Loading...
08/12/1991 CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION August 12, 1991 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met at City Hall with the following members present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner Sue Berfield Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Richard Fitzgerald Commissioner Lee Regulski Commissioner William Nunamaker Commissioner Also present: Michael J. Wright City Manager M.A. Galbraith, Jr. City Attorney Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. Service Pin Awards - Two service awards were presented to City employees. Presentation by Camp Dresser & McKee regarding design considerations for Pier 60 renovation (WSO) Tom Burke, representing Camp Dresser & McKee (CDM), indicated an attempt has been made to accommodate the winning pier design which includes 18 structures consisting of portals, sitting areas and a bait house. The proposed construction is wood with old-time lighting. The current pier’s structure is in poor shape and he recommended replacing it. He estimated the basic structure will cost between $1.2-million and $1.4-million. An additional $750,000 to $950,000 will be needed for the 18 additional structures. He said a shopping list is being proposed today and the Commission can add as many amenities as they wish. In response to a question, the City Manager recommended the City Commission reach a decision now regarding what amenities they want on the pier and not build it in stages. In response to a question, it was indicated walking onto the pier is free. Going beyond the bait house will cost $0.50. In response to a question, Mr. Burke reported permits will be required from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). He said the existing groin piles allowed accumulation of the beach. Current thinking is to enclose the old groin piles and top them with concrete. Beyond that, wood or concrete construction has not been determined. Mr. Burke indicated CDM can design the basic structure to accommodate add ons and the Commission can pick and choose what they want. Mr. Wright said the Commission will see this again before the bid goes out. In response to a question, it was indicated an observation deck has been proposed for the end of the structure. 1991/92 Budget: a) First Reading Ord. #5115-91 / Millage; b) First Reading Ord. #5116-91 / Operating; and c) First Reading Ord. #5117-91 / Capital Improvement (AS) Discussion ensued regarding the three-year forecast predicting a $1.6-million shortfall or need to increase taxes for Fiscal Year (FY) 1992/93. It was suggested $800,000 be removed from the proposed budget. Various options were discussed. Suggestions were made to send a redundant employee at Ross Norton to the Sailing Center versus the Long Center and to reduce overtime by 10% across the board. Extensive discussion ensued regarding the need to balance the budget and the impact of drastic cuts at this time. It was also suggested to cap the number of employees at the current level and to look at the pension plan’s funding. The majority of the Commission thought the rollback rate should be the target for this year’s budget. Extensive discussion ensued with concerns expressed regarding the need to make cuts and how to save money without reducing services. Consensus of the Commission was for the City Manager to bring back a budget at the rollback rate with options for cuts and options to reduce the budget beyond the rollback rate. Contract for roof engineering and design services for seven City facilities to Professional Service Industries, Inc., Clearwater, FL, at an estimated cost of $35,500 (GS) On October 18, 1990, the City Commission authorized staff to negotiate a contract with Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI) for roofing consultant services and to establish a roof maintenance and replacement schedule for various City facilities. On April 4, 1991, the City Commission authorized a contract to survey the roofs of 12 major facilities believed to be in need of major repair or total replacement. PSI completed its survey and designated seven facilities as having roofing surfaces that need replacement or major repairs. These facilities are: the City Marina, the Clearwater Shuffleboard Center, Fire Station Nos. 1 and 4, Memorial Civic Center, the Main Library, and Moccasin Lake Park. The total fee for roof engineering and design services for these facilities is estimated at $35,500. PSI proposes to provide the following roof engineering and design services: a) Conduct an investigative analysis of available roof systems to determine the most compatible system for the required performance criteria of the building; to provide a complete roof system design with specifications and detailed drawings, tailored to each specific project; to review all documents with the City; b) Conduct contractor qualifications analysis for bidder selection and solicit competitive bids from a minimum of three qualified roofing contracting firms; c) Conduct a pre-bid conference at the job site with contractors to review plans, specifications and field conditions; and d) Review all bids with City staff for contractor selection and make