Loading...
12/02/1991 (2) . .:.,.: e. I.,,;.:.l . ,.. .. . 1 ' . . ~. , . ". . , .f, ,. .,. ,~ , .,' ., . , , .. '. . , .' . ~. . '.'" . " . i~, ... . <'t ., ~~~H".P,;';,7.~.~;';:":' ,'~~ '..,. " .'. ~..'. :.'- <, .;..' HI": \, .,." " I J' ..... ..~... .. e,." ..,', H . ., ..'< . . . . . . . ", ' " '.. '~ . .. ~ .. .'. . . , , t . . '. e . . ' '.' ,....\ ........,." WORKSESSION je. . City Commission Worksession Minutes . . . 0 Date -I~/r;'[If? " .i \ '-.. l/,~f. : ' .-"". CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION December 2, 1991 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met at City Hall with the following members present: Rita Garvey Sue Berfield Richard Fitzgerald Lee Regulski William Nunamaker Mayor /Commissi oner Vice-Mayor /Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Also present: Michael J. Wright M.A. Galbraith, Jr. Cynthia E. Goudeau City Manager City Attorney City Clerk The meeting was called to order at 11 :55 a.m. Service Pin Awards - Four service awards were presented to City employees. Beach proiects - Jim Terrv with Pinellas County Cl.:l,,~ Jim Terry indicated the State is preparing its 1993 budget for Fiscal Year July 1, .wtf 1992 to June 30, 1993 and reported the State will fund beach projects at 75% with the County picking up the remainder. He said the County will not go forward with projects the State does not approve. He said projects include a boardwalk or dune construction item and an inlet management plan requested for Clearwater Pass. In response to a quastio'n regarding the elimination of Dunedin Pass. Mr. Terry indicated the County Commission withdrew action. Mr. Terry said the City Commission could request funding for a management study of Dunedin Pass. In response to a question, Mr. Terry indicated projects are proposed only for the Gulf side and not Tampa Bay. Regarding renourishment on Sand Key, the City Commission has already expressed support. Mr. Terry said the State indicated it will not support beach renourishment on Sand Key due to lack of parking and access. Discussion returned to Dunedin Pass and it was indicated scientists do not agree that opening Dunedin Pass would enhance the flushing of the harbor and improve water quality. Mr. Terry reiterated his recommendation for the Commission to request a Management study of the pass. In response to a question, he said he did not know if the City would have to pay the 25% cost. The consensus of the Commission was to agenda this item for a later meeting. Regarding beach renourishment, Public Works Director William Baker said the Commission assumed the Trolley and Sand Key Park parking lot would suffice when they endorsed Sand Key renourishment. He said this fell through. If Sand Key residents want the renourishment, he said they must provide parking. .......-. mws12a.91 1 12/02/91 . ~ . . " . . ~ ' . . . , . .. ....' ~ . . . "",,-' The consensus of the Commission was for staff to bring back agenda items for studies of Clearwater Pass and Dunedin Pass. Consensus was to bring forward an item regarding Sand Key beach renourishment later. It was suggested the studies of Clearwater Pass and Dunedin Pass be tied together. Purchase of 21 ~1992 Ford Crown Victoria Police Patrol Vehicles from Carlisle Ford. lnc.. St. Petersburg, FL, at a total cost of $275,667; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease Purchase Agreement with AT&T Credit Corp. (Consent B&C) Bids were solicited and received for the purchase of 21 Police Patrol vehicles. Two vendors submitted bids; Carlisle Ford, Inc., St. Petersburg, submitted the lowest bid of $275,667 ($13, 127/each) for 1992 Ford Crown Victoria vehicles. Staff recommends awarding the contract to Carlisle Ford, Inc. During the FY 1991/92 Budget Hearing Meetings, the City Commission approved the purchase of 14 patrol vehicles and seven sedans. In response to a question, the City Manager said the process of vehicles being assigned to administrative staff before they are used for patrol is still in place. However, additional cars are needed. Information regarding the life cycle of the cars will be provided. A question was raised regarding at what point lease/purchase is no longer economical. This will be reviewed. . -., , ......,"'1 (Cont'd from 1 1 121191) Declare DrODerties surolus for the puroose of deedina land and grantino easements to FOOT for the widening of SR 580 (PH) The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) proposes to widen SR 580 from Countryside Boulevard to Kendale Drive, starting construction in FY 1993/94. As they propose to widen the road to six lanes, they will need additional right-of~way along several City land parcels. To meet Florida Department of Environmental Regulation requirements for storm drainage, FOOT also will need parcels for drainage purposes. The City's contribution of this right-of-way will encourage and expedite this improvement and continue the longstanding cooperation between the City and FOOT. Because of the proximity of the Countryside Police Station, Police Chief Sid Klein has been informed about this requirement and has no objection to this request. FOOT is asking tor deeds to four parcels of land: three to be used for right-ot-way purposes and one to be used for water storage. A 1 O~foot by 1 O~foot drainage easement adjacent to the two reservoirs also will be required. It was reported the letter of agreement has not been received from FOOT and this item may be pulled. CCont'd from 11/21/91) Contract to precare a Proiect Oevelocment and Environmental Study CPD&E) for the