1,000 at their discretion. Rewm Wilson seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Paula Harvey replaced David Healey for the Planning Department at this point. ,.. ',' i ITEM #2 - MYRTLE AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT NO. I (Located on East side of North Myrtle Avenue, South side of Carlton street) i. , , , FINAL SITE PLAN /. Nick Lewis: If there is a fire hydrant at the corner of Myrtle Avenue and Ca~lton Street, the Fire Department will require' one additional hydrant at the southerly most entrance. .t. ';.:' j.:. Roy Ayres: Questioned if the plan was for dead storage units. The owner replied that it was for mini-storage units and all units are facing away from the streets. Owner will need to provide for at least one handicapped parking space. \ 'r. ~.~~ .~:' :. ,,<-0., ~ '!.. ~':;'.1D:' ];~\~,.. >:'~c.~ '.' r~~,~ ~"',::::' : . , ' N\.~'.:, ;'. ' J:. f, :l......T, ~~V:>. . ~4fi' .,. " ~;'~".; .:.,. '" . John Rooks: Presented written comments prepared by the Engineering Department (Attachment #2). Additional comments to the owner were as follows: 1. sanitary sewer would not be s.ubject to moratorium because it goes to Marshall Street plant and also there are not enough units to be involved in the moratorium. 2. storm water detention looks adequate. :r>~' ' :: .,..... ' ,:r c.' ~'., . ~'l:~~c .~,' . S'; ,:. " :: :~c .'....1 : ," ~ ,;">.' . :)" ,'1- "~,'~; , ~~.. . 'i1" L 3. There will need to be a sidewalk along Carlton street because conditions for a waiver cannot be met. Engineering will need " an easement for this sidewalk.' . J There was considerable discussion at this point on that portion of the .street that appears to be on the developer's property. Keith Crawford 'offerred a solution to take a portion of the property and dedicate it to.the City as right-of-way. Cecil Henderson: . be required. If a parking variance is obtained, a dumpster pad will " ~ c .; ',: ' ,'" , .i:' .~ ~~i' ,i?' : Paula Harvey: Planning Department comments were as follows: ~:;.::() ., "I": ;{.::,. '.:..' . 1\.;:' ' d' 1"-. .'.. , .\ .. ~:i~:~:.~.. .::/:; ': ..,.. . 1. Figures for impermeable coverage need to be adjusted to match what is on the plan. -3- ,~. .-- ~tern #2 - Continued a Paula Harvey: 2. Planning agrees with Traffic Engineering that it would be a benefit to the owner to reduce the number of parking spaces. We encourage you to seek a variance on the parking, nnd will support that requQst. ,.... \. 3. Buffering will be required along the East and South property line. It was the developer's understanding that it was the North and South property lines. Mrs. Harvey suggested that the developer contact City Clerk's office for what the Board's conditions of approval were. '. ~: . .'. Ream Wilson: Presented written comments from the City Forester. Further noted. that since the project comes under the new Parkland Dedication Ordinance, and is a non-residential project, open space is the only requirement that must be met. Also stated that the city will want money in lieu of open space since this would be a difficult area to maintain. (Attachments 3 & 4). ,,', ... .',. " DISCUSSION: Mr. Ayres had an additional ,comment that approval of the site plan does not constitute approval of the sign on the property. Will still have to apply for a sign permit. ....}', . K,..;.O.:.... ;". , . ~ ~ > . ". ~~o' f :i.;':. . , i:': '. :01..' ". l~."~. > . MOTION: Paula Harvey made a motion that the final site plan be approved subject to the following changes being made on a revised site plan: ~'. / 1. Existing. sidewalk needs to be labeled, and the sidewalk on 'Carlton Street needs to be shown. ,... I~ ...\. Jr, . ~',," " ~~;.'.<: "7:;".",: ~: ~:~;.':;.' ','::' .. :";.i, : : . ',~' \ '.' ' i,:, , . ~;:.i~"., >. . f.':~ ::.~: .- .>..'.~, . . 2. Handicapped spaces need to be shown. >. ., 3. Erosion control needs to be shown on the final aeRB~~aB~~eR site plan. pJ:a-n. ~.