recommendations for contract award. In response to a question, Floyd Carter, General Services Director, indicated a determination has been made regarding the roofs that need to be replaced. He said this contract is for the design work. It was questioned if Moccasin Lake was removed from the list. Mr. Carter indicated this is a major repair and that project has no funding for design. Contract for the burglar and fire alarm service and monitoring for one year to Maire Co., Clearwater, FL, at an estimated cost of $17,964 (GS) The Maire Company has installed alarm systems in 27 City facilities; the alarm systems remain the property of this company. After providing this service for several years, the Maire Company has agreed to continue the service at current pricing. Staff recommends this company continue providing burglar and fire alarm service and monitoring. If put out to bid, responding companies would include a charge for installing new alarm systems. The estimated charge represents the annual fee for servicing and monitoring burglar and fire alarms for City facilities. The City Manager indicated this is being reviewed to see if all monitoring is needed. It was questioned if City staff could monitor the alarms. It was indicated the alarm is tied into the City’s telephone lines. Consensus of the Commission was to pull this item from the agenda Purchase Order Contract to Smith Fence Company to install new upgraded backstop and wing fencing on the two ballfields at Frank Tack Park for $32,238 (P&R) During the April 25, 1991 storm, the Frank Tack Park backstop and wing fencing were severely damaged and removed. Smith Fence Company, according to the current contract with Pinellas County, supplied the City with two quotations: 1) a $22,212 bid to replace the fencing with the same materials specified when it was installed in 1972 and 2) a $32,238 bid to replace/upgrade the fencing to current standards including larger diameter fence posts, heavier duty fence fabric, and welding of joints rather than nuts and bolts. Staff recommends upgraded fencing due to frequent repairs required for the original lighter-weight fencing. In response to a question regarding the proposed upgrades, the City Manager indicated the changes will reduce labor costs. (Cont'd from 07/18/91) Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5105-91 - Creating Sec. 136.031, adopting standards and specifications for stormwater detention facilities; amending Sec. 137.010, relating to site plans and stormwater detention requirements for development projects requiring site plan approval (PW) For the past years, property undergoing development in the City has been subject to stormwater detention and treatment requirements based upon the development's impact. Property, not subject to stormwater requirements when originally developed, often is extensively paved or otherwise impervious. The impact of redevelopment often provides improvement to the stormwater situation and the developer avoids having to provide stormwater facilities. In the Comprehensive Plan, the City pledged to eliminate this inequity by adopting new retrofit standards relating to stormwater requirements. Redevelopers have been subject to standards established by the City Engineer in January 1991. The subject ordinance specifically ordains the City Engineer's actions. On July 2, 1991, the Planning & Zoning Board unanimously approved the ordinance as written. Through the Chamber of Commerce, downtown interests have requested that the Urban Center zoning area be exempt from code requirements relating to stormwater detention. While the ordinance has not been brought forward with any exclusionary language, staff has no problem with such an exemption inasmuch as the downtown area already receives special considerations designed to encourage redevelopment. Language is available for consideration should the Commission choose to exclude the downtown area from this ordinance's requirements. In response to a question, William Baker, Public Works Director, indicated a threshold could be included in the ordinance. Currently, stormwater detention is required for the first square foot of redevelopment. Concerns were expressed that the ordinance would discourage development. The City Manager pointed out the ordinance does not effect rehabilitation within a building’s existing footprint. Mr. Baker indicated an option favors developers because the requirement is proportional to the change. He reported, however, the Environmental Advisory Board, recommends full detention if a property is changed beyond a certain extent. Mr. Baker also reported the downtown area has requested to be exempt. He said staff has not brought forward these considerations. If the stormwater utility applies to all, he suggested some of those funds could be used to build something to address the downtown area. Extensive discussion ensued regarding the impact of the ordinance on redevelopment. Consensus of the Commission was for the ordinance to provide more leeway for redevelopment. The meeting recessed from 3:00 to 3:10 p.m. Ranking of prospective consulting engineers to prepare a PD&E study for the widening of Drew Street (PW) In cooperation