wideninq of Drew Street to Post. Bucklev. Schuh & Jernioan. Inc. for a not-to-exceed fee of $496,429.89 (Consent B&C) mws12a.91 2 12/02/91 , . . . .:- ,. \" ...". ... . . . . .. . .., ,. . . In cooperation with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) t the City proposes to widen Drew Street from west of Ft. Harrison Ave. to east of NE Coachman Road. The City has agreed with FOOT to prepare preliminary design reports and construction contract documents including construction plans and specifications in conformance with FDOT and Federal Highway Administration requirements. The City has allocated $4-million to begin the preliminary and construction work necessary for widening Drew Street. The initial work contemplated in this agreement is preparation of a preliminary design report known as a Project, Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study. Future work contemplated in this agreement is preparation of construction contract documents including construction plans and specifications, right- of-way maps, easement and property descriptions, FOOT Joint Project Agreements for utility relocation, permit applications, record drawings for utility relocations, certifications and other professional services that may be necessary for the successful completion of this project in coordination with FOOT. When these professional services are desired by the City, the City and the Engineer will negotiate amendments to this agreement. The Commission approved the ranking of the top three firms: Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc.; Wade-Trim, Inc.; and Parsons, Brinkerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. Staff negotiated a contract with the top ranked firm and recommends contract approval. The PD&E study begins upon approval. It is anticipated it will take twenty months to complete. ) It was reported the PD&E study looks at all impacts of a project. The Commission ,-=~ has seen this item before but the FOOT was asked to review the contract. As a result, some items of work were eliminated and the contract was decreased from $564tOOO to $496,000. In response to a question regarding why the project ends just west of N Fort Harrison Avenue, it was indicated Drew Street becomes a State road at that point. Aoreement for Professional Services with Kina Engineerina Associates. Inc. to develoo and oroduce the NPDES oermit aoolications. an element of the Comprehensive Watershed Management and Urban Ecosystem Management Master Plan for a term of two years subject thereafter to renewal by Commission approval in the amount of $477.654.50 (Consent Agreement) The quality of water in our nation's lakes, streams, bays and harbors has recently gained attention and focus from local, State and Federal environmental regulatory agencies, legislators, environmentalists, and private citizens. According to the "National Water Quality Inventory 1988 Report to Congress," pollution from sources such as agriculture. urbanization, construction sites. land disposal and mining are among the leading causes of water quality impairment. On November 16, 1990, the Water Quality Act of 1987 (also known as the Clean Water Act of 19B7) established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit process for municipal and industrial storm water discharges. Besides federal requirements applied to local water resource protection, Florida also imposed significant legislation to improve water resources and control stormwater discharges in the State. Changes were made to the State Comprehensive Plan and mws12a.91 3 12/02/91 administrative rules of State environmental regulatory agencies. In addition, the State Water Policy was amended to afford greater protection to State water resources from diffuse source (non-point source) runoff and has established a surface water protection and management goal, the development of comprehensive watershed management plans. The policy will prevent existing environmental, water quantity. and water quality problems from becoming worse, and will reduce existing flooding problems, improve existing water quality, and preserve or restore the value of natural systems. In May 1989, through the Comprehensive Plan, Clearwater approved a pledge to develop a stormwater master plan consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan. and address policies consistent with the protection of water and natural resources through a conservation element, a drainage element. a coastal zone management element, and a recreation element. In addition, the City Comprehensive Plan calls for the establishment of a stormwater utility fee or other funding mechanism to provide necessary funding to achieve these goals. On December 20, 1990, the Commission approved the Stormwater Utility Fee on second reading COrd. 115058-90) to fund the program as outlined by the Camp, Dresser & McKee report, "Establishment of Stormwater Utility Program for the City of Clearwater," published in May 1990. The report recommended allocating $750,000 for development of a Stormwater Master Plan that was subsequently funded through the FY 1 990/91 budget process. After expenditures in support of developing a Stormwater Utility Fee, $486,000 remains in this project account. \ } ................. On August 1, 1991, the Commission approved the ranking of prospective consulting engineers to prepare a Citywide Stormwater and Watershed Management Master Plan and authorized staff to negotiate with the firms in order of their ranking. The contract negotiated with King Engineering Associates and staff includes