02/01/1996 (2)
II 1ft" < 'II I , ~ , ~ I
, '\' , ~ - ' '.
, ,
. ~ ' i
:,:::,"
"
{i' . ,
:: ~> <I .
.", c
~f;t~~,t:'~/:":::-<;',~;:,/:'>i:i"~,""i:::~):'?":::::":t::..':': \::('::':, :: '<: : ::' :;"':;~" . ,:: :," :',
':~: "=: ',: ~l ~ , :::, , _:,.' t' ,I.:'.. ..
, , '.',. . '.."".
., .' \ '. .... .
. . :' . ~'., ,e,~', '......""': '~'"
'~
" ,
....
COMMISSION
City Commission Minutes
II
Date
~-J J) If!!'
, :~\
J,--.)
~~, I tJ Lit
\:.)
,. "I " .... ,1, . ~ .
:',Y' ,
~
""I
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
February 1, 1996
Present:
Rita Garvey
Sue A. Berfield
Fred A. Thomas
J. 8. Johnson
Robert Clark
Elizabeth M. Deptula
Kathy S. Rice
William C. Baker
Pamela K. Akin
Scott Shuford
Rich Baier
Cynthia E. Goudeau
Patricia O. Sullivan
Mayor/Commissioner
Vice-Mayor /Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
City Manager
Deputy City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
Central Permitting Director
Engineering Director
City Clerk
Board Reporter
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. The invocation was
offered by Father Edward J. Mulligan of St. Brendan1s Catholic Church. The Mayor led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily
discussed in that order.
<)
ITEM #3- Service Awards - None.
ITEM #4 - Introductions and Awards
Proclamation: National 8urn Awareness Week - February 04 -10, 1996
ITEM # 5- Presentations - None.
ITEM 1/6 - Aooroval of Minutes
Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of
January 18, 1996, as recorded and submitted in written summation by the City Clerk to
each Commissioner. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #7 - Citizens to be heard re items not on the Aaenda
Bill Kirbas recommended Commissioner Clark focus on working with the County to
address the State policy to eliminate enclaves.
John Doran thanked everyone involved for displaying banners welcoming winter
visitors. He Questioned if banners also could be displayed on the beach. He reported the
v
mcc02a.96
1
02/01/96
. '.,' .. "y , . . .' . I I. '
/~
,
CBA (Clearwater Beach Association) has purchased buttons that read "I live here, ask me,"
and distributed one to each Commissioner.
Jay Ross requested the City sell property it owns on Island Estates.
Louis Simmons complained he received a speeding ticket on Clearwater Pass
Bridge. He said the steep incline causes cars to accelerate above the posted speed limit.
He expressed concern the speed limits on each end of the bridge differ.
Rov Cadwell requested amending Ordinance #301-7 so that it would not apply to
buildings constructed prior to 1991. Mrs. Cadwell read a petition to amend the ordinance
into the record.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM #8. - Variance{s) to Sian Regulations for orooertv located at 500 Cleveland St.,
Gould and Ewing's 1 st Addition, Blk. 2, Lots 8 & 9 (Church of Scientology, SV96-01)
- "': 'J
t~'f~'-~
The applicant is requesting a variance of one wall sign to allow four wall signs. The
subject property, on the northeast corner of Cleveland Street and North Ft. Harrison
Avenue, is zoned Urban Center Core. The variance is requested to permit the existing four
wall signs to remain. An area of 48 square feet is allowed for attached signs in the Urban
Center Core. A 50% bonus is available for properties with signs judged by the Downtown
Sign Review Committee to create a positive image for this district. The Committee
approved a 30.2% area bonus for this property to allow signs oriented to Cleveland Street
with an area of 62.5 square feet.
Three of the four signs on the front of the building are permitted by the City. The
fourth sign, one of two 1 5-square foot plaques at each end of the building, was installed
without a permit. The property owner is requesting a variance to allow that plaque to
remain.
Staff feels existing conditions support variance approval. The building recently was
refurbished and restored. The applicant indicates the placement of the four signs will
complete the restoration effort and submitted an early photograph of the building that
depicts similar signs on the building's front. Staff feels the signs reflect favorably upon the
character of downtown Clearwater. The Downtown Sign Review Committee reviewed this
building's signs and determined they create a positive image for downtown.
Jeff Litton, representative, verified photographs of the property presented him by
Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford. Mr. Litton noted the time and effort spent
restoring the building.
Commissioner Barfield questioned which sign was being addressed by the variance
request. Mr. Shuford said if the variance is denied, the applicant would choose which of
the three signs would remain. Commissioner Thomas said he would have no problem with
the signs if they were truly historic. He respected and liked the refurbishment and
~
mcc02a.96
2
02/01/96
'ill .. i .,.' I
, ,\' .' "
('J
recommended removing the sign over the door or to remove "Scientology" from the
plaque. Commissioner Johnson agreed.
Commissioner Berfield questioned if the signs would be in compliance if the sign
over the door was removed. Mr. Shuford said that was the case. Commissioner Berfield
expressed concern the City would give the Scientologists an advantage over other
businesses that have not restored a building.
Mr. Litton referred to the effort it took to restore the building to its original look,
which included signage. He said the lettering referring to the Scientologists' restoration
efforts is small compared to the rest of the sign. He said the last line on the plaque
referring to the Scientologists' restoration efforts can be removed if that will meet City
Commission requirements. Commissioner Thomas requested the sign to look as if the line
never existed. Commissioner Clark said anyone who comes to the City with a request
must meet City standards.
Commissioner Clark moved to deny a variance of one wall sign on property
identified as Lots 8 and 9, Block 2, Gould & Ewing First Addition. The motion was duly
seconded.
..a.......
Mr. Shuford said if the City Commission is comfortable with the Scientologists
modifying their sign, he suggested approving the variance request with staff
recommendations for a condition and adding a condition to modify the sign within 30 days.
Commissioner Clark withdrew his motion. The seconder agreed.
.....-,/
Commissioner Clark moved to approve a variance of one wall sign to allow four wall
signs on property identified as Lots 8 and 9, Block 2, Gould & Ewing First Addition, for
meeting Sec. 45.24 Standards for Approval, items (1) M (4), subject to the following
conditions: 1) the property owner shall secure a permit for the fourth sign within 30 days
of this public hearing and 2) the sign be modified within 30 days to remove reference to
the Scientologists' restoration efforts. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
ITEM #9. - (Cont'd from 12/07/95) Public Hearing & First Readina Ord. #5942-95 M
Amending Sec. 35.11, to revise definition for IrDelicatessenlr; amending Sees. 40.383 &
40.403 to revise the unit number and floor area requirements for restaurants in
Hotels/Motels; amending Sees. 41.071,41.072 & 41.074 to provide for conditional use
permits and accessory use designations for certain types of alcoholic beverage uses (LDCA
95-21 )
The City Commission requested staff bring forward recommended modifications to
the alcoholic beverage regulations adopted in January 1995. Staff prepared an ordinance
addressing: 1) elimination of "cap" on percentage of floor area considered as a conditional
use by the Planning & Zoning Board. Current code requirements establish a small range
the Planning & Zoning Board can consider to allow alcoholic beverage uses in certain types
of uses (e.g., shopping centers and retail complexes). This has created difficulties in
processing applications for uses that exceed the "caps, It The proposed language provides
v
mcc02a.96
3
02/01/96
. , ~. ~ ," l' ,P'
, ' '
,,,,,,","\ stringent supplementary standards for approval for all uses exceeding the "cap"; 2)
, , I revisions to the definition of "delicatessen"; and 3) additional revisions in keeping with
January 4. 1996, City Commission direction addressing Planning & Zoning Board and
property owner concerns. These changes "mesh" City code with State requirements for 4~
COP-S (hotel/motel) and 4~COP-SRX (large restaurant) alcoholic beverage licenses.
