Loading...
10/12/1992 CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION October 12, 1992 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met at City Hall with the following members present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner Richard Fitzgerald Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Sue A. Berfield Commissioner Arthur X. Deegan Commissioner Absent: Lee Regulski Commissioner Also present were: Michael J. Wright City Manager M. A. Galbraith, Jr. City Attorney Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk The Mayor called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. and the following items were discussed. Eleven service awards were presented to City employees. Direction regarding implementation of Reclaimed Water System (WSO) In April 1990, Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM), the City's water and sewer consultant, completed a report entitled "Reclaimed Water Master Plan". The report concluded the City could install a city-wide reclaimed water infrastructure system consisting of storage, pumping, transmission mains, and neighborhood service lines, in three phases, on a timetable of five years per phase, at a total cost of $60 million. The report further concluded the system would be a viable financial venture and would involve a single-family monthly user fee varying with the choice of the several alternatives for structuring the system's cost recovery. Since the publication of that report and the initial enthusiasm it created, certain circumstances influencing the financial considerations of the system have taken place. It seems unlikely now that the City could depend upon State Revolving Fund financing for this project. When examining the expected monthly bill for the use of reclaimed water at multi-family complexes and in open space uses, such as golf courses, it appeared necessary to reconsider how three categories of users (single-family homes, multi-family units and open space) could be charged in a manner which would be acceptable to all of the three and generate the necessary revenues. Additional information provided by CDM represents alternate considerations for strategizing the geography of the phased implementation, as well as the financial choices for cost recovery. It can be seen that the expected monthly charge for a single-family reclaimed water user varies from $17.99 for a residence in the Countryside area; if done separately with a Swiftmud grant in the amount of 50% of the cost of transmission, storage, and pumping facilities, with a connection fee of $250, and involving a Resource Development Surcharge against water and sewer accounts within the Countryside area; to $40.84 per month for a single-family residence in the Clearwater Beach service area; if done separately and without grants, connection fee, or Resource Development Surcharge. The expected rate structure involving multi-family units and open space areas varies also as different parameters are applied. The City Manager stated the prime purpose for the water reuse system is to preserve potable drinking water. Tom Burke, of Camp Dresser and McKee, stated reuse systems are becoming more necessary and accepted throughout Florida; five are active in Pinellas County, with two more underway in the south county area. The system in St. Petersburg was implemented in 1977 to help implement a zero discharge policy and to help relieve the need for new potable water systems. Potable water use has stabilized, although demand has increased. In response to a question regarding funding received by St. Petersburg, Mr. Burke stated a lot of grants made it possible. All the water comes through two pipelines; if they hadn't proceeded with the project, they would now be constructing a new pipeline as well as new outfalls. Mr. Burke stated the main reason for Clearwater to develop a reclaimed system is water resource conservation. It is becoming difficult to find supplies of water that are both potable and used for irrigation. Other reasons are: conditions for permitting are mandating at least consideration of reuse systems; there are concerns in meeting toxicity conditions where surface water discharges and there is no reclaimed water system in place. He stated SWFWMD is actively promoting the use of grant monies to help get reclaimed systems in place. The City's advanced water treatment plants are producing a quality of water that is appropriate for reuse. The reclaimed water master plan, prepared in 1990, considered a three phase program to construct a reclaimed water system throughout the city. Phase 1 would cover the northeast or Countryside area, serving 830 acres of open space and 1200 acres of residential property, at an estimated cost of $12.9 million. Phase 2 in the central city area at a cost upwards of $22.2 million, and Phase 3 construction in the east, northwest, and beach areas at about $22.8 million. The total master plan costs were projected at $58 million; subsequent reviews, however, show the overall cost would increase to $62 million. Master plan recommendations are: 1) proceed with planning for expansion of the system currently in place to serve some northeast area open space; 2) pursue state revolving loan funds, and explore alternate funding sources; 3) conduct a series of public information workshops within the community; and 4) develop and adopt an ordinance on the implementation of the reclaimed water system. In developing the master plan recommendations and in trying to understand how to implement a less comprehensive program, three areas different from the original report were recommended: 1) a more northeast area, 2) the Clearwater Beach area including Island Estates, and 3) the northwest area, which would include east and west from Clearwater Country Club and north of Drew Street. In considering these areas three general characteristics were considered in defining a customer base: single family, multi family, and golf courses/open space. Service to these customers would entail substantial costs for facilities including