five principal elements: 1) Base Data Development - $93,699; 2) Municipal NPDES Permits (Two Parts) - $279,912; 3) Industrial NPDES Permits - $64,500; 4) Municipal/Regulatory Coordination - $30,054; and 5) National Flood Insurance - $9,490. The elements total $477,655. Since the original stormwater management program concept was conceived, many State and Federal changes have occurred. A more aggressive Federal NPDES program than originally anticipated or planned for by Camp Dress & McKee in the development of the Stormwater Utility Program, a greater focus on watershed management comprehensive planning required of Clearwater by Federal and State authorities than originally conceived within the City's Comprehensive Planning Document were adopted. The City chose to pursue, an additional Flood Insurance requirement to provide an additional opportunity for citizens to reduce flood insurance premiums within high flood prone areas. The available balance in this project is sufficient to provide funds for this contract. . Although the $486,000 now available was anticipated to fund development of a Comprehensive Stormwater Master Plan, of which the NPDES Element was an anticipated component. the changes that occurred at the State and Federal level require staff to now consider phasing this project. The work proposed by this contract represents those elements minimally required to meet Federal requirements due on May 18, 1992 and integral to the development of a final Municipal and Industrial NPDES permit. Approval of mws12a.91 4 12/02/91 " ' : , . . ~ " , " , ,...., . " . " '.". .' " t...} , ::",,;,_,J this item will allow the City to move forward on the most critical elements of the Comprehensive Watershed Management and Urban Ecosystem Master Plan while details and alternate funding mechanisms are developed for those remaining features of the Master Plan. While the focus of this contract is primarily on the NPDES efforts, the contract contains language that allows for expansion into tho more comprehensive master plan originally envisioned and still desired. Should the City be successful in its application for a 50-/50 funding cost share with SWFWMD or from other similar sources, an amendment will be processed whereby King Engineering is assigned the greater study. Bill Baker, Public Works Director, explained this project would be very expensive as originally posed. He said the current plan is not as grandiose but a document will result of which the City can be proud. He reported in August, King Engineering was rated as the number one contractor for this program. As this has been slow in coming forward, he reported King Engineering has done some work. If this contract is approved, King Engineering will be paid through the contract. If not, another contract can be used. The City Manager reported staff began carving back the program because it is imperative that these plans be coordinated with the County. Therefore, the proposal is to only do the basics until the coordination with the County is in place. It was indicated the minimal will be done to meet NPDES requirements for the City. Concerns were expressed regarding the need for coordination and the need to address the problems within the City's limits. It was stated pollution does not honor municipal boundaries. ~. <,....1 The City Manager reported this will be a two-phase project. The first phase will identify how much pollution exists and the second phase will identify how to deal with the pollution problems. Discussion ensued regarding the need for County coordination. It was indicated the City and the County do not agree philosophically. The City believes all of the basins should be looked at while the County wants to concentrate on the Allen's Creek basin only. Deputy City Manager Kathy Rice indicated staff will meet with the County to discuss these issues. In response to a question, it was indicated the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) will determine if the County's philosophy is acceptable when their application is submitted. The City Manager emphasized he does not want the City to be caught short but he did not want to overextend without coordination with the County. Tom Miller, Assistant Public Works Director Environmental, indicated two primary efforts will occur: 1) the NPDES application and 2) FEMA requirements. The meeting recessed from 12:57 to 1 :30 p.m. Discussion continued regarding the stormwater management. Mr. Miller indicated the County is planning to present its Allen's Creek proposal ,by May 18, 1992, the deadline for application. He said the other 53 basins in the County should proceed to comply with negotiated time frames. He reported 11 basins are in Clearwater. In response to a question, Ed Mazur, representing King Engineering, indicated Alligator Creek and coastal zone basins one through four are self.containad within Clearwater. ..... mws12a.91 5 12/02/91 ~:f' ., ~ . . Further discussion ensued regarding how to identify pollutant sources and what enforcement will be taken. In response to a question, it was indicated this is a draft agreement and no funds are contained in the comprehensive program. Mr. Miller indicated the City wiH supplement the County's data and Part One of the plan is collecting data. Part Two is more detailed and is based on what the County will be doing. If the County approach is accepted by EPA and the City has no problem with its consultant, the City should be OK time wise. In response to a question, Mr. Miller said the City must obtain a separate permit from the County's