with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), the City proposes to widen Drew Street from west of Ft. Harrison Ave. to east of NE Coachman Rd. The City has agreed with FDOT 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 preliminary work. The initial work contemplated in this agreement is the preparation of a preliminary design report known as a Project, Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study. Future contemplated work is the preparation of construction contract documents including construction plans and specifications, right-of-way maps, easement and property descriptions, FDOT Joint Project Agreements for the relocation of utilities, 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 FDOT. When such services are desired by Clearwater, the City and Engineer will negotiate amendments to this agreement for these professional services. The City has advertised its need for a consulting firm to prepare the PD&E Study. From ten firms responding to the City's advertisement, the Consultant Selection Committee selected three. Each made a one-hour presentation on their qualifications and was ranked: 1) Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan; 2) Wade-Trim, Inc.; and 3) Parsons, Brinkerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. It is recommended that the Commission approve the Selection Committee's ranking and authorize negotiations for contractual services in order of the ranking. In response to questions, it was indicated the current work is to improve the intersection at Saturn Avenue. The widening of Drew Street will require the purchase of some property. Light Poles on SR 60 The City has received requests to bury the power lines for the street lights along SR 60. Mr. Baker indicated the City does not need to address the lights on the north side of the road because they have already been addressed. He said, however, the wire could be buried in some places on the south side. He said it would cost $10,000 to bury the wires strung between 11 poles from the fire station to the Causeway. The City Manager reported it will cost $57,000 to bury the lines on the north side from the sewer plant to the first light. He said the results from the pending test bores will be presented to the Commission. He questioned if the Commission wished to add the $10,000 project. Concern was expressed that eliminating one wire did not justify the expenditure. This item will be added to the September 5, 1991 agenda. It was announced the stormwater ordinance will be on the August 29, 1991 agenda. Interlocal agreement with Pinellas County extending the local option gas tax to August 31, 2007 (PW) Pinellas County originally adopted a $0.04 per gallon gas tax effective 09/01/85- 08/31/95. Effective 09/01/87, Pinellas County raised the $0.04 cent tax to $0.06 and extended the collection period from 09/01/95 to 08/31/97. Pinellas County now proposes to extend the $0.06 gas tax for an additional period of ten years, from 09/01/97 to 08/31/07. This action is proposed to avoid placing a toll on the new Bayside Bridge and existing 78th Ave. Bridge and to provide more transportation funds for road improvements. In addition to providing a time extension of the gas tax, the proposed interlocal agreement also suggests a new distribution formula to determine the division of the gas tax among the County and municipalities beginning in January 1992. Under the existing formula, Pinellas County receives 75% of the total local option gas tax proceeds and cities receive 25%. The unincorporated area of the County is considered a city and shares in the city portion of the proceeds. Under the new proposal, the County would receive 75% of the tax proceeds and the unincorporated area would not share in the percentage allocated municipalities. Each municipality's share of the tax would increase slightly. This change will also provide an increased share of funds for the municipalities as the old formula originally was to extend to 08/31/97. Under the present plan that expires August 31, 1997, Clearwater is estimated to receive $3,016,000. Using the new formula for the same time period, Clearwater will receive $5,072,000. If the tax is approved for ten additional years, it is estimated Clearwater will receive an additional $9,088,000. A major restriction in the proposed interlocal agreement requires that projects constructed with total local option gas tax revenues be limited to those contained in the long-range 2010 Transportation Plan adopted by Pinellas County Metropolitan Planning Organization on October 26, 1984. While this plan includes most major thoroughfares, the agreement would preclude using funds on City streets and other City projects not covered by the plan. Clearwater will participate on a percentage basis and projected dollar figures are based on Florida Department of Revenue (DOR) estimates. Based on the first five years, actual cash received has been approximately 91% of DOR estimates. Cecil Henderson, Assistant Public Works Director, explained the changes indicating the new agreement will be better for the City as Clearwater will receive $11-million more than planned. The City Manager recommended support of the agreement, saying