pipeline, pumps and storage. Total estimated costs for construction of the facilities in the three areas would be $21.8 million. It is felt there is a good possibility for grants; potentially $3.4 million for the northeast area, $1.9 for the beach, and over $1 million for the northwest area. Major considerations in projecting user charges for single family, multi family and golf course/open space systems are: 1) open space customers would pay for a share of the transmission system only, as the volume of use would not benefit from the service or cost of a small diameter pipe; and 2) multi family space is largely impermeable and would not benefit from a large rate of irrigation. Also, charges vary with whether or not grant monies are secured and whether a surcharge is established. In addition there would be connection fees. In response to questions, Mr. Burke stated the fee is based on everyone using the system provided it is extended into their area. Costs would increase if it were a voluntary program. Another consideration would be a surcharge on lawn meter customers. A concern was expressed regarding all customers paying for the system whether they use it or not. A question was raised regarding paying for the system rather than volume of use, and it was stated the supply is more than would be used in the foreseeable future for these areas. Total sales for the city are 15-16 million gallons per day. The reclaimed water being turned out by the plants is 17 million gallons per day, with part of that going to Safety Harbor, leaving 14-15 million gallons of sewer effluent available for irrigation, which is more than enough supply to meet the demands. Mr. Burke stated there is a waiting list in St. Petersburg Beach for hookup to the system. It costs $1300-1500 up front for new residential customers, but the interest is great because of the security of supply. There are no meters, and no limit to usage. Regarding condominiums and commercial property, rates are based on the amount of permeable area. Systems that use reclaimed water as a commodity entail a community subsidy for reasons of water conservation or wastewater disposal. He questioned whether or not it is appropriate at this time to determine what to charge residential customers for the system, and to generate a rate schedule. Meter readings indicate beach residents use about 500,000 gallons of potable water per day for irrigation. It was stated the citywide water system would lose about $850,000 in revenues if the reclaimed system was available to the beach. The loss is calculated into the estimated customer rates for using the reclaimed system, therefore, the revenue would be generated there. It would not affect the regular water system rates. It was stated a determination would also need to be made whether or not to make connections to the system mandatory. A concern was expressed regarding how to begin the program and the costs involved. It was stated, first, an ordinance needs to be adopted to authorize service to Clearwater Country Club and to start charging golf courses for water they are already receiving; second, before bringing the system into a neighborhood, the public needs to be educated. There needs to be discussion regarding alternatives. Concerns were also expressed regarding different neighborhoods having different needs. Many Countryside residents have wells for watering; and there would be no demand for the system in industrial, commercial, and less wealthy areas. It was also stated some beach residents objected to restriction of private wells, and being assessed for something not used. It was suggested a referendum be held or a survey. In response to questions, Mr. Burke stated the process of permitting, design and construction would take about two years. Prior to implementation, a reclaimed water ordinance is needed, and open space charges need to be determined. Concern was expressed that facilities currently receiving the water at no charge need to be put on six months notice that charges will begin. In response to a question regarding what a rate would be, Mr. Burke stated a fair rate will be determined and presented at a later date. It was also stated a rate schedule will include construction costs as well as operating costs. Mr. Burke, in response to questions, stated St. Petersburg bases their connections by petition; if more than 50% want a connection, the neighborhood will receive priority. He stated there is not a system in place that it not subsidized. The water will always be available, but does not have to be used. Agreement with AT&T Credit Corporation to provide a $4.5 million line of credit to cover all planned lease purchase equipment acquisitions for fiscal 1993; authorize all uncompleted equipment acquisitions previously approved for financing under the agreement which expired on 9/30/92 to be financed under this new agreement provided all other terms and conditions of the original approval remain unchanged (AS) As in prior years, the City requested bids to provide a line of credit for lease purchase financing for fiscal 1993. Unlike prior years, the use of New York prime rate as the index was changed this year to the weekly average rate for five year treasury notes as published weekly by the Federal Reserve Board. This change was done at the suggestion of several potential vendors (including AT&T) who indicated an unwillingness to bid against New York prime rate, which increasingly fails to reflect five year tax exempt municipal rates. Even after considering the change in the index, all bids received this year translate into higher rates than bids received last year. As an example, last year's low bid was 85% of prime, which would currently yield a borrowing rate of 5.1% (based on the current prime rate of 6%). This year's low bid would currently yield a borrowing rate of 5.43% (based on the current Treasury index of 5.46%). Because the new index is a fair approximation of our alternative investment rate, the 99.4999% bid means that "legal arbitrage" savings on this year's lease purchases have