~.~<, . ' '~r-:l/:.'..: 4~ Adjustment needs to be made to the impermeable coverage figures on the site plan to agree with what is on the . site, that figure not to exceed 85%. ,.., . }....x~~'.. ' ..~:. . ..' . ~f::.: J.'\ ~ . .M~S. Ha~vey further moved to recommend approval of the final site plan based upon a finding of this committee that the plan conforms with the.design guidelines for site plan review, subject to the following conditions: " ;1....... , ':r.. '.;c .. 1. That a. fire hydrant be located on the Southern-most entrance if required by the Fire Marshal. J; . . :;. ' I.C' ,. '~""O. :.:: t':", '.' ~. '. > M::':,.,. . ~jj~:';;::;::"::',': :>~ ~f,.:.. ',.. ,~ ~, T " '. . . ~~t/:::.,.: ..'.. 2. That a sidewalk easement or dedicated right-of-way be given on the Northwest section of the property. h . I -4-. 'I o '. .~, .' , t' ~ ,I. ' :i>:".::,~.:.--. I;.,. .. ~i~:L~.. : [\> ;~l~. :;~. . ~ . .:"".., , ,"'~ n ,~}.:'r:'. ..f?/... t:t:.:i .., . r"t~'8.' ... . ." I... . ~~;;~' :',:\ " .. '",. :. .." . tt:,.' .' lit::;;,;, . ......--... r . ,,-... I ~tern #2 - Continued MOTION: (Continued) 3. That clarification of the ownership of the railroad right-of-way be given/~nw~he~~~hwe~~w~eion~f-~ne p~~&~r prior to the building permit. 4. That verification of the assessed just value of the property and the most recent sales price be. provided prior to the approval of the final site plan. 5. That the initial building permit be procured no later than January 11, 1984, and that all Certificates of Occupancy be procured within two years from date of the issuance of the initial building permit. 6. That buffering be provided on the site as required by the approval of the special exception use by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Motion was seconded by Cecil Henderson and carried unanimously. There followed considerable discussion on the railroad right of way and whether it was actually on the owner's property, between Cecil Henderson, Chairman Haeseker, Paula Harvey and Mr. Beneke. Chairman Haeseker concluded the discussion with the statement that the Committee will require a copy of the deed,as well as a copy of the current survey as proof that the Benekes do, in fact, own the portion of property in question. ITEM #3- Sunus Business Center, located Southwest corner of Belcher Road and.Logan street FINAL SITE PLAN '1 Nick Lewis: No comment. . Roy Ayres: Questioned sidewalk not being shown along Belcher Road. T~e developer stated his intent to ask for a variance because of the d1tc~ along the road and also the upcoming Widening of Belcher Road to S1X lanes. will need to note that a variance has been applied for on the site plan~ .'. John Rooks: Presented written comments prepared by the Engineering Department. Mr. DeYoung will need to contact Max Battle regarding payment in lieu of storm water detention provision since Mr. Rooks and Mr. DeYoung's understanding on this. differ. (Attachment #5) Water Quality added a note that they want everything 'toga through a .grassed.area.. They are not concerned about quality of detained roof area~ just the parking ~~. lot. . Keith'Crawford: Noted that Traffic Engineering couldn't count two park~ng spaces th~t are actually in a loading zone. -5- ~ T"o:.!;""'{ ~ c : .'. " ;_;"-.. ,I " " '. 11-.' i,".,: J,' r:~:'>,/.<' t,:.,,::: ~:," y!:;' : .'. ~;\:..:" :: ~ I(~. >" . ~..::: ~.~:..; ~ . l~~ r.: : . ~r~/ ": . ~(I.,.'. "-" , \ r-., Item #3 (Continued) . Cecil Henderson: Presented written comments prepared by tho Utilities Department. (Attachment #6) Paula Harvey: Planning Department comments are as follows: 1. Need to show proposed building height in feet. 2. .Location of any free standing signs needs to be shown on the plan. 3. Need to have clarification as to the use of the property in order to determine parking requirements. On the final revised plan, a breakdown will need to be shown of the three proposed uses, and parking will have to be recalcu- lated accordingly. 