projects earmarked for projects using Penny for Pinellas monies could be funded by this source and the Penny for Pinellas funds could be used elsewhere. Purchase of a Traacs 800 Random Access Automated Chemical System for the Water Pollution Control Laboratories from Bran & Luebbe Analyzing Technologies, Inc., Elmsford, NY, for $49,716 (PW) State and Federal regulatory agencies require the Water Pollution Control Division to run daily nutrient tests on each treatment plant. Effective August 1, 1991, this workload increased 25% with the requirement to complete daily tests of the combined East/Northeast effluent. Operating and discharge permits set maximum levels for each test, four nitrogen species and two phosphorus species. The City is liable for fines if maximums are exceeded. Additional nutrient tests are run for monthly environmental assessments and process control evaluation. Stormwater discharge monitoring will be required soon. Commercial laboratories cannot provide daily sample results within required time constraints. Turn-around times of two to four weeks from sampling date to report of results are not uncommon. Results must be available in time to make process adjustments, change chemical dosages, show trends in time for corrective action, and to avoid permit violation fines. The existing auto analyzer, in daily use for seven years, does not have the capacity or speed to keep up with the increased sampling requirements. It is imperative to augment its capability with an additional dual channel instrument. The combined performance will enable more frequent batch runs, adequate response time for corrective action, and back-up equipment during downtime. Staff is specifying sole source purchasing for the new unit from the present system's manufacturer to maintain a consistent methodology to provide complete redundancy in case of downtime, interchangeable parts where possible, standardization of consumable materials, and the benefit of laboratory technicians' prior training and experience. In response to questions, it was indicated this was used in the water treatment plant as the discharge permit provides that nitrogen cannot exceed certain levels. Bill Baker said the City was fined $500 a day for 30 days when the plant did not meet requirements for two days. He said this equipment is being requested for the lab to provide a quicker turn around time. A question was raised regarding how asphalt is purchased for paving. Mr. Baker indicated the City usually purchases it by the ton. Concern was expressed that too much asphalt is being used. It was requested that a recap of tonnage versus square yards be provided to the City Commission. 1992 Legislative Package (CM) General Issues of support or concern include: billboards/outdoor advertising/sign regulation; impact fees; local government mandates; affordable housing - doc stamp surtax; presumption of disability benefits for Police; occupational license reform; and recapture Kenton penalty. Specific proposals on matters affecting land and water management include: regional activity center concept for retail and industrial developments; equitable annexation of enclave areas; substantial improvement; and Pinellas County Planning Council legislation. General issues of support or concern include: volunteer protection; Sunshine Law - applicability to Candidate's Night; services tax; and compressed natural gas. Matters affecting general law include: inclusion of statutory notice requirements for the adoption of ordinances; trip and fall on public sidewalk; electric utility tax base; regulation of "cruising" on the public streets; and amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. In response to a question, it was indicated it is necessary to pursue the substantial improvement ordinance. Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5124-91 - Relating to flood protection; amending Sec. 146.004, COA, revising definitions of "substantial improvement" and "market value of the structure" (PL&D) The City Attorney and staff have identified a need to revise the definition for "substantial improvement" in the flood protection ordinance to provide consistent treatment of properties on Clearwater Beach, Sand Key, and Island Estates. These areas share similar characteristics regarding flood activity and should be treated similarly under all regulations. State and Federal laws differ on how these areas are described and regulated. Federal requirements (FEMA) define Clearwater Beach and Island Estates as "areas of special flood hazard." The State defines only Clearwater Beach and Sand Key as areas within the "coastal building zone." Because of these distinctions, City code currently provides dissimilar treatment of these areas. Regarding the definition of "substantial improvement," Clearwater Beach and Sand Key are governed by a "cumulative total" State rule limiting improvements to a structure to 50% of the value of the structure cumulative over the life of the structure, before full compliance with flood protection requirements must be achieved. Island Estates, however, is governed by a Federal rule which states that local governments may establish regulations which reflect appropriate