been virtually eliminated. When we investigated the interest rate issue further, AT&T sent information indicating that the compression of the taxable vows. tax-exempt rate differential is primarily a function of the absolute level of interest rates. Staff believes that increased regulatory pressure on the lenders is also partly to blame. Whatever the reason, the financial gain usually realized as a result of thee rate differentials will not be a factor in 1993. The remaining advantages of the lease purchase program are the ability to spread payments over more than one budget year, and the ability to lock in current rates if, as expected, rates increase during the next five years. Staff intends to monitor the lease purchase program more closely next year to determine whether it continues to be cost effective, especially for smaller purchases. AT&T has been our lease purchase lender for each of the last two years. City staff has been very satisfied with the service we have received from them. This agreement does not represent a commitment to borrow. Decisions to lease purchase specific items of equipment must be approved by the Commission throughout the year on an individual basis. Concern was expressed regarding AT&T's taking exception to utilizing the standardized contract document. The Finance Director stated the proposed contract is the same as the last two years. It has not been extended past September 30, but no purchases will be made prior to the approved contract. He stated he will submit confirmation of the extension of contract in writing prior to Thursday. Purchase of 14 - 1993 Ford Crown Victoria Police Pursuit Vehicles from Don Reid Ford, Inc., Maitland, FL, for $186,088; authorize a lease purchase thru AT&T Credit Corp. for 5 of the vehicles (PD) The Patrol Division is currently short of patrol cars which hinders its deployment of personnel at peak times to respond to calls for service and to provide prevention patrol coverage. The Police Department will free up additional officers for regular patrol duty as a result of the new Crime Scene Services Contract with the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office. The Police Department's capital improvement plan of he 1992/93 budget requested the purchase of five additional vehicles to address these needs. In addition, the Police Department is purchasing nine more vehicles to initiate a maintenance, appearance and mileage containment plan in the West District. Under our current system of patrol deployment, patrol officers are randomly assigned a vehicle each day from the Police Department's fleet for use during the tour of duty. It is common for an officer to drive a different car on each work day. This has resulted in poor vehicle maintenance and appearance, mileage inequities, and a lack of accountability in dealing with these problems. As maintenance problems increase, the number of cruisers available at any given time decreases due to vehicles being at the motor pool for service. At times, there have been no cruisers available for officers suppose to be on duty. An experimental plan was developed in the West Patrol District to address both the lack of cars and at the same time improve the maintenance of appearance of the fleet. The plan is to pair each officer in the district with another officer working a different shift. One cruiser would be assigned to this pair of officers for their exclusive use. That particular car would be operated only by these two officers who would be responsible for monitoring the maintenance, appearance and cleanliness of the vehicle. The vehicle would not be operated 24 hours a day as is frequently the case with the current fleet. Mileage will be more equally distributed within the fleet and the useful life of the vehicle would be extended. This plan is not a take-home car plan; the car would be left at the Police Department between shifts and would be available in an emergency. For the past ten months, the Police Department has experimented with this plan on a limited scale with eight pairs of officers in the West Patrol District. The eight cars used in the plan were two to four years old with moderate mileage. We observed a remarkable improvement in the appearance and maintenance of these vehicles as well as the attitude and morale of the officers assigned. In response to questions, it was stated five of the vehicles will be lease/purchased, the remainder will be purchased cash. If the police officers are assigned a specific vehicle, they will take better care of it thus increasing its longevity. Also, the vehicle will always be available one shift for repairs. Contract with Everett S. Rice, Pinellas County Sheriff, to provide Crime Scene Services and Evidence and Property Storage to the City's Police Dept., for the period 1/1/93-12/31/93, for $240,000 (PD) Through the 1992/93 budget process, the Police Department has eliminated the Identification Unit. The staffing level of full time positions consisted of one police sergeant, five police officers and two identification technicians as well as vehicles, equipment and operating expenses. The proposed contract can accomplish the same optimum level of service utilizing Sheriff's Department personnel and equipment at a cost of $240,000.00. This contract will eliminate the two identification technician positions and reassign the sergeant and five officers to needed operational patrol positions. The contract cost includes the processing of two thousand crime scenes in the City of Clearwater. There is a provision, whereby, if the two thousand number is surpassed, additional crime scene processing will cost $120.00 each. However, the Clearwater Police Department shall determine which crime scenes will be processed. The collection and storage of all evidence and property, excluding bicycles, together with the packaging and transportation of same to a lab or other testing facility is included. The contract significantly reduces operating costs associated with the purchasing and developing of film, standby and overtime pay for court