due to Clearwater's size. Mr. Mazur said the effort is to be certain as little confusion as possible exists between the City and County plans. A question was raised regarding whether the Environmental Advisory Committee was involved. Mr. Miller indicated they were and they support the NPDES application and a comprehensive program. In response to a question, Mr. Miller indicated the FEMA application is due in December. First Readina Ord: #5158-91 ~ Election Code (eM) The City Clerk and City Attorney have reviewed the City's Election Code for needed amendments. The proposed ordinance contains amendments to bring the code up to date with the City Charter and Florida Election Code Requirements as well as minor clarifying language changes. <,J '. The most significant changes are: 1) Removal of the 90-day prior to the election restriction for appointment of a campaign treasurer. The City Attorney thinks this is not in keeping with the requirements of F.S. 106 that the City must follow. Petition Cards will still not be available until 90 days prior to the election; 2} Requiring an individual to obtain new petition cards if they change the seat for which they are running. Currently, it is possible to circulate petition cards indicating plans to run for a particular seat and change that seat at qualifying; and 3) Repealing Chapter 33, Campaign financing. State Law requires municipalities to enforce Chapter 106 Campaign Financing. By repealing this section, the City avoids duplication and eliminates the need to amend this section when Chapter 106 is amended. Generally, when a requirement is contained in the Chapter of State Statutes, the City has simply referenced the appropriate section and eliminated duplicate language. In response to a concern regarding removal of the gO-day restriction, the City Attorney reported State law will not allow the City to restrict collection of election funds to a 90-day time frame. A concern was expressed that funds would be collected years before an election. The City Attorney pointed out that most candidates do not want to start campaigning too soon. He recommended agreeing with proposal to see if any problems arise. The Mayor requested establishing a 180~day time frame. Reschedulina of 01/02/92 & 01/16/92 Commission MeetinQs to 01/09/91 & 01123/92 (CM) Due to the holidays. it will be difficult to prepare the agenda for the January 2, 1992 meeting. Staff recommends rescheduling that meeting to January 9, 1992. As "--- mws12a.91 6 12/02/91 :..'1.. . January is a five-Thursday month, there is also the opportunity to change the second meeting to January 23, 1992, eliminating back to back meetings if the Commission approves changing the January 2, 1992 meeting date. Consensus of the Commission was to make no change in the meeting date. This item was pulled from the Agenda. (Cont'd from 11/21/91) Public Hearing & First Readina Ord. #5145-91 - Amendment of Zoning Atlas to CPO and Review of Master Site Plan/Sub. Plant for Loehmann's Plaza, Lots 1 & 2, NW corner of NE Coachman Rd. and US 19N, 19.89 acres (Principle Mutual Life Ins., Wal-Mart, Z91-02) (PH) Wal~Mart Stores, Inc., the contract purchaser, is requesting a Zoning Atlas Amendment from Commercial Center teC) to Commercial Planned Development (CPD) of the previously platted Loehmann's Plaza Replat Subdivision. Loehmann's Plaza is currently in receivership. In 1985, this property was annexed into the City and platted as two lots in 1986. Lot #1, site of Loehmann's Plaza Shopping Center, contains 19.237 acres. Lot #2, leased as an automotive service facility (Jiffy Lube), contains 0.65 acres. The property was platted under the previous Parkway Business District (CP) zoning district. The property became non-conforming when zoned as Commercial Center (CC). Non-conformities include: 1) lot area; 2) lot depth; 3) lot width; and 40 side and rear setbacks. If the area is rezoned CPO and the proposed replat is approved, Lot It 1 would be split into three lots and Lot #2 would be reduced from 0.65 acres to 0.614 acres. I .....,.,_.\-~\ .~,.l/ In 1989, the City Commission reviewed a request to subdivide the property into four lots as presently proposed. The proposed 1989 resubdivision required 18 variances to correct existing non-conformities. The Development Code Adjustment Board approved two of the 18 variances. It was suggested that the site be rezoned CPD. The Zoning Atlas Amendment to CPD is being requested to address, as a single issue, the present 15 variances required under the CC zoning district. The applicant has submitted a proposed site plan that shows the demolition of the Loehmann's Plaza Shopping Center buildings with redevelopment of the majority at the site with a Wal-Mart store. Four lots would be created: 1) the Jiffy lube property; 2) the Kinko's site; 3) the Wal-Ma~t site; and 4) the undeveloped parcel at the southwest corner of the site. Staff is currently reviewing the revised site plan. This procedure will assure that development of the site is looked upon as a whole, with individual parcels complementing each other. Staff feels this approach will more adequately insure appropriate development of the property, as measures to mitigate potential negative effects of the development on nearby residential property and roadways can be considered and implemented. City Code permits the zoning classification of Commercial Planned Development (CPO). Section 135.078 sets a desired minimum area for such zoning as four acres. Permitted uses for such zoning are specified in Sec. 135.079 as, "Any single or