On November 14, 1995, the Planning & Zoning Board unanimously recommended
adoption of this ordinance. On January 9, 1996, they were advised of Commission
direction but did not see the specific language. Board members expressed satisfaction
with proposed changes.
Mr. Shuford will provide the City Commission with the Planning & Zoning Board
comments regarding the proposed modifications before the second reading.
Commissioner Johnson moved to recommend changing the alcoholic beverage
ordinances. The motion was duly seconded.
Commissioner Berfield said she would not support these changes. She said the
original reason for the cap was to prevent the proliferation of alcoholic beverage
establishments. Mr. Shuford said frequent problems have occurred based on the range of
permitted uses the City Commission adopted a year ago. He said cases had to be granted
large parking variances or not be considered at all. He said it would be appropriate to
consider additional conditional use permits at some developments such as Pelican Walk.
He said other circumstances would not be viewed favorably. Mr. Shuford said the change
<, '~
\ ,<".) allows the Planning & Zoning Board to consider conditional uses on a case by case bases.
Commissioner Thomas felt this language was more restrictive. The Mayor noted
the language allows the Planning & Zoning Board to consider alcoholic beverage uses
above the 1 5% cap. Mr. Shuford said denials can be appealed to the City Commission.
Commissioner Thomas questioned if the City Commission could appeal a decision made by
the Planning & Zoning Board. Mr. Shuford said the City Commission has that right.
Commissioner Thomas said citizens should also have that right. The City Attorney noted
the language restricts appeals to affected parties. She said it would be most unusual for
the City Commission to appeal a decision made by a citizen board.
Commissioner Thomas noted the City Commission has tried to control the sale of
alcoholic beverages on the beach. He questioned how the City Commission could reserve
the rights of Clearwater beach citizens to appeal. The City Attorney said she will have to
review the appeal language. Commissioner Thomas said he would vote to pass the
ordinance tonight if staff come backs with language that allows citizens of the general
neighborhood to appeal Planning & Zoning Board decisions to the City Commission.
Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Thomas. Johnson and Clark and Mayor
Garvey voted "Aye"; Commissioner Berfield voted "Nay." Motion carried.
The City Attorney will provide additional information on the appeal section regarding
the rights of citizens to appeal.
,~
mcc02a.96
4
02/01/96
,"'
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5942-95 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass Ordinance #5942-95 on first reading. The
motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
tfAyes": Thomas, Johnson, Clark and Garvey.
"Nays": Berfield.
Motion carried.
ITEM # 10 - Public Hearina & First Readin~ Ord. # 5956-95 - Amending Secs. 21.10 &
42.35 to provide for temporary storage of Recreational Vehicles for lodging purposes at
the Harborview Center
Some exhibitors at Harborview Center craft shows will want to temporarily "lodge"
in their recreational vehicles for the duration of the craft show, typically two or three days.
Staff determined such lodging, on a limited scale, creates no public safety or appearance
concerns. Staff recommends approval.
On January 9, 1996, the Planning & Zoning Board approved this ordinance with a
number of changes that are included. and with the understanding they would review and
comment on the parking management plan prior to t.he City Commission's final adoption of
the ordinance.
, '}
~,....e.'"
Proposed rules for recreational vehicle parking recommend only exhibitors
authorized by the Harborvlew Center management may avail themselves of this privilege
which is limited to 10 recreational vehicles at one time. Recreational vehicles may be
parked in the designated area at the lower City Hall parking lot. Those meeting weight and
size requirements may be parked in designated areas in the ttdeck" parking area at the
Harborview Center. Authorized exhibitors are allowed to overnight park their recreational
vehicles the day preceding the exhibit's opening and must remove the vehicle by the day
after the exhibit closes. Failure to comply may result in towing of the vehicle at owner's
expense. No services (electrical. water. restrooms showers, pump-out, etc.) are available
at any parking location.
Only recreational vehicles, travel trailers, campers or like units s8all be allowed to
overnight park in the listed locations; only vehicles intended to be occupied during the
overnight period shall be stored at the specified locations. No vehicle longer than 35 feet
shall be stored at the listed locations. All stored vehicles shall be in good working order.
Prohibited at parking locations: 1) outdoor dining; 2) outdoor clotheslines; 3) use of
tents or other outdoor storage; 4) campfires or any sort of open fire; 5) repair or servicing
of vehicles; 6) consumption of alcoholic beverages; and 7) littering.
Participants will be required to execute a release form regarding personal injury or
damage to the vehicle or any personalty contained therein and/or any other agreement the
v
mcc02a.96
5
02/01/96
, '. , . ' ,~ , ,. '" : ~. ~ , \/ . ~
/'~
City Risk Management Department deems necessary to protect the City and Harborview
Center from liability claims. The City and Harborview Center management reserve the
right to require compliance with these rules and to require the removal of any vehicle
whose owner(s) are not in compliance. Loss of exhibitor privileges is another consequence
of failure to comply with these rules.
Mr. Shuford said according to Harborview Center research. several other Florida
convention centers have similar provisions for recreational vehicles and charge fees ranging
from $5 to $10 per night. He will provide the Planning & Zoning Board with these
proposed rules for their review on February 6, 1996. Mr. Shuford said staff will monitor
this activity and may return to the City Commission with recommendations for
adjustments. He said a resolution will be presented at the February 15, 1996, meeting to
adopt the proposed rules.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the City Code Amendment to allow
recreational vehicle parking at the Harborview Center. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
Mr. Shuford will report on February 12, 1996, regarding recommendations made by
the Planning & Zoning Board.
Co" l-t.
"~fld
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5956-95 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Johnson moved to pass Ordinance 1/5956-95 on first reading.
The motion was duly seconded.
Commissioner Berfield expressed concern the ordinance refers to recreational
vehicle parking in a four block area around the Harborview Center. Mr. Shuford said it had
not been determined where parking would be permitted when the ordinance was written.
The parking area will be specified in the resolution. Commissioner Barfield questioned if
the resolution can overrule the ordinance. The City Attorney said the ordinance states the
parking area will be designated and the resolution will determine that designation. The
Mayor noted the resolution will allow flexibility should a change be needed.
Upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Berfield, Thomas, Johnson, Clark and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
Commissioner Berfield expressed concern the definition of recreation vehicles
requires they be equipped with restrooms, etc. Mr. Shuford said the rules will explain the
requirement that recreational vehicles be self contained.
Commissioner Clark requested a copy of the research supplied by Harborview
Center management regarding services provided by other Florida convention centers.