time periods for what constitutes "substantial improvements." In this case, the City has established a definition of "substantial improvement" that limits structural improvements to 50% of the value of the structure cumulative over a one year period before full compliance with flood protection requirements must be achieved. Legal research has revealed that the State rule is based solely on an informal staff opinion from the Florida Department of Community Affairs. Consequently, since no formal rule has been established as required under the Administrative Procedures Act (Chapter 120, Florida Statutes), the State rule is not binding on the City. The proposed change to the definition of "substantial improvement" consolidates flood protection requirements for Clearwater Beach, Sand Key and Island Estates to reflect current City regulations relating to Federal requirements; improvements to a structure are limited to 50% of the value of the structure cumulative over a one year period before full compliance with flood protection requirements must be achieved. The proposed change to the definition of "market value of the structure is made to eliminate inconsistencies associated with changes to the definition of "substantial improvement." On August 13, 1991, the Planning & Zoning Board unanimously recommended approval of the code amendment. The Board further indicated it supports the City Commission's efforts to amend State law concerning "cumulative improvements" on barrier islands. It was noted the rules need to be consistent throughout the State. Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5113-91 & #5114-91 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Industrial and RD Zoning for Parcel A and B: Parcel A located in Sec. 17-29-16, M&B 21.00, less and except those lands zoned AL/I, Parcel B located in Sec. 17-29-16, M&B 24.03, less and except those lands zoned AL/I (Building Operation Holding Co., LUP91-04, Z91-01) (PL&D) It was indicated the Planning & Zoning Board (P&Z) has recommended approval of the Land Use Plan Amendment and zoning change. Jim Polatty, Planning Director, said an associated ordinance establishing the zoning category has been changed to now require four acres as a minimum lot size. He reported the P&Z recommended leaving the minimum lot size at two acres. The City Manager indicated the ordinance is not needed in this case as Park Place is controlled by a Development of Regional Impact. It was indicated, with the larger lot size, the new zoning district cannot apply to the Rehm property. The Commission did not wish to change their previous direction. (Cont'd from 07/18/91) Alcoholic Beverage Distance Separation Variance for Penguin Palace Restaurant located at 7 Rockaway St., Miller's Replat, Lot 2 & vacated beach drive on West and Lot 3 (Alexiou, AB91-15) (PL&D) This request is for an alcoholic beverage separation distance variance for a 4COP-SRX establishment known as Penguin Palace. The subject property is located in a CR-28 zoning district which automatically establishes a requirement for a separation variance since the CR-28 district is regarded as a residential district and alcoholic beverage uses are required to be separated from residential districts. On April 2, 1991, the Planning & Zoning Board (P&Z) granted a conditional use permit to allow an ownership change for the establishment, and to permit expansion of the outdoor seating area on the property's west side. The approval was subject to the following conditions: 1) the requisite occupational license shall be obtained within one year from the date of the public hearing; 2) the applicant shall obtain the required variances from the Development Code Adjustment Board (DCAB); the applicant shall obtain the required variances from the City Commission; and 4) the applicant shall obtain the requisite permits from the Florida Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The applicant must obtain the following variances from DCAB: 1) a variance of 15 feet to permit a deck zero feet from a street right of way; 2) a variance of 55.5 feet to permit extension of a structure across the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL); and 3) a variance of seven parking spaces to permit a 1,338 square foot deck. On July 11, 1991, DCAB denied an associated variance. A variance of 7.65 feet to permit a deck 7.35 feet from a rear property line, and continued the variances listed above until the August 8, 1991 meeting. Staff will provide the Commission with a written report on DCAB's action concerning the variance requests. Staff recommends denial of the parking variance associated with the deck expansion. The existing deck has been the subject of protracted code enforcement action. Most recently, on January 8, 1991, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board (MCEB) heard a code violation case based of the deck's location west of the CCCL, over the City right-of-way, and the fact that City and DNR permits were never issued. On April 11, 1991, an Affidavit of Non-Compliance was submitted to MCEB and a $100 per day fine is being assessed. The applicant has submitted an application for a permit to DNR. MCEB provided the applicant with 90 days