08/29/2007
CITIZEN’S ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEETING NOTES ON 2008 EAR-BASED AMENDMENTS
Municipal Services Building – Room 130
Wednesday, August 29, 2007 – 1:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Norma Carlough, Frank Dame, Bill Day, Ronald Delp,
Elizabeth France, Barbara Green, Helen Kerwin, Bill Murray, Alex Plisko, Jr. and Glenn
Bailey of Pinellas County Planning.
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Michael Delk, Director of Planning, Gina Clayton, Assistant
Planning Director, Sandra Herman, Planner III and Steven Everitt, Planner II, Bill Vola,
Emergency Management Director, Bill Morris, Director of Marine and Aviation, Kelly
O’Brien, Engineer II, and Heather Shell, Public Information Specialist.
Sandra Herman explained about House Bill 1359, pertaining to the new coastal high
hazard area (CHHA) requirements for the comprehensive plan. She said that the
Planning Department wanted to bring the draft of the coastal management element to the
committee now showing the changes as per the last CAC meeting and that the element
would be coming back with the CHHA requirements incorporated into it. Mrs. Herman
went over CAC’s 4 key points on Coastal Management from the 6-06-07 meeting: 1.
Disaster Management (new 26.1.1 policy)
2. Mandatory evacuation as part of development agreements or development orders, and
how and where and interagency agreements subject to City and County approval,
especially with regard to hotel development (new 24.3.7 policy)
3. Define working waterfronts (new 26.2 Objective)
4. No net loss – Michael Delk discussed that this might not be one to include (further
discussion below)
Mr. Dame wanted to discuss the subject of “no net loss” pertaining to docks. He is
concerned about the loss of dock spaces for redevelopment into condos, and that maybe
there should be a type of “impact fee” for the removal of docks like when someone has to
pay a fee when they remove a tree. Michael Delk explained that there are a number of
legal issues surrounding it and it is easier to find a place to plant a tree than find a place
for a dock. There has to be a nexus between collection of a fee and dock slips and there
has to be a period of time to spend the funds. Mr. Delk thought that this may be very
difficult and impractical.
Mr. Day said he was concerned about public versus private docks and riparian rights. He
questioned the loss of public access to docks. He was concerned that side setbacks for
docks in the Marina District will affect accessory docks.
Mr. Delp said that this is the loss of privately owned slips and he was concerned about
penalizing property owners if they want to go another way in developing their property.
- 1 -
Mr. Dame talked about working waterfronts and how they are regulated by the state now
and they can’t change from commercial working waterfront to residential condos now. It
is a matter of public policy here.
Michael Delk spoke about the “impact fee” issue. He said that his staff will talk to our
legal staff on the “exaction” approach - to pay into to offset those docks (loss of private
docks). He said we would get input from Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney,
on legal basis from a regulatory standpoint regarding the payment of fee issue and the
value of it – window of obligation in spending the money.
Ms. France said she feels that boating is a recreation – not a necessity.
Michael Delk explained that as an industry, it has a large economic impact in the state. It
reaches deep into Florida economy.
Bill Morris said that a top retailer of boats is in Clearwater and they go out of their way
for their customers to find a place for a boat to make the boat deal go through.
Ms. France said she was not aware of these economic benefits.
Mr. Dame said that waterfront commercial is important for our citizens to enjoy the water
– it was a big loss when the high dry marina left Island Estates and now that property is
being redeveloped and there will be no more public docking there – this is a big loss.
Ron Delp said there were two points here: what is the business case on it? (The private
sector will object most certainly). What is a good public policy here?
Glenn Bailey said the County had a boating access task force. There is a no net loss
ordinance in Martin County.
Mr. Day asked about the existing versus potential for slips.
Michael Delk said staff will research whether or not the City can require a developer to
pay into a fund to provide additional docks for public use if he demolishes existing slips.
nd
Glenn Bailey said that Pinellas County has the 2 most registered pleasure boats in
Florida. They bring much into our economy. We should look at a no net loss policy to
designate certain areas for working waterfronts.
Ron Delp said he feels that “Jolly” should be added to “trolley” in the policies.
Michael Delk said that Jolly Trolley is too specific for the comprehensive plan – it really
refers to alternate modes of transportation and it should be more generic here so we don’t
have to go back and change the comprehensive plan if the name changes. The issue is
encouraging trolley service on the beach. Then leave it to local discretion to where and
what is required. Also, Jolly Trolley has been limited in the budget.
- 2 -
There was discussion on transient docks – Mr. Dame wondered about the rental of docks
for single family. Michael Delk, Gina Clayton and Sandra Herman said that this would
probably not be recommended for strictly residential areas. Gina Clayton pointed out that
Home Occupations should not have traffic going in and out of a neighborhood – that the
neighborhood should stay residential. Michael mentioned about accessory use for docks
by right if on-street parking is provided in East Shore Study – no formal plan for
requirements is out yet.
Mr. Murray suggested adding “supplemental” to the trolley service policy.
Gina Clayton, Michael Delk and Bill Vola advised that there was a workgroup with the
county working on consistent CHHA model regulations.
Sandra Herman went page by page of the draft element with the amendments, and
restated that it would be coming back with more revisions including the CHHA
regulations.
Issue of Local Concern: Annexation was then discussed.