Public Hearina - Second ReadinQ Ordinances
I~
mcc02a.96
6
02/01/96
, ' ,
fp .. ' . , , ' ,'~.
r",
ITEM #11 - Ord. #5889-95 - LDCA amending Sec. 35.11 to define "vehicle sales";
amending Ch. 40 to add permitted uses in various zoning districts (LDCA 95-12)
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5889-95 for second reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #5889-95 on second
and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Berfield, Thomas, Johnson, Clark and Garvey
"Nays": None.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
CONSENT AGENDA (Items #12-17) - Approved as submitted less 1/17
ITEM 1112 - Work Order for Pasco Gas Sales Office & Ooerations Center Desian to Post,
Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., Tampa, FL, for an estimated $59,100 (GAS)
, ITEM /I 13 - Purchase 1 .200 feet of 12 inch black Polvethvlene cine (for Pasco River
'Crossing) from Consolidated Pipe and Supply, Birmingham, AL, at an estimated $18,924
(GAS)
, ">>""\
_I
ITEM #14 - Aareements with: Golden CouClar Band Boosters. Inc.. Clearwater HiClh School
Band Boosters. Inc.. and Clearwater Neighborhood Housina Services. Inc. for parking of
automobiles during Spring Training season of the Philadelphia Phillies for the period
03/01/96 -03/31/96 (PR)
ITEM 111 5 - Purchase of miscellaneous. brass water fittinas from B & H Sales, Sarasota,
FL, for the period 02/02/96 -02/01/97, at an estimated $102,635.75 (PW)
ITEM #16 - Contract for Reservoir #1 - New PUffin House to Oakhurst Construction Co.,
Inc., Seminole, FL, for $199,932.66 (EN)
ITEM #17 . See below.
Commissioner Clark moved to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted less Item
#17 and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #17 - License Aareement with Alexandra of Clearwater Beach. Inc. (Steven and Lisa
Chandler), for the period 04/01/96 -04/30/11, re Pier 60 Concession Stand at Pier 60 Park
on Clearwater Beach (eM)
A 1 5-year license agreement has been negotiated between the City and Alexandra
of Clearwater Beach, Inc. for the concession stand in Pier 60 park. Agreement highlights
include: 1) City constructs building at its expense. Building includes all structural items,
u
mcc02a.96
7
02/01/96
. . ' . ' ~ ' . . I ,.,...' .
i~
i.e., built.in cabinets, counters, etc. Alexandra provides all equipment, furniture,
furnishings, etc. Alexandra provides all rental items, i.e., floats, cabanas, etc.; 2)
Alexandra will pay City $100,000 per year in monthly installments of $8,334, plus a
percentage ranging from 20% to 25% of gross sales (excluding rental income) above
$750,000, plus a flat 50% of all rental income; 3) Alexandra will pay all taxes, utilities,
and maintenance costs; 4l City may terminate if Alexandra is anyone of the following. 5
days late with any payment, files bankruptcy, vacates or abandons the premises,
understates sales by more than 3%, does not comply with Health Department rules or
does not cure any default; 5) Alexandra will allow the area to be used as a public activity
area including a Safe Zone for children, Jolley Trolley stop, City information dissemination
point, parking permit issuance, and other civic promotions and entertainment activities;
and 6) the City will provide storage space (per RFP language) for rental items used on the
beach by allowing Alexandra to use the small (400 square foot) former life guard building
at the South end of the Pier 60 parking lot. A separate agreement will be prepared for that
purpose.
The City Attorney said the revised version address concerns expressed by
Commissioner Berfield regarding the maintenance of all rental equipment. The reference to
a mortgage was deleted. Commissioner Berfield questioned if the licensee has the right to
assign the licensing agreement. The City Attorney said only with the consent of the City
Commission. Commissioner Thomas expressed concern assignment of the license
agreement be at the sole discretion of the City Commission. The City Attorney said that
negotiated provision is not included in the agreement's current language.
L:...~ Consensus was that an assignment of the license agreement must be at the sole
discretion of the City Commission.
Commissioner Thomas said it was unfair that the City Manager would be able to
cancel the agreement at her sole discretion and felt the licensee needs to retain the right
to cure. The City Attorney said Steven. Chandler has agreed to a provision allowing a , 5-
day period to cure which is included in the agreement.
Bruce Harland, attorney representing Steven Chandler, said his client will accept the
assignment restriction provision.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a 1 5-year License Agreement between
the City of Clearwater and Alexandra of Clearwater Beach, Inc. (Steven and Lisa
Chandler); beginning on April " 1996 and ending April 30, 2011, for the use of certain
described property located at the Pier 60 park on Clearwater beach, including a provision
that reassignment of the lease must be at the sole discretion of the City Commission and
that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously. '
OTHER ITEMS ON CITY MANAGER REPORT
ITEM # 18 - Vogel. Develooment Agreement status (CP)
'.~
mcc02a.96
8
02/01/96
t ,'> ' . <", _ '.. /' , ~ ' " , .,. ,
i~
,
According to City Commission direction, staff attempted to negotiate a
development agreement for property adjacent to the proposed extension of Landmark Drive
south of Enterprise Road. In her January 22, 1996 memorandum, the City Manager
indicated staff was unable to negotiate a satisfactory development agreement in a timely
fashion and acquire right.of-way along the proposed Landmark Drive extension. To
expedite roadway construction, staff plans to work within the existing City owned right.of-
way between Enterprise Road and Marlo Boulevard. Eventual development of the Vogel
property will require sewer service provided by the City. Annexation will be necessary and
the property will have to adhere to City development requirements. The City intends to
require the dedication of right-of-way along the west side of the Vogel property to allow
for future improvement of Landmark Drive.
In his January 26, 1996 letter, Marcus Vernon, attorney for James and Hazel
Vogel, indicated his client is prepared to dedicate the needed right-of-way for the
Landmark Drive extension with City assurances regarding the development scheme of the
property.
The City Manager requested she bo allowed to continue negotiations.
'.~)
Commissioner Thomas questioned if the City has right~of-way to continue landmark
Drive south of the park. Engineering Director Rich Baier said the City has 40 feet in some
areas and 80 in others. He said the City lacks land necessary for water treatment and
mitigation. Future plans are to extend Landmark to Union. Commissioner Thomas
questioned if staff has done a study regarding the traffic impact of that extension. Mr.
Baier said a study has not been done but estimated the road would carry between 7,000
and 8,000 cars per day. Commissioner Thomas felt neighbors have a legitimate concern
that landmark Drive could be a major roadway in the future.
Marcus Vernon, Attorney for the Vogels, sald Clearwater contacted Mr. Vogel
regarding the City's desire for the right.of~way. He said the Vogels have attempted to be a
good neighbor. He said it was smart of Commissioner Berfield to raise the park access
options. He noted permit deadlines for extending landmark Drive are approaching and
expressed concern the City may "shoot itself in the foot" if they allow these permits to
expire without constructing the planned road. He said the Vogels have not created these
problems. When they tried to improve the area, the City had assured them landmark Drive
eventually would be extended. He reported the City purchased part of the Vogel property
in anticipation of retention needs for the extension, between the Vogel's undeveloped tract
and their earlier development.
The Mayor noted years ago Mr. Vogel had made the initial contact to the City. Mr.
Vernon said the Vogels had submitted a site plan at that time. Commissioner Thomas
questioned if the Vogels could access their undeveloped land if they regained some of the
land purchased by the City. Mr. Vernon said that was not the case. Once the City made
assurances landmark Drive would be developed, the alternate right.of-way was blocked by
the current shopping center. If the intent had been to access the undeveloped property
through the shopping center, the Vogels would have designed the development differently.
~~;
mcc02a.96
9
02/01/96
, I . J ,"" , . '. . , j . '. ~. ... < , . ..' '. . " > .' ',j . ... ... ~', ..', ' L '
t~
Mr. Vernon said the current design is based on the City.s long term promise to extend
Landmark Drive.