to comply with City and State requirements. To legitimize the existing deck and allow its expansion, the separation variance request is a required approval. Delayed in the pursuit of required approvals was due to the withdrawal of an offer to purchase the facility. On August 13, 1991, P&Z will consider a conditional use permit for change in business ownership. The Planning Director indicated DCAB denied expansion but did approve the existing deck, which essentially legitimizes the existing structure. It was indicated that approval from the Department of Natural Resources is needed. The City Manager questioned whether the City Commission can restrict alcoholic beverages to inside the building. The City Attorney indicated they could but it would be difficult to enforce. He said any conditions placed on approval would need to be reasonable. Alcoholic Beverage Distance Separation Variance for Stinger's located at 18443 and 18449 US 19N, Levitz Plaza, Units 4-6, Sec. 20-29-16, M&Bs 33.02 & 33.021 (Home Shopping Network Realty, Inc. AB91-17) (PL&D) The applicant is requesting an alcoholic beverage separation distance variance for a new 4COP alcoholic beverage license designation to permit on premise consumption of beer, wine and liquor. The proposed establishment, a nightclub, is to be located at the Grant's Plaza Shopping Center. According to the applicant, the proposed club will be an upscale dance club catering to the social needs of people in their late twenties to early fifties. The applicant plans to provide recorded music videos and live bands with musicians and vocalists as on premise entertainment. The applicant previously requested a site plan modification and alcoholic beverage distance separation variance to locate this establishment in the Jersey Jim Towers Shopping Center. This property is in an area presently zoned commercial center. The proposed establishment will use an indoor seating capacity of 200 seats with no outdoor seating. A balcony with 4,500 square feet of interior floor area is also proposed. The Fire Marshal has determined the allowable seating capacity to be 200 seats. The shopping center is set back from US 19N and has adequate parking spaces. Proposed hours of operation are 12 noon to 2 a.m. Mondays through Saturdays, and 1 p.m. to 2 a.m. on Sundays. The nearest residentially zoned property is directly to the east of the shopping center and zoned RPD-10 by Pinellas County. The nearest City zoned residential property is approximately 400 feet north of the establishment. The Planning Director indicated the Planning & Zoning Board had continued the conditional use for this establishment until its August 13, 1991 meeting. He said parking will be one of the issues. Variance to Sign Regulations for property (Atrium at Clearwater Square) located at 601 Cleveland St., Gould & Ewing 2nd Addn., Blk. 13, Lots 1-4 & vacated alley & unsubmerged land to E (Maria Real Estate, Inc. SV91-16) (PL&D) The applicant is requesting a variance to permit construction of additional signage for identification of the Sun Bank building (to be known as Atrium at Clearwater Square) and of the businesses within this nine-story building. The requested signage is primarily to assist pedestrians in locating the building, and the businesses therein. The City's sign survey found the existing signage meets the sign regulations. The sign regulations restrict signage to business identification in the Urban Code District [Sec. 134.101(3)]. This section appears to be designed to control signage for developments of one or two stories with businesses side by side rather than above each other in multi-story office buildings. There are no provisions for building identification signs or property identification signs in the Urban Center Cord district. The sign regulations do provide for such signs in other commercial and office districts. Presently, the Sun Bank has two approved business identification signs at the top of the applicant's building that are too high to assist pedestrians in identifying the building. The applicant is requesting a building identification sign at street level to enable pedestrians to more readily identify the building. The directory portion of the proposed sign is to assist pedestrians in identifying businesses occupying the building without having to enter the building to find a directory. The total area of the proposed signage could be considered as a single sign, or as two signs, (a building identification sign and a directory sign). However, a building is not a business establishment, and therefore, not entitled to a business identification sign, or any signage, under current code requirements. This seems too restrictive and contrary to the general intent of the sign regulations that includes in its purpose: "to enable the identification of places or residence and business, and allow for the communication of information for the conduct of commerce." The proposed request, appears to be aimed at meeting these purposes. It seems appropriate to consider the portion of the proposed sign identifying the building as a business identification sign for the property owners although they do not have offices in the building. If this is