'Developer stated that the plan of use of the three areas were partial office, partial warehouse storage or very light manufacturing. " Ream Wilson: Preserited written comments prepared by the City Forester. . (Attachment #7) ..DISCUSSION: RoY Ayres noted that showing a sign on the site plan does not constitute approval of the sign. A sign permit will still be needed. .Mr~ Crawford cautioned the developer to figure the most conservative way whenre-calculating parking spaces. MOTION:Pau1a Harvey made a motion to approve the final site plan subject :.to the following changes.being made on the site plan prior to approval: . , . '.1. That sidewalks b~di~~ on Belcher Road, or note be provided on plan that a ~ is being sought for the sidewalk 'requirement. 2. That the dumpster location be widened to a minimum of 12 feet. 3. That there be a note provided on the plan that the individual units will be individually metered. 4. That parking calculations be shown for the individual uses propose.d on site. 5. That location of exterior free-standing signs be shown on the pl~n, noting that that does not constitute sign approval. 6. That building heights be shown in feet. ~.;{) ~/::,:.:'..:' .' ,. ~'i"'. '~f:~;':.;:)>.:, . .'. .. -6- ..-.... \ ,...-. o !.tem >>3 (Continued) MOTION~ (Continued) She further moved to recommend approval of the final site plan based upon a finding of this Committee that the plan conforms with the design guidelines for site plan review subject to the following 'conditions: 1.. That detention be adequate to the site, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. " 2. That initial building permit be procured within six months, and Certificates of Occupancy be issued within two years of issuance of the original building permits. Motion was seconded by Ream Wilson and carried unanimously. ',' " ',' .~ .~ > > , .. ITEM #4 - Office-Factory-Warehouse , located North side of Sunnydale Blvd., between Belcher Road and Hercules Avenue. l' ,. ,. " . ,,\ . FINAL SITE PLAN " ~ .' . . Nick Lewis: Questioned the location of the fire hydrant. Mr. Knight responded that it.was across the street on the Westerly corner. -;,,:, ~. , r'.;',. . ~<@ F:,~."c. : . i'i~): ' t" 'f<'..:.'.': .<~}:.~";' . ..',~ .. '.: ~ "': . r: \..... ' ~..' . ?i '.:. r~ .:. Je: ,. l- ~\ ' . "f, < f~.'. :. ", }'r,<. . <: ;,.'." j'~~:: ~ ~ i. '. "', 'f.,::" . Roy Ayres: . Must limit parking spaces to what is proposed on site plan. Sidewalks need to be labeled. John Rooks: Presented written comments prepared by the Engineering Department. (Attachment #8) Will need to submit a letter to get sanitary sewer to the site because of the moratorium on the East and Northeast plants. Keith Crawford: Recommended eliminating narrow landscape areas on the ~ediate periphery of the buildings. proposed the elimination of one , parking space that would be unmaneuverable. Cecil. Henderson: Presented written comments prepared by Utilities. Noted that ~he entrance radius must he wide enough that the garbage trucks can tu~n around. (Attachment #9) David Healey: Planning Department comments are as follows: {R~", 'l('''-:: ~. . t.-.:. -- . : p, 1. 'With respect to the designation of office-factory-warehouse. Factory use is not a permitted type of activity as zoned. ,Manufacturing would be a better terminology for the type of activity permitted. -!o" . I'.~~' . ; . , . .;... . ~~. . '. !~/.. " ?:.>.:~'.I. . 'l"..' . f...'~ , t. ~ . \~..,;J. . ~~:~.:~..' .' .', ~~(,,\' ': (,1. .,',., ", !ll'f,;~;...:.,...';' I 2.. Must st~pulate on site plan the maximum area in each of the .use categories. 3. Need to stipulate a maximum number of employees. 1 . l. -7- ~ , I' , .' " '.. . . . J "\ . :. .' . ~ '. ' '.... ". . . . , . . 't, > . . ' " ,:1 ....-, (: I) Item #4 (Continued David Healey: (Continued) 4. Suggested that Planning would like the middle opening to be closed, and that parking in front be reoriented. 