ITEM If 19 - Landmark Orive extension
In October 1972, the City purchased Lake Chautauqua Park with matching funds
from a LWCF (Land and Water Conservation Fund) grant. LWCF, a Federal program under
the NPS (National Park Service), is administered on a State level by the FOEP (Florida
Department of Environmental Protection).
When the Grant Agreement was signed, the City agreed to develop the park in
accord with approved plans: 1) overnight camping area (since removed); 2) picnic facilities;
3) water oriented activities; and 4) nature trails. Development did not occur because the
City did not have an adequate public access road to the park.
A September 29, 1986, letter from the Department of Natural Resources lnow part
of the DEP) reminded the City that LWCF regulations require the park to be developed and
O!'lAn to the public withir:t ,five years of purchase. In 1995, the DEP conducted a
... ...- -.. -
compliance inspection of Florida parks that recsiv.:!:! LWCF grant funds. Their April 19,
1995, letter to the City indicated Lake Chautauqua Park was still undeveloped and if it is
not developed and opened to the public, the NPS could designate the park as a
"conversion..t The City would have to provide and develop replacement property for public
recreational use. DEP requested the City submit a development plan within 60 days and a
time schedule for opening the park.
<;>
The City's FY 1995/96 CIP budget contains funding to extend Landmark Drive
south of Enterprise Road to the park. The City Commission approved the development
plan of Lake Chautauqua Park and extension construction. Staff submitted a development
plan and time schedule to the DEP for completion of Phase One. The DEP and NPS
approved the plan and time schedule.
On November 13, 1995, a public meeting was held at Countryside Library to gather
information and comments from residents and homeowner associations regarding the
park's design. Specifics concerning the development include: 1) 1 st phase development
scheduled for completion by November 20, 1996 with a $260,000 budget to include
entrance road, parking for approximately 50 cars, picnic tables and grills. nature trails,
interpretive signing, entrance gate, etc.; 2) 2nd phase development scheduled for
completion by June 1, 1997 with a $120,000 budget may include a restroom, fishing
dock, ramp for canoes or other non~motorized water craft, etc.; 3) the park will close
around sundown daily; 4) a minimum 1 OO~foot vegetative buffer along the park's North
side will separate it from residences; 5) Parkstream Avenue will remain barricaded with no
vehicular or pedestrian access to the park; 6) the only park entrance will be from Landmark
Drive; and 7) the current unpaved maintenance roadway along the park's North side is
secured for maintenance vehicles only and will not provide public access.
Regarding the Landmark Drive extension: 1) In March 1960, Pinellas County
obtained 33 feet of land for a public road, drainage and/or utility purposes only; 2) on
~J
mcc02a.96
10
02/01/96
t'lt.~
, .' ~" ~
~ , I~I-.~'- i
~ 'J
~~
October 7. 1974, the City Commission adopted the official thoroughfare plan as prepared
by the Planning Department and Parking and Traffic Committee to extend Landmark Drive
South from Enterprise Road to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard; 3) in 1979. the developer of the
Shady Oak Farms/Country Villas South Subdivision was required to reserve right-of~way for
the Landmark Drive extension; 4) in 1986, the City Commission approved reservation of
right-of-way from the Country Park Development for the Landmark Drive extension; 5) in
1989, the Landmark Drive extension was advertised as a Penny far Pinellas Project and
listed in the brochure when the tax was approved; 6) in 1990, the Commission approved a
contract to prepare construction plans for the landmark Drive extension to Union Street;
7) in 1991, plans were shelved until construction dollars were included in the CIP budget;
and 8) in October 1995, the Commission approved the City budget that contained CIP
funding of the Landmark extension from Enterprise Road to just north of Marlo Boulevard.
Construction plans depict a three-lane facility with a center turn-lane 12-feet in
width and two tr8vellanes 14-feet wide. Several alternatives include two travel lanes and
two bicycle lanes. Five-foot sidewalks are included. Implementation of bicycle lanes is
dependent an a roadway with at least a 70-foot right-of-way width.
The extension will address storm water treatment and include a retention pond and
mitigation area within City owned property east of Landmark Drive and adjacent to and
south of Mullet Creek. The stormwater treatment and retention pond area, plus its
mitigation site, is larger than one acre and will provide a diverse habitat for wildlife.
Construction of the box culvert bridge over Mullet Creek will allow improved conveyance
of water as it is the outfall for upstream flooding in and around the Northwood Subdivision.
Current plans do not include a Saber Drive connection to the Landmark Drive extension
but do depict a connection to Marlo Boulevard. In response to concerns from citizens in
and around the Marlo Boulevard neighborhood, Engineering has suggested options to
address "cut through" traffic: 1) cul-de-sacing Marlo Boulevard at McMullen-Booth Road or
2) restricting ingress traffic from the landmark Drive extension into the Marlo Boulevard
neighborhood with raised tubular delineators or a raised separator down the center of the
Landmark Drive extension. Traffic and circulation issues have not been finalized and await
further input from the community and City Commission.
Staff has reviewed alternate routes to the park. The City does not own right-ot-
way to construct a roadway to the park from Union Street and condemnation would be
required to acquire remaining land. The City owns no parcels for water treatment and a
mitigation site as required by Federal and State law. Access from Union Street would not
address Marlo residents' concerns regarding access to McMullen-Booth Road. Over past
years. residents have attempted to erect a signal at the intersection at McMullen-Booth
Road and Marlo Boulevard. The signal does not meet appropriate warrants and was not
approved by the County.
I Although not the purpose of the November 13, 1995, meeting, several residents
related opposition or support to the Landmark Drive extension. The extension of landmark
Drive is needed: 1) to provide adequate public access to Lake Chautauqua Park; 2) to
reduce park traffic from the East on Marlo Boulevard, a residential road; 3) to provide a
second ingress/egress option for Marlo Boulevard area residents; and 4) first phase of
mcc02a.96
11
02/01/96
, ,.... . .' . , . . .' ~ . .. ' . < .~ . ,. .' .' '.
(~
( .'
Landmark Drive development which eventually will be extended South to Union Street.
Benefits of the Landmark Drive extension include: 1) Clearwater citizens will have
adequate access to a developed park; 2) Marlo Boulevard area residents will have less park
traffic through their subdivision; 3) access and frontage will be available to new residential
development of 33 homes; 4) Northwood Estatest residents will have improved drainage
conditions as the outfall is upgraded and treatment pond is constructed; 5) a diverse
habitat will be created in place of a current meadow; 6} a neighborhood will have an
alternate travel route; and 7) a remote/inaccessible area frequented by teens, etc. will be
lighted and accessible to the Clearwater Police Department.
Mr. Baier said traffic counts on Landmark Drive north of SR 580 decreased from
8,000 cars in 1991 to 7,255 in 1992 and increased to 8,200 cars in 1993. He had heard
Landmark Drive is used as a cut-through road. He said the extension would not connect to
Saber and would only connect to Marlo if requested. He said the extension could include
two bicycle lanes and two standard lanes. His recommendation will be based on
negotiations with the Vogels for right.of.way. '
Mr. Baier said the received many calls from neighborhood residents who were
confused about the proposed extension. Some Marlo Boulevard residents indicated after
they had signed a petition to access the park via Marlo, they realized the amount of traffic
that would result from that connection would be greater than the six or seven cars a day
estimated by those gathering signatures. The City Manager noted the City Commission t s
recommendation to provide information to residents of the Marlo Boulevard neighborhood
before making a final decision regarding connecting Marlo to the Landmark Drive
extension.