combination of uses identified as permitted in the commercial, office or residential zoning districts contained in this chapter" with conditional uses specified in the same manner. mws12a.91 7 1 2/02/91 , ... " I , .f' 'r , ",,' . " . '. t#",} . liJ Other limitations placed upon development in a Planned Development District are done through review and approval of the site plan by the City Commission. Section 135.076 states in part. "All lands assigned this zoning (Planned Development District) will require site plan approval by the City Commission in accord with provisions contained in chapter 137." The site plan for the property to be rezoned has been received by the City Commission and referred to staff. All site development will be required to follow the site plan approved by the City Commission. The proposed CPD zoning is compatible with the surrounding commercial zoning along US 19N. Staff review indicates these conditions should be established as conditions for approval of the site plan: 1) Within the 25~foot wide buffer proposed along the rear of the site (the west side) and along the Staff Run Blvd. frontage west of the proposed driveway (a portion of the north side), buffer vegetation shall be installed consisting of three rows of shrubs (minimum height of 30tl at time of installation) placed three feet on center; the tree planting requirements of the Clearwater City code for perimeter landscaping also shall be met. Due to site constraints, however, the rear buffer can be reduced to a minimum of 10 feet in width along up to 20% of the width of the property to accommodate the turning radii required for truck loading access and maneuvers so long as no reduction in plant materials in the reduced width buffer occurs. Plant materials to be installed in these areas shall be dense, fast growing varieties. A landscaping plan submitted to the Director of Planning & Development and Assistant Public Works/Environmental Director and approval of this plan shall occur prior to the issuance of a bullding permit; 2) The Wal-Mart building shall maintain a 75~foot setback from Stag Run Blvd.; 3) The existing driveway proposed for removal along Stag Run Blvd. shall be completely removed through the wetland mitigation area and the land under the driveway shall be restored to a functioning wetland condition to the extent possible given existing utilities in this area; 4) During construction, erosion barriers shall be installed to protect wetland areas to be preserved and/or created; 5) No alcoholic beverage sales shall be permitted on the subiect property; 6) The hours of operation shall be from 9:00 a.m. until 9:00 p.m., seven days a week, except that an extended closing time of 11 :00 p.m. may be permitted for special events for up to 10 days per calendar year; 7' No deliveries shall occur before 8:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m.; seven days a week; 8) The applicant shall construct or, alternately, provide funds to cover the full construction costs of cul-de-sacs or other street termini. as deemed acceptable by staff, to close Stag Run Blvd. to through traffic; such construction should include landscaping and other design considerations to eliminate cut-through traffic; 9) The applicant shall provide all improvements to surrounding roadways required by the Florida Department of Transportation. Should no significant improvements be required by the State, the applicant shall: a) Pay its pro rata share for an added left turn (eastbound) lane onto US 1 9N on NE Coachman Road. The basis for this pro rata share shall be the ratio of the projected traffic to be generated from this site making this movement to the projected '"'background" traffic making this movement; b) Pay for an added right turn (eastbound) lane on NE Coachman Road between US 19N and the proposed NE Coachman Road driveway; and c) Not proceed with the development of the proposed Phase II expansion until such roadway improvements have been installed; 10) The applicant shall provide architectural renderings showing the proposed east (front), north and south elevations of the proposed Wal-Mart building as part of its site plan application. These elevations shall demonstrate architectural features that eliminate the "boxlike" appearance of some Wal-Mart stores and specify color treatment for the building; 11) All outdoor storage and displays shall be required to be approved through the conditional use permit process. Proposals for special, mws12a.91 8 12/02/91 . ' , . " ..t ' . . .' " ~. .. :' . " ~ . '. ' temporary outdoor sales shall be included in this requirement, so that screening and other conditions can be established. Also included Bre temporary outdoor storage proposals; and 1 2) A cross~access easement shall be executed between the applicant and the owner of Lot #4 to permit the sharing of the proposed driveway access(es); no direct driveway access shall be permitted to Lot #4 from NE Coachman Road. The Planning & Zoning Board continued discussion on this item from the November 5 and 19 meetings to allow more time for staff review and coordination with the applicant and Coachman Ridge neighborhood. The neighbors have vocally opposed the proposed development due to concerns about traffic on Stag Run Blvd., NE Coachman Road and Old Coachman Road, and about driveway and other site design issues. On December 3, 1991, the Planning and Zoning Board's will meet and their recommendations will be presented to the City Commission at the December 5, 1991 meeting. The applicant has been responsive to the concerns of staff and the neighborhood. Several changes to the site plan have been made, including closure of the existing "center" driveway access to Stag Run, shifting of the loading dock to the south side of the site, and provision of a 25-foot wide landscaped buffer along the west and relevant portions of the north sides of the site. The applicant has also agreed to share in the cost of some roadway improvements. This cooperative attitude is particularly worthy of note since the existing site development (195,000 square feet of shopping center) exempts the applicant from the City's concurrency regulations and transportation impact fee requirements. 