Sandra Herman showed the group a map of the City including the boundaries of the
Planning Area as per Interlocal Agreement with Pinellas County and the unincorporated
areas are clearly delineated on the map.
Michael Delk said that some City Managers are aggressive with annexation programs
from an economic development standpoint.
Michael Delk said there are three types of annexations:
1.Voluntary
2.Involuntary
3.Interlocal agreement with county
He pointed out the agreements to annex on one of the maps (outstanding agreements in
the city).
He feels Clearwater is the primary service provider for these areas (unincorporated) and it
is very inefficient for the City to surround these enclaves without providing service.
Kelly O’Brien said that all costs to extend sewer lines have dramatically increased – up to
about $200 a lineal foot (property width) now to provide service lines and restore road
afterwards.
Mr. Delp said why do it?
1.No business case
2.No break even
3.No legal requirement
- 3 -
Michael Delk explained that it was a Local Issue of Concern from the EAR that we must
review and consider the topic of Annexation, and that from a public service policy it is
more efficient to annex all the unincorporated properties within a city’s planning area.
Mr. Delp asked about practices and incentives.
Michael Delk said we cannot offset the funds for hookup costs (enterprise fund).
Gina Clayton said there are two main benefits: Police and Environmental. The Sheriff
cannot justify going into our area for a few properties. From an environmental
standpoint, septic systems are polluting our groundwater.
Kelly O’Brien said there is a payment plan for the costs of getting sanitary sewer service.
The Plan allows payment to occur over 10 years at 8%.
Mr. Day said one advantage of annexation is to be able to vote in the City.
Michael Delk discussed the referendum part of the annexation statutes: there is a
provision about no registered electors in an area (such as commercial area) allowing us to
annex such an area. He said he used to do this in Temple Terrace. But Clearwater has
historically not been aggressive with regard to annexations and this doesn’t take
advantage of contributing to the tax base (he cited an example of a good commercial area
to target near the ball field).
Gina Clayton discussed the 1-acre program a few years ago, with only 17 property
owners taking advantage of it, and the Pinellas Assembly recommendations that would
have required the city to provide service to all the enclave properties at the city’s cost.
Kelly O’Brien said that if the property owner does not pay off the sewer costs within the
10-year payment period, a lien is placed on the property.
Mr. Day asked if unincorporated properties not in the city are required to meet city code.
The answer was no.
In discussion of the costs in the PPC’s Truth In Annexation worksheet, Michael Delk
discussed the MSTU fee in the County that can be equal to city taxes in some places such
as Temple Terrace. Also, in Broward County, all areas are to incorporate and the county
handles regional issues (airports, transportation, libraries).
Mr. Dame and Mr. Day agreed with Mr. Delp: why pursue annexation?
Michael Delk said for efficient delivery of services and to contribute to the tax base.
- 4 -
Michael Delk said he asked staff to map the 10 acres or less enclaves to propose to work
on an interlocal agreement with the County as per State Statute 171. Gina Clayton said
though that the county may say yes provided the city pays all costs for services.
More than 10 acres would require a referendum. Michael said we got close to putting
together 110 ATA’s package. He will ask staff to go back and clear up a number of them
after this big project is complete. Michael said you don’t want to hold a referendum that
had failed until about 10 years. It takes about that long for a community to get over it.
Mr. Dame said he felt the biggest controversial issue is “cost sharing” and he doesn’t
think it is fair to the people that are already in the city (that had to pay). But, Norma
Carlough said in reality how many properties are really involved here. Sandra Herman
said on average the city processes about 30-40 annexations (of single properties) a year.
So Ms. Carlough said that is not many people who might object - in the last 10 years that
would only be 300-400 owners who may object and many of those have since sold the
properties or are not here anymore.
Kelly O’Brien said a feasibility study was conducted in 2001 that indicated it would cost
about $26M to run sewer lines to all the properties within the unincorporated areas of the
City’s Planning Area. Now it would be doubled or tripled in cost.
Gina Clayton said we would further refine some of the proposed objectives and policies
and get back to the committee. She wants to include a provision to consider requiring
hook up if a line is 50 feet from a property (rather than to the property).
Ron Delp said we need to get more aggressive on this issue.
Mr. Day said to go for federal funding.
Norma Carlough thought the Truth In Annexation worksheet seemed to be skewed.
Mr. Dame said to focus on it from an environmental standpoint. For the septic systems
that are creating some kind of environmental risk – go after these.
Michael Delk said we need to take a realistic approach. He said maybe we can start with
the 10 acres or less approach. Dollars versus environmental concerns would be
considered.
Michael Delk said that we were going to take a different approach with the remaining
three Issues of Local Concern. He said that he and Gina Clayton have discussed working
on all three of the issues together and then not getting back with the committee until the
end of the year. This way, we will meet every few weeks for a month or so on all of the
issues together. It will make more sense to not have so long of a time lapse between
discussions plus it will be easier on staff to prepare for the meetings as there is a lot of
work involved in the preparation for each meeting. He said the consulting work on the
- 5 -
EAR was $300,000 and we are doing all this work in house with only a few staff
members.
The committee agreed and said that they would like to continue to be notified on the
progress by email as Sandra Herman has been doing so far.
The meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m.
Meeting notes by Herman and Everitt.
- 6 -