........,..'
Parks & Recreation Director Ream Wilson said in 1972, the 40.acre lakefront park
property cost $100,000. The City cannot repay the State for it. If the City does not
develop the park, the conversion process will require the City to develop a similar park
elsewhere. He did not know the current fair market value of the park. Commissioner
Thomas noted the propertyts value is diminished because its wetlands would make it
difficult to develop.
Commissioner Berfjeld questioned the standards for accessibility. Mr. Wilson said
the City would have to provide an adequate roadway to make the park available to the
public. He said Marlo Boulevard residents had opposed using their street as access so the
City waited until extending Landmark Drive was possible. Commissioner Berfield
questioned if accessibility had to be via a standard roadway or if a bicycle trail would be
considered acceptable. The City Manager expressed concern park visitors arriving in
vehicles would have to park on Marlo Boulevard if the only access was via a bicycle trail.
Commissioner Berfield questioned if the definition of accessibility is limited to automobiles.
The City Attorney indicated she did not know. Commissioner Berfield referred to letters
received from Northwood Estates residents who favored opening the park. She said
resident expressed concern about losing the park, not building a roadway. The Mayor
expressed concern Clearwater residents who live far from the park would be denied
entrance if access is limited to a bicycle path.
'---'
mcc02a.96
12
02/01/96
.., . ~ '.' "., .' ' -.. . ~ . ' . ' . . .. '. ..
'~
I ,
. I
L~~
~
In answer to a question, Mr. Wilson said the park is adjacent to Camp Soule.
Commissioner Thomas questioned if the City is successful in acquiring Camp Soule from
the Boy Scouts, could public access be provided through that property. Mr. Wilson said
this may be possible. Commissioner Thomas recommended combining the park with Camp
Soule and not extending Landmark Drive. He said if the Boy Scouts do not agree to the
proposed operation plan far Camp Soule, the City could use the money for the Landmark
Drive extension to match the Camp Soule Grant and operate the park without the Scouts.
Mr. Wilson said the Park Service and FOEP would have to approve combining the Boy
Scout property (if it is secured) with Lake Chautauqua Park. Mr. Baier expressed concern
the City will have a problem if they cannot provide access to the park by November and do
not meet established deadlines. If work does not begin until the summer, it will be too (ate
to substantially complete the access and meet DEP's mandate. Commissioner Berfjeld
suggested contacting DEP and requesting their approval for a more natural access way.
Mr. Baier reiterated the deadline for park development and access is November 1996. The
City has met DEP requirements by submitting a time table and site plan. Staff will have to
see if DEP will entertain an amendment to those plans.
Sam Parter-Katz, former Country Park Homeowner Association president, said most
residents in her subdivision favor the park but believe another access should be explored.
She expressed concern the area's natural beauty is quickly diminishing.
Joel Katz of Country Park said his subdivision has many children and neighborhood
events. He noted the effects of widening SR 580 and did not want that happening to
them. He opposed additional road construction until the impact of the McMullen-Booth
Road widening is known. He wanted the environment to remain beautiful.
Judith Troutman, a Clearwater resident since 1974, said she has been waiting for
the Landmark Drive extension since 1980. She said those who live adjacent to the
Landmark right-of-way were aware of the plans for the road when they purchased their
property. She noted the MPO had denied the City's approval for a traffic light at the
McMullen-Booth Road/Marlo Boulevard intersection. It is difficult for her to turn left onto
McMullen.Booth Road to reach her teaching position at Countryside High School.
Gerald Kashinski, Country Villas resident, said he has been waiting a long time for
the Landmark Drive extension. He noted the need for some traffic controls for residents
when they enter or depart the neighborhood. He felt the park is a side issue. When
McMullen-Booth Road is opened, access will be more difficult. He said there may be a
problem with cut through traffic. Mr. Kashinski expressed concern regarding the danger to
children who must be picked up and dropped off by school buses on McMullen-Booth
Road.
Carl Wortham, acting chair of Country Park Homeowner Association, said most of
his subdivisions 400 residents strongly oppose the Landmark Drive extension. A petition
from the Country Park and Country Vinas subdivisions opposed the extension. He said two
additional petitions will be presented. Mr. Wortham expressed concern regarding
neighborhood preservation and property values diminishing. He expressed concern the
extension would continue to Union.
mcc02a.96
13
02/01/96
. , . , ' , '.' I"~ I'. .. . L . I ~'.."' .. " , - . L '
;".....'"'"'
,
Raymond Hunt opposed the Landmark extension. If it is built, he did not want it to
connect with Marlo Boulevard and create a thoroughfare. He said when the Landmark
Drive extension was proposed originally, McMullen-Booth Road was not a six-lane road. If
access to the park is necessary, he would rather it be via Marlo Boulevard. He expressed
concern about compromising the safety of children and diminishing property values.
Bob Reeves said he lives near the proposed extension. He questioned if the
Landmark Drive extension was being proposed to access the park or meet an alternate
agenda.
Donald StrasbourQ said when staff discussed the development in December, the
park was to be passive with 1 2 to 15 parking spaces. He said the number of parking
spaces now has increased to 50. He said the 8,000 to 12,000 cars who use Landmark
Drive daily wiH continue South when it is extended. He recommended using the money for
the extension elsewhere.
Jeff Warring said he lives on Saber Drive and originally opposed the Landmark Drive
extension. He is concerned about the preservation of natural areas but noted if access is
not provided, the land for the park will be developed with housing. He said Mr. Baier has
bent over backwards to be fair to area residents. He noted options exist for Marlo
Boulevard and Saber Drive will not connect with the Landmark Drive extension. He felt a
closed Landmark Drive extension is the best the resident will have. He said losing the park
would be the biggest loss of all. He said he would support a bicycle trail if one would
) meet access requirements.
. ...,'~
Joe RayhiH expressed concern regarding the amount of conflicting information. He
said he counted the cars on Landmark Drive and felt there is a great deal more traffic than
the Engineering Department is reporting. He opposed the Landmark Drive extension. He
felt the road is bGi"H QMt5l\ded to meet the needs of a developer. He recommended
connecting Lake Chautauqua Park to Camp Soule and making the park into a wild life
preserve.
Mr. Baier clarified the traffic data presented to the Commission. Traffic counts
presented at Monday's Work Session referred to landmark Drive traffic in the area of
Eagle Estates. The estimate of 250 cars per day accessing the park was based on a
greater number of parking spaces. The number of spaces has been reduced to
approximately 50. In answer to a question, he said the current concept for the Landmark
Drive extension would not connect with any subdivision. He said the extension is
estimated to cost $900,000, not $1.4-million.
The City Manager reported if the Landmark Drive extension is not built, the Vogel
development will need access. The City Attorney said from a legal standpoint, the Vogel
property is not landlocked. City right-of-way is indicated from Landmark Drive or Saber
Drive. If Landmark Drive is not extended, the Vogels will attempt to access their
development via Saber Drive. She said that is a public right-of-way and the City will face
litigation if they attempt to block it. She said access to that property is a concern. In
v
mcc02a.96
14
02/01/96
t '.. " ' .' , ,.,..., ,....r
f~
answer to a question, the City Attorney indicated the property is zoned for residential and
office.