done, the remainder of the proposed sign is appropriately classified as a directory sign. Business identification signs are permitted to be up to 48 square feet in the Core Subdistrict. The surface area of the portion of the proposed sign identifying the building is 34.71 square feet, which is less than the maximum surface area allowed for a business identification sign. For comparison purposes, the sign regulations allow building identification signs up to 40 square feet in other commercial and office districts. The portion of the proposed signage attributed to building identification appears to be reasonable. In the Core Subdistrict, one sign is permitted in proximity to any building entry to identify the names and addresses of individual business establishments or occupants. This signage is in addition to the business identification signage, but is limited to two square feet per establishment or occupant, and to an overall area of six square feet. This requirement hardly seems meant to deal with a multistory office building with many occupants. The applicant is requesting four square feet of signage per business occupant for up to ten occupants. He is proposing to use six-inch high letters to identify the businesses. As the sign is aimed at pedestrians, this letter height seems excessive. It seems that letters three inches or less in height would be adequate for the intended purpose. The overall dimensions of the directory portion of the proposed sign are 15'10" X 6', giving an area of 95 square feet, or an average area of 9.5 square feet per occupant rather than the four square feet requested in the application. (The application appears to have blocked out each individual business name.) It is the staff's recommendation that if the directory portion of the proposed signage is permitted, it should be reduced in area, and that an overall limit be placed on the size of the directory sign and the size of the letters; this would result in signage having a maximum of three-inch high letters and an overall area of 56 square feet (approximately 13' X 4'3"). Concern was expressed regarding some of the sidewalk being contracted. It was indicated this was a trade off as the added landscaping would be an enhancement. Amendment to Sec. 72.15 concerning the Sale or Service of Alcoholic Beverages (PL&D) The City Police Department has identified a practice concerning the service and consumption of alcoholic beverages which, in effect "gets around" City regulations concerning alcoholic beverages. Some restaurants complete the sale of alcoholic beverages by 2:00 a.m. as required by City code but continue to allow customers to consume these beverages after 2:00 a.m. The proposed ordinance would simply impose the same conditions for alcoholic beverage service and consumption as are currently imposed for alcoholic beverage sales. The City Attorney indicated this will not prevent alcoholic beverages from being given away. Agreement to enter the Infill Housing Program (PL&D) The Infill Housing Program is the constructing component of the "Challenge 2000" partnership joining the City, lending institutions, and Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services (CNHS). The Agreement to Enter has been prepared to establish the rights and responsibilities of the City, CNHS, and clients who will purchase the new homes. The Infill Housing Program is highly individualized, with the house and lot selection tailored to the client's wishes and financial capabilities. The purpose of the Agreement is to formalize the steps that will lead to home ownership before any substantial funds are spent. Clients will be screened for eligibility before the Agreement is presented, and only those who have been approved by the CNHS loan committee will be invited to enter. It is expected all seven clients presently enrolled in budgeting and home maintenance classes will soon be ready to formally enter the program. Concerns were expressed that some clients find it difficult to attend the courses scheduled during working hours. Mr. Polatty indicated this would be investigated. City Manager Verbal Reports The City Manager reported the Center Foundation needs four Clearwater representatives. He reported a draft mission statement for the Maas Brothers Task Force will be available for the September 5, 1991 meeting. The City Manager said it was time to schedule evaluations for the City Attorney and the City Manager. The evaluations will be scheduled at Thursday night’s meeting. Other Commission Action Commissioner Fitzgerald reported at today's Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (TBRPC) meeting, a list of proposals was submitted. TBRPC is requesting comment from all of the communities. He has given the list to the City Manager and indicated he will come back to the City Commission for input. Commissioner Nunamaker questioned the implications if the lower part of the Maas Brothers property is used for a park and parking is removed. Commissioner Fitzgerald reported a move was afoot to impose a retransmission charge to networks by cable operators. Betty Deptula, Assistant City Manager, is to provide more information. Adjournment The work session adjourned at 4:45 p.m.