5. Also in the way of a suggestion, driveways need to be lined up better'. 6. Need to specify building heights in feet. 7. Need to identify where the loading spaces are going to be. ;1. B. Need additional information on the final site plan with respect to sign dimensions. : ; 9. Need to identify landscape materials. ." . > i . ,. . Mr. Healey also noted that the Commission specifically requested that this site plan come back before them. '" . ~. ' . . Ream wilson: Presented written comments from the City Forester.. (Attachment #lO) Also noted that this development comes under the City's new Parkland Dedication Ordinance, and as a non-residential development the open space requirement would be 4e~ A mone~ary contribution to the ~.04%. City will be necessary to satisfy the parkland dedication requirement. (Attachment ill) :~/.::.>:~J'{'\ . h" ~ . !" "\, ~ ' . . ~: ~ "; ~ "" ~.>..':' l';.:. ... t'::/..; T.:.:;... . ~:". ~~::;~:. . . c DISCUSSION: Keith.Crawford questioned if the retention area and the planter .are the sarne. He remembered that the Commission ruled that you can't use one area to. meet requirements of two separate requirements, i.e. cannot 'allow retention area to be used as part of the open area. . . . .MOTION: David Healey moved to recommend approval of the final site plan based. upon a finding of this. Committee that the plan conforms with the design guidelines for site plan review subject to the following: ....... A. Those things' that would be changed on the final site plan before it is submitted for approval by the Commission: ...\ ;r :J.~ I ~\ ~ " .1." .. ':'I.r 1. proposed sidewalks be identified. . ':. , . ." ~:;..' .' ~ ~.. '." ....'. ~' ' 2. Th~t the narrow landscape areas on the immediate. periphery of the building be deleted,. and that the required loading spaces be identified. " 'j.". ~ , ~... ~ , ., ~', ~> c : ~.' . 3. That the required items of information with respect to building height and sign size be added. ~\~ ~'~"~.'''~. ':V ~{i..:" . ~;;" :r1,;i ". ~{.:';?~.:. .. ~':(.l'" \"~....> J . .,...,..: ~ . 'I... -8- ...... . "J. /.--..... r Item #4 .. Office-Factory-WarohousQ Complex (Continued) ...0 MOTION (Continued) A. 4. That the maximum amount of square footage in each of the three use categories for office, warehouse and manufacturing use be identified on the plans. , ,. 5. That the parking formula be adjusted to note the maximum n~er of employees for the manufacturing use. 6. That the landscape area at the North end of the building be adjusted to provide a proper turning radius for the sanitation vehicles. , . ~ :', . 7. That the Eastern and Western most curb cuts be realigned . with the entry and exit drive. ,." , , ,. . 8. That the middle access egress opening be closed and the parking on the South side of the building be reconfigured perpendicular to the road. B. Those items that will be conditions of approval of the final site plan be amended to include: 1. Verification and payment of required open space money in lieu of land prior to certification of the final site plan. ,;..... 'r ?~...;. . ,r~H~. . ~ij"\' :t::. ::;.' '., ~: 2. Issuance of the building permit within six months of date of approval of the final site plan and issuance of the Certificates of Occupancy within two years of the date of building permits. Motion seconded by. Cecil Henderson. 'AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Roy Ayres moved to amend section B of the motion to,include an item #3. 3. That the city Engineer specifically approve the roof top water retention, and if so approve~that a structural engineer s~j,1.-:b/be I:equired on. the roof assembly. seal . cecil Henderson seconded the amendment. Amendment and Motion carried unanimously. . 'There being no further business before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 12:40 p.m. ~:-~. "."I\",U -9- . . . . ~ "