Commissioner Thomas felt the owner had created his own problem by the way he
developed his other property. The City Attorney agreed the property was once part of a
larger parcel. Commissioner Thomas felt the City should not be concerned about the
property owner's access because the property owner blocked his own access. The City
Attorney said City right.of.way adjoins the subject property. Commissioner Thomas noted
the City has the right to vacate the City's right-of-way. He noted the issue is public
access to the park.
Commissioner Johnson said he received several calls today regarding the extension.
Half the callers supported it and half of them opposed it. He said this seems like another
program where City attempts to develop City-owned property is creating problems
between neighbors. He said the City Commission is trying to do the best they can and
trying to satisfy everyone without taking anything away from anyone. The City is not
contemplating dumping traffic on any neighborhood. He asked that residents appreciate
the City Commission is trying to work out a solution that is good for everyone. The Mayor
agreed.
Commissioner Clark noted Commissioners Berfield and Thomas had offered two
options tonight and closure was impossible. He said he would not support the extension
until the options had been explored. He said he ;s not saying if the options are not feasible
that he will not support the extension at a later date.
~ "'.'\
''4k-~f
Commissioner Thomas recommended closure based on the option of connection via
Camp Soule or returning the Landmark Drive right-of-way to adjacent neighbors less the
'and required for the bicycle trail. The City Attorney expressed concern staff needs to
clarify if access via automobile is a requirement. Commissioner Clark said limiting options
was not acceptable.
Commissioner Johnson moved to continue this item until staff can investigate the
options. The motion was duly seconded.
Mayor Garvey said the need for public access to public land is the ultimate goal.
She noted the purchase of the Camp Soule property is not guaranteed. The Landmark
Drive extension has been on the map since 1960 and she noted some residents would like
additional access to their subdivisions.
Commissioner Thomas agreed the public should have access to the park. He felt it
would be prudent for the City Commission to rethink the planned extension.
Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
The Commission recessed from 8:33 to 8:50 p.m.
u
mcc02a.96
15
02/01/96
. ,~ ,,' . " .' , . ,,-. ' .' . <'. '. \. ~
f",
ITEM #20 - Construction Contract - Pier 60 Park, inclusive of Concession Building, Pavjlion,
covered Playground and Park amenities to Caladesi Construction Company, Largo. FL, for
$1,210,425; approve transfer of $135,521 to the project code from the unappropriated
retained earnings of the General Fund (EN}
A conceptual plan previously presented to the Commission depicted a park inclusive
of a concession building, covered pavilion, and covered playground. The City Commission
indicated they wanted the park to exhibit a nautical seascape theme, preserve open space
and vista, and provide shade far the playground area. Plans were prepared after several
meetings with key staff members from the Marina, Parks & Recreation, and City
Management team.
I<}
The plans depict: 1) an 1,800 square foot concession building, increased in size
from 1.500 square fAet to accommodate PineHas County Health Code requirements for
rest rooms. The building was relocated tCi the East for construction below the base flood
elevation of 12.5 NGVD; 2) considering the difficulty in maintaining appropriate turf grass
on the beach, Parks & Recreation moved the sod line eastward to improve long term
aesthetics; 3) the original conce ptual plan of a 1 21-foot diameter playground covering was
estimated to cost more than $200,000, be cold and dark in the winter, and difficult to
construct to accommodate 120 mph dynamic wind loads was replaced with two smaller
structures; 4) Commission concerns that the park's facade mirror Pier GOts seascape
nautical theme were addressed; 5) a portico midway along the promenade was replaced by
an open nautical truss span for a $40,000 savings; and 6) Engineering, Parks &
Recreation, and Public Works crews provided excavation. installation of landscaping,
concrete flat work, grading, sign manufacturing, etc., to maintain a value engineered
budget and save approximately $100,000.
The project will start about February 5, 1996, and is scheduled for completion by
June 28, 1996. The current advertisement yielded three bids. The lowest bid is
approximately $200,000 less than the rejected sole bid to the project advertisement during
the holiday season.
Funding of $169,513 is available in the CIP (Capital Improvement Project) for the
construction of a beach pavilion. Additional funds of $139,270 are available in Recreation
Impact Fees. The balance of funding, $1,037,463, will be provided with the appropriation
of unappropriated retained earnings of the General Fund at first quarter. The total is
$135,821 higher than the recommended bid contract amount due to the inclusion of the
playground apparatus to be provided by a separate contractor and a 5% construction
contingency. Revenues from the concession lease at an estimated $1 50,000 per year will
be captured in the General Fund as a General Fund revenue.
Mr. Baier reported recreation fees can be used even if the playground is not
constructed. Recreation fees cannot be used for the concession stand or capital
improvements. Mr. Baier reviewed the conceptual plan and site plan. He displayed a
rendering of the current vista and sketches of the view after the proposed buildings are
constructed. Commissioner Thomas suggested if the playground is not built and the
pavilion is moved, the view of the Gulf would be less intrusive. Mr. Baier said the pavilion
, ,,~
mcc02a.96
16
02/01/96
. . " ~ " . "j Ir. . . . .....' ,
(~
would be more useful in its present location. The Mayor said when the sign is erected, it
will change the vista.
Commissioner Clark expressed concern a wind tunnel will be created. Mr. Baier did
not think the structures would create a problem worse than the present configuration. The
Mayor noted a fence would be constructed. The Mayor said beach residents have stated
they want a pavilion. Mr. Baier said if the pavilion and playground are eliminated, the cost
of the project would be reduced by $400,000. The Mayor said she liked the design and
questioned why it should be changed.
Commissioner Johnson noted the City Commission had several meetings on this
subject. He noted Commission direction was to enter into an agreement with Mr. Chandler
(Alexandra) based on this area being a park. He felt it was a personal affront to Mr.
Chandler for the City to contemplate changing plans at this late date. He said he likes the
site plan and felt the project should continue as is. Commissioner Thomas supported the
project if the buildings could be constructed and vista maintained. The Mayor noted the
vista has increased and an activity center is being provided on the beach.
Paul J. KeHey, new President of the Beach Chamber of Commerce, said the Beach
Chamber of Commerce recommends proceeding with the project as proposed. In answer
to a question, Mr. Kelley said the executive committee voted unanimously regarding this
issue.
" "\\
"'\~5'<I
Steven Fowler, President of the Greater Clearwater Chamber of Commerce, said the
beach area council voted unanimously to support the current plan.
John Doran said to just do it.
Gerry Huskan, representative of Sunsets at Pier 60, urged completion of the
proposed facility. She said it would enhance the beach's family orientation.
Anne Garris requested the City Commission not even talk about doing away with
the playground. She did not think the roofs on the playground and pavilion would do
anything to block the vista. She said beach residents have been waiting for this project for
a long time and recommended the Commission just do it.
Sheila Cole said the Beautification Committee reviewed the plans and did not feel
the vista would be spoiled. She said the view is beautiful and will be visible after the
proiect is built. She recommended the Commission go forward with the plans.
Commissioner Berfield moved to award a contract for Pjer 60 Park (96-8) inclusive
of the Concession Building, Pavilion, Covered Playground and Park amenities, to Caladesi
Construction, Co. of Largo, FL for the sum of $1,210.425 which is the lowest responsible
bid received in accordance with plans/specifications, and approve a transfer of $135,521
to the project code from the unappropriated retained earnings of the General Fund, and
that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
~,r:J
mcc02a.96
17
02101/96
. '. " I '\.... ~ < ' .' . .. -I. . .