'hj\ t:.",;1' Staff review indicates a need to close Stag Run Blvd. to eliminate serious "cut- through" traffic. The roadway would be closed through construction of two "back-to- back" cul-de-sacs (or other road termini) at the Florida Power right-of-way. This closure will be initiated by staff upon direction from the City Commission. The cost of this closure should be borne by the applicant, given the expected traffic volume increases on Stag Run Blvd. from the proposed Wal-Mart development. The applicant has agreed to pay $2 for every $1 paid by the Coachman Ridge neighborhood for these cul-de-sacs; City policy generally requires the subdivision that benefits from such traffic improvements to pay the entire cost. The Coachman Ridge Homeowner's Association has agreed to make available to the applicant existing landscaping for relocation, and to assume maintenance responsibilities for installed landsca ping. Staff also recommends initiating a study to determine the validity of moving the proposed improvements to NE Coachman Road into the Metropolitan Planning Organization's five year Transportation Improvement Program. Traffic volumes have increased on the roadway since the City's Comprehensive Plan was approved. Proposed improvements to Stag Run Blvd. that close the road to through-traffic will likely further degrade NE Coachman Road's capacity as traffic formerly using Stag Run Blvd. will be diverted to new routes. A concern was expressed regarding the conditions. Jim Polatty, Planning & Development Director, indicated the conditions are appropriate, in particular the one regarding architectural renderings as some neighbors had expressed concern regarding the attractiveness of the building. Additional amendments made to the site plan include eliminating two of the five proposed entrances. Mr. Polatty reported one unresolved issue mws 1 2a.91 9 12/02/91 . L , . .. I ' , ' ',"\ .: ,.; >, .'" . . t,.1' ... +', . ' \ , .'.~ +..... i;....t'll' , is the fate of lot four. He said the owners of Lot 4 have agreed to sign onto the application. FOOT has received the plan and will be imposing some conditions on the development. It was requested that information be obtained regarding plans for the 30,000 square foot addition in phase two. Concerns regarding access to lot four were expressed. It was indicated access will be from the Wal-Mart property, not from NE Coachman Road. It was questioned if the environmental impacts on and off site will be evaluated. Engineering will be requested to review this. Information regarding stormwater retention before and after construction was requested. Regarding the cui de sac to be constructed on Stag Run Boulevard, it was indicated Wal~Mart has offered to pay for two~thirds of the cost and the homeowners will pay one- third. The homeowners' association has indicated they will maintain it. Peter Yauch, Traffic Engineer, indicated staff has completed a circulation study as this development will have significant impacts on the intersection of US 19N and NE Coachman Road. In response to a question, he indicated closing the median at Stag Run Boulevard would be a last resort. The City Manager questioned if the apartment complex on Stag Run had expressed concerns regarding the proposed closure of that road. Mr. Polatty indicated only one call had been received. A question was raised if the traffic impact from Wal-Mart would be greater or less than the current development had the current development been successful. Mr. Yauch indicated it would be similar. The Mayor raised a side question if Clearwater looks to see if traffic signals are needed. She felt the signal at Cleveland Street and Lake Street is unnecessary. ('"".') "'~"'I!'. Establishment of permanent Rehabilitation Specialist Dosition in the Plannina & Development Department (Consent C&S) :'J On May 2, 1991, the City Commission considered establishing a Rehabilitation Specialist position within the Planning & Development Department. Staff was instructed to bring this back during the FY 1991/92 budget process. This position was included in the City Manager's recommended budget, however, the change was not brought to the Commission's attention during budget hearings. A Rehabilitation Specialist prepares work write ups, supervises bidding, and inspects and certifies contract compliance of all housing rehabilitation jobs done by the City Community Development Division and Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services. These offices currently rehabilitate approximately 35 units per year. Volume is expected to increase when funding under "Challenge 2000" is utilized. Inspections of new housing and rehab units will be required. Establishment of this position as a regular Civil Service classified position is consistent with the Civil Service Ordinance and with regulations of the IRS relating to "employees" as differentiated from "workers hired as independent