~
ITEM #21 - Parkina 50ace Utilization Agreements for Clearwater Beach (CP)
Mr. Shuford reported a great deal of concern has been expressed regarding this
issue and recommended a continuance to allow the concerns to be addressed.
Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this issue until February 15, 1996. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Berfield requested interested parties to contact Mr. Shuford with
their concerns.
ITEM #22 - First ReadinQ Ord. #5982.96 - relating to false fire alarms; amending Sec. 5.25
to provide an alarm user 2 courtesy warnings and to require an alarm user to pay an
administrative fee of $22.50 for city's review of written evidence from a licensed alarm
company that the alarm system causing a false alarm has been inspected and repaired (FD)
When Suppression forces determine a false alarm has occurred, the incident report
is forwarded to the Fire Prevention Division and a Notice of Violation is sent to the property
owner by certified mail. The property owner has 15 days to repair the system and provide
notification of same. No property owner has allowed the 15.day period to elapse.
(' "")
....,~-
This proposed change will require the property owner to submit documentation plus
a $22.50 administrative fee to cover the City's costs to review written evidence that the
alarm system has been inspected and repaired.
Commissioner Johnson moved to amend the code to authorize collection of an
administrative fee for processing false fire alarm incident reports. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5982-96 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass Ordinance #5982-96 on first reading. The
motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Berfield. Thomas, Johnson, Clark and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
nEM #23 - Interlocal Agreement with New Port Richev (NPR); acceot Franchise Ordinance
1388; and Res. #96-06 - Accepting the Franchise Privilege and Concession of the City of
New Port Richey, Florida, for the purpose of furnishing gas within NPR and to its
inhabitants, and approving the interlocal agreement related thereto (GAS)
On January 2, 1996, the New Port Richey City Council approved on second reading
an Interlocal Agreement and Franchise Ordinance with the City of Clearwater to allow CGS
(Clearwater Gas System) to provide natural gas service to New Port Richey citizens. The
Interlocal Agreement, which incorporates the Franchise ordinance as part of the
y
mcc02a.96
18
02/01/96
. '
'. '. I' , .' ".1,.... ".' < .~ ~ '"- . " ,. ·
J' .,'
~ ...
'''1
I . ; I.
agreement, provides the City a 30 year non-exclusive right to supply natural gas service
and to construct, operate, and maintain all facilities necessary to supply gas to the City of
New Port Richey and its citizens. The agreement provides for CGS to collect a 6%
franchise fee from New Port Richey natural gas consumers and remit it to the City of New
Port Richey. On January 4, 1996, the City Commission awarded a contract to A&L
Underground, Inc., which provides the labor and materials necessary to install a G-inch gas
main along US 19 for the trunk mainline to bring natural gas service to the cities of New
Port Richey and Port Richey.
Commissioner Berfield noted the agreement is non exclusive and questioned if
another gas company also would be permitted to supply gas service to New Part Richey.
The City Attorney reported another company first would have to obtain approval from the
PSC (Public Service Commission). She said another company could sell bottled gas. The
City Manager noted the, PSC broke red the agreement awarding this territory to CGS and
felt the PSC would protect the territory boundaries.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve an Interlocal Agreement and accept
Franchise Ordinance # 1 388 with the City of New Port Richey, thereby enabling Clearwater
Gas System to provide natural gas service to New Port Richey and that the appropriate
officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
,'...':.
~, .",..~
The City Attorney presented Resolution #96-02 and read it by title only.
Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Resolution #96-02 and authorize the
appropriate officials to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call,
the vote was:
"Ayes"; Berfield, Thomas, Johnson, Clark and Garvey
"Nays": None.
ITEM #24 - Suncoast SailinQ Campaign request for fundinq
The Suncoast Sailing Campaign, headquartered at the Clearwater Sailing Center, is
training for the 1996 Olympics and competing for participation. They have requested a
$5,000 advertising/sponsorship and $5,000 matching fund sponsorship in return for
providing the City with billboard space on their motor home, van and boat. The vehicles
would provide the City with a travelJng billboard and water billboard advertising
Clearwater. In her January 31, 1996, m~morandum, Director of Tourism Development
Jean Sherry supported the request. She said Clearwater is an exciting destination for
sailors of all skill levels. Support of the Clearwater Olympic Team will provide exceptional
domestic and international exposure to a highly diverse demographic market that will
translate into awareness and interest in Clearwater as a destination.
Jill Nickerson, representative for the Suncoast Sailing Campaign. said their
affiliation with the Sailing Center has brought a great deal of international competition to
Clearwater. She reported the DCA (Downtown Clearwater Association) has adopted them
y
mcc02a.96
19
02/01/96
'1-" ' j ,.,. 'I \' . ~., .' . . \ ".", .
f~
but noted it costs approximately $300,000 to reach the Olympics. The team is attracting
a great deal of press. A two.person team recently tinished second in the St. Petersburg
event. She said the team represents Clearwater's best hope for representation in the
Olympics. Ms. Nickerson said their request is for the purchasing of advertising, not a
donation. Their boat attracts attention an every beach it visits and they are one of the
only teams permitted to exhibit the Olympic logo on their sails. Currently, they are
supported by several local businesses and their efforts depend on donations. She said this
is a City effort.
In answer to a question, she said Clearwater could have its name on the sails or
both sides of the hull. She recommended the hull because it is always exposed. Not all
sponsors get signage. Ms. Nickerson said the City can provide them with art work of their
choice. Advertising on the hull would be shared with Home Depot. She pointed out the
boats return to the beaches and provide a great deal of exposure to the public. She said
the team uses Clearwater's Sailing Center as their home base, making Clearwater one of
the few International Sailing Centers in the Country.
I:;~, ~
Commissioner Thomas noted the Clearwater Aquatic Team had requested funds to
help an Olympic qualifier last year. The City Clerk reported the Aquatic Team had
requested a greater percentage of the revenues in order to fund expenses. Commissioner
Johnson expressed concern about setting a precedent. Mayor Garvey felt advertising
should be considered. Ms. Nickerson suggested the City consider the return for their
money. She noted this would provide a great deal of advertising exposure and would
promote revenues. The team would like to say they are Team Clearwater. She reported
the team will soon be attending a training camp in Miami with the Austrians. She said this
is a business proposition and the team would be giving a lot for the dollar.
Commissioner Clark noted the Olympic sailing venue will be held in Savannah, not
Atlanta. He noted local press and television coverage does not help Clearwater attract
tourists. The Mayor noted visitors to beaches where HIe boat is sailed will see
Clearwater's advertising. Ms. Nickerson said the Olympic venue will occur in many places
although the games start in Atlanta. She said the team has to remove the logos during the
Olympics but will put them back on afterward. She reported the team travels regularly
from Canada to Key West and will travel between 80,000 and 100,000 miles to 49 events
in the next 12 months. Commissioner Berfield noted the City will receive a great deal of
attention if the team wins a gold medal. Ms. Nickerson said the City will attract attention
even if the team is not that successful. She said the team recently purchased all new
equipment and are dedicated to competing in the Olympics.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a $5,000 advertising/sponsorship and
$ 5 ,000 matching fund sponsorship in return for providing the City with billboard space on
the hull of their boat. The motion was duly seconded.
The City Manager indicated the budget could be adjusted at first quarter to meet
this funding request. Ms. Nickerson said the team would be happy to participate in
downtown events. Commissioner Barfield requested the team have Clearwater on their
shirts. Ms. Nickerson said they could. '
y
mcc02a.96
20
02/01/96
I . I . I . ~ . . ,~ ..,". I ' . .' #- ~ '.' \
.;
"')
r ,I
Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Berfield, Thomas and Mayor Garvey
voted "Aye"; Commissioners Johnson and Clark voted "Nay." Motion carried.
Ms. Nickerson invited City Commission members to experience the thrill of riding a
catamaran.
ITEM #25 - Direction re aooealina Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) decision in Meador
tBayview) case
In the January 18, 1996 letter. the PPC (Pinellas Planning Council) forwarded a
copy of the Notice of Denial concerning Clearwater Case IICW 95-58 regarding the Meador
Bayview property on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, As the City is technically the applicant under
the countywide planning process, the City could apply for an administrative hearing
regarding this issue. The City Attorney recommended the City appeal only in cases in
which the City is truly the applicant.
Commissioner Johnson moved for the City not to appeal the PPC decision regarding
the Meador Bayview property on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
!TEM #26 - Airoort Authoritv - 1 aopointment (ClK)
I, 'l' ~ e,
"J
''''~r;.
Commissioner Thomas moved to reappoint Charles Silcox. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #27 ~ Desion Review Board - 1 appointment (ClK)
Commissioner Clark moved to appoint Gary Young. The motion was duly seconded.
It was noted Alex Pliska had applied recently for an appointment. He is completing
his second term on the Development Code Adjustment Board after serving since 1990. It
was felt his expertise would be an asset to the newly formed Design Review Board.
Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Berfield and Johnson voted "Aye";
Commissioners Thomas and Clark and Mayor Garvey voted "Nay. tt Motion failed.
Commissioner Johnson moved to appoint Alex Plisko, Jr. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #28 ~ Develoement Code Adjustment Board - 2 aopointments (eLK}
Commissioner Johnson moved to appoint Mark Jonnatti. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
The second appointment was continued.
v
mcc02a.96
21
02/01/96
. .' ..' ..". 'i. . . ,J ,'".
'i't' ,c ~. .
n
ITEM #29 - Marine Advisory Board - 1 aooointment (eLK)
Commissioner Clark moved to appoint William W. Wilhelm. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #30 - Historic Preservation Board - 1 aooointment (elK)
Commissioner Barfield moved to appoint David C. Berry. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #31 - Other Pending Matters - None.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
ITEM #32 - First Reading Ordinances
a) Ord. #5957-96 - Vacating a portion of drainage & utility easement lying in Lot 153,
Woodgate of Countryside Unit One (Rubins I Jacobs, V95-161
The City Attorney presented Ordinance 1f5957-96 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Thomas moved to pass Ordinance #5957-96 on first reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll can, the vote was:
. f~~;~
7)~;11
"Ayes": Berfield, Thomas, Johnson, Clark and Garvey.
"Nays": None.
ITEM #33 - Resolutions
,
a) Res. #96-09 - Demolition Lien - 1003 LaSalle Street, Greenwood Manor, Lots 9 & 10
(Rooks)
The City Attorney presented Resolution #96-09 and read it by title only.
Commissioner Clark moved to pass and adopt Resolution #96-09 and authorize the
appropriate officials to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call,
the vote was:
"Ayes": Barfield, Thomas, Johnson, Clark and Garvey
"Nays": None.
ITEM #34 - Other City Attorney Items
0) Requesting Arnold &. Porter as outside counsel and Rice, Williams as consultants for
cable negotiations with Time Warner & GTE
v
mcc02a.96
22
02/01/96
. , J' \. I . .' ,.' ", ,_' ~, ' .... - " .' I ., .' . ,.1
(..~
, "
The City Attorney requested Commission approval to continue using the law firm of
Arnold & Porter as the City's outside counsel for cable franchise agreement. In addition to
negotiations with Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse, staff anticipates using
the firm in cable franchise negotiations with GTE. The City Attorney indicated staff also
wishes to continue using Rice Williams as technical consultants during negotiations.
The City Attorney said attorney fees are expected to cost $25,000 for negotiations
with GTE and $50,000 for negotiations with Time Warner. The fees will be reimbursed if
there is no closure an the negotiations. If a franchise is successfully negotiated, the City
will try to include these costs in the franchise.
Commissioner Johnson moved to approve continuing to use the law firm of Arnold
& Porter as the City's outside counsel for cable franchise negotiations with Time Warner
Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse and GTE and continuing to use Rice Williams as
technical consultants during negotiations. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
The City Attorney requested an attorney/client session regarding the Atrium at
Clearwater, Ltd. versus the City and CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) be
scheduled for February 15, 1996 at 3:30 p.m. Consensus was to so schedule.
ITEM #35 - Citv Manager Verbal Reoorts
I,',::.)
The City Manager referred to a memorandum from David Grice requesting the City
Commission to revisit his request to close streets in the Plaza Park neighborhood. Staff
will gather information regarding this item and present it to the Commission.
ITEM #36 - Commission Discussion Items
a) Review position re Restriping Drew Street
Consensus of the City Commission was to oppose the FDOT (Florida Department of
Transportation) plan to restripe Drew Street (SR 590) from four lanes to three between
Missouri and N. Ft. Harrison Avenues. A letter expressing this view will be sent to FDOT.
Commissioner Clark noted FDOT will make the final decision regarding the matter.
ITEM #37 - Other Commission Action
Commissioner Berfield requested the City Manager to repeat comments she made
at the Work Session regarding the Municipal Services Building. The City Manager noted
concerns expressed regarding the building being too small and the configuration of the
works paces. In 1993, the City Commission asked staff to do a space study that identified
every position and 10% for growth. The City Commission expressed concern the building
was too large. Another study compared the proposed work station sizes to those used by
other industries. She said the complex was never intended to be a Class A office building.
Since the building was planned, several new departments were created including C-View
TV which will have a studio in the Municipal Services building. The Traffic Control
; .......)
mcc02a.96
23
02/01/96
, .
... ". . .
. . ~ .
'e
~'~.. "
.,. " ~ . 1 .
1.~' . ...
("~
Computer has been moved into a conference room. She said the 10% growth margin has
been absorbod. She said the building is comfortable now. It was constructed with an
open configuration with movable partitions. She noted employees are not accustomed to
that kind of environment. She requested staff be allowed to move into the building before
determining the building is too small and the open plan is not a good work environment.
Commissioner Thomas concurred. He said the City Commission did what residents had
asked them to do in running the City like a business. He suggested waiting two years
before judging the project.
Commissioner Thomas expressed concern regarding complaints that speeding is
occurring due to the steep grade on Clearwater Pass Bridge. He requested signs be
erected to warn of the steep grade and that the speed limit be the same at both ends of
the bridge.
Mavor Garvev announced the start of the Downtown Marketplace on Saturdayst
beginning February 3, 1996t and the Saturday in the City event on February 17, 1996.
ITEM #38 ~ Adiournment
I
The meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
ATTEST: . (~1\"^'''-\.L ~ . !:1... >- L a
V City Clerk
f~',~
I, ,':I$'
. ~.. .
.."
~
mcc02a.96
24
02101196