contractors." Consensus of the Commission was to approve this position. Direction reQarding proposal to amend City Sian ReQulations to achieve consistency with the Countywide Siqn ReQulations (Consent C&S) "------' mws12a.91 10 12/02/91 The Pinellas County Commission has adopted a set of sign regulations similar to those recommended by the Mayors Council. The new regulations contain a "sunset clause" that allows the Commission to invalidate the adopted ordinance if a city or cities representing more than 2% of the County's population adopt sign regulations less restrictive than the County's after March 1992, or decide to "opt out" of the County's ordinance altogether. For the most part, Clearwater's Sign Regulations are more restrictive than those of Pinellas County, with a few major exceptions. City regulations would allow up to 384 square feet for an attached property identification sign; the County's ordinance would limit the maximum sign area to 1 50 square feet. In the Limited Office district, the City permits a maximum sign height of 20 feet; the County Code would limit sign height in this district to 1 2 feet. A comprehensive revision to the City's Sign Code is proposed for the Planning Services Division Work Program. It is recommended that staff pursue a complete amendment to the Sign Code using Countywide Sign Regulations as the general format for the revised Sign Code to provide continuity and consistency with the Countywide Sign Regulations, and provide a simpler, more clear format for the City's Sign Regulations. For example, the confusing concepts of "property" and "business" identification signs will be replaced with the simpler to understand and administer concept of "freestanding" and "attached" signs. Because revised sign regulations may be more restrictive, nonconformities may be created by the adoption of more restrictive requirements. The issue can be addressed three ways: 1) The City Attorney advised if changes are f;:"~ made to the Sign Code before the October 13, 1992 amortization deadline, those changes ,~. can be applied to signs erected since 1985, and to signs in existence before the new Sign Code came into effect in 1985. Signs, legally erected since October 1985, can be declared nonconforming and treated the same as signs erected .prior to October 1985; 2) The Sign Code could contain language "grandfathering" signs legitimately erected under current regulations. Signs permitted under the 1985 Sign Code and rendered nonconforming by revised regulations can be exempted from meeting new amortization requirements, and therefore, be permitted to remain in existence; and 3} A separate amortization period can be established for all signs permitted under the existing ordinance rendered nonconforming by revised regulations. This would provide a longer time for property owners to recoup the value of their nonconforming signs than would be the case under the first option. Staff recommends following the second option so the City does not place sign owners in a "Catch 22" situation. Sign owners have made efforts and undergone expense to meet a substantially more restrictive sign code than was in place before 1985 and have suffered some competitive disadvantage due to the smaller signs required under current code relative to signs erected prior to 1985. Staff feels these property owners should not be further penalized by changes to the code required because of a Countywide sign control effort. Under this option, signs legally permitted since October 13, 1985, would be permanently "grandfathered," would not be subject to amortization proceedings and would otherwise be treated as a legal, conforming sign. Allowing these signs to remain would not violate the Countywide Sign Code provisions because the code allows local control over how to address nonconforming signs. .~ mws12a.91 11 12/02/91 , '.. ...,. ~. >. ", . .... ,'. . .. . . I I , . ...... , ~.~" ~. I. .....-. Staff requests the Commission direct staff to: 1) Use the Countywide Sign Code format for the Cityts revised sign regulations and 2) Provide for "grandfathering" of signs that are to be rendered nonconforming under the revised regulations and were erected legally under current sign regulations. It was questioned why the City does not wait to make additional changes to its sign code until after the County decides its direction. Mr. Polatty indicated the County will be taking up this issue in February 1992 and the City will not be that far along by then. It was suggested the City adopt its code when the County adopts theirs. Concern was expressed regarding the new amortization schedule. It was felt an incentive should be offered to make nonconforming signs conform with the code. Receive/Refer first draft of Downtown Develooment Plan prepared by staff for advertisement for public hearings (Consent R&Rl .,~;l,';~> Planning & Development staff has prepared an update to the existing Downtown Clearwater Development Plan. This update contains the following major areas of discussion: 1) A "Charter" establishing specific goals for Clearwater's Downtown; 2) An analysis of and needs identification for Downtown access, including vehicular, bicycle, mass transit and pedestrian access; 3) Four new areas are added to Downtown, including major areas on the northwest, south-central and near the East End Project; 4) Downtown Clearwater is divided into eight districts with specific analysis in the plan for each district regarding: function; linkages; assembly possibilities; design issues; and zoning issues; 5) Signage; 6) A revised statement of redevelopment necessity; 7) Condemnation policy for guiding the condemnation of private land for private purposes delineated with the Downtown Plan; and 8) A proposed revision to the Urban Center zoning. A copy of the Downtown Plan was provided with the Commission Agenda packet. Staff will be available to provide a summary presentation of the revised Downtown Plan at the Work Session and, if necessary, the Commission meeting. Several public hearings will be necessary to adopt the Downtown Plan and its associated Land Use Plan, Zoning and Land Development Code Amendments. Jim Polatty indicated a $2.3-million renovation of the Pierce 100 building has been approved by that building's board. Scott Shuford, Planning Manager, said staff is reviewing a five-year plan that will bring more people downtown for extended periods. He said the plan will be simpler and easier to understand. In response to a question, Mr. Shuford indicated residential development is part of the plan and multiple uses are also proposed. Mr. Shuford said it was important to recognize the existing assets of downtown. He said major issues include access which consists of improving downtown's appearance and capacity to make it more pedestrian friendly and to include mass transit. Four expansion Breas are also proposed. In response to a question, the City Manager indicated taxes will not be lowered but the growth in assessed values will go to the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), not the City's general fund. Mr. Shuford said outside input has not been solicited as staff wanted Commission input first. He reported the Planning & Zoning Board's initial public hearing will be held this month. ...........' mws12a.91 12 12/02/91 , . . . . . ", ,r., ' ,. .', ' . .:' . :r"l. :.. "-. PLeliminary Subdivi$ion Plat for Eark Place/Storz located between Drew Street. Gulf-to-8av Boulevard. US 19N and Hamoton Road, M&Bs 21.00 & 24.03,48.421 acres m.o.1. (Buitding Operation Holding Co.) (CM Consent) This application is for a Preliminary Subdivision Plat of 48.42 acres into three lots. The site is the northern portion of the Park Place development at the southwest corner of Hampton Road and Drew Street. Lot #1, containing 18.53 acres, is currently the subject of a site plan for two 100,000 square foot light industrial buildings and a rezoning request from General Office (OG) to the proposed zoning district of Research, Development and Office Park (RD). Lot #2 contains a total of 12.28 acres and is zoned General Office lOG), Commercial Center (CC), and an area of 2.3 acres of Aquatic Lands Interior (ALII). Lot #3 is zoned General Office (OG) and contains 14.85 acres. The proposed Park Place Boulevard, the main access road, has an 80-foot right-of- way containing 2.76 acres, traverses the property from north to south, and will connect Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard with Drew Street. The Department of Public Worksffraffic Engineering has reviewed the proposed plat and will require a blanket 1 Q-foot utilities' easement and ingress/egress easement. Mr. Polatty indicated the big issue will be tree removal. In response to a question, he indicated Public Works staff is looking at the best location for the building and requirements for retention and runoff. Ord. #5153-91 - Relatina. to City Charter: orooosina amendment to Sec. 8.04 relating to """,~ nominations of candidates for City Commission, to provide that qualifying fee and petition t~ cards are to be received by the City Clerk not less than 46 days, rather than 35 days, prior to date of election; providing for special election to be held in conjunction with regular City election in order to submit proposed City Charter amendment to voters. The Mayor said the question was confusing and requested it be restated to identify the qualifying period. Res. #91-45 - Accessina orooertv owners the costs of mowinl} or clearing owners' lots The Mayor expressed concern regarding the City continuing to clear property for absentee owners. It was indicated if these properties are in the housing target area, an effort will be made to obtain the properties. City Manager Verbal Reports - None. Other Commission Action Commissioner Fitzgerald requested the large banner at the bingo parlor in Countryside Village be investigated. Mavor Garvev reported a City volunteer team will be involved in the Courtney Campbell Causeway beautification effort and Paint Your Heart Out program. ......-/ mws12a.91 13 12/02/91 '":,~~.. ,.':: ','; ~ " " .<,}~ ..,." '. ,> " .. s.:.' :', ., , '. .' ., '. .;. , r." . / ~~ " . .... ; ~ ; m~';~,~!~~' :;':',t:,~C .:r.' ,: :.~:"i"'V't;.:;..:t.\t: '~) ,f (.:~ '.'1 :.; ~ : ~ . .~'<~.~'{ ~~.);!.: '. <', . . . .:.\. <;' ",' ".. , ...... .,., . :" . ',' ' ., .' ',' ..' ..' ~'.:.;' ... '. 0.' '~, Commissioner Reaulski questioned the status of the Stowell sanitary sewer line. The City Manager reported a meeting will be held tomorrow. /.-.... . ' Commissioner Reaulski questioned if any response had been received regarding the Dimmitt flag case. The City Attorney stated a meeting will be held tomorrow to review the proposals from Mr. Stowell. He said the parties have agreed to mediation but have set no date. He stated no word had been received regarding the flag case. The City Attorney requested the Commission review the draft of the agreement between the City Commission and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) before Thursday's meeting. Adjournment The work session adjourned at 3:15 p.m. .,~~ to \-.: mws12a.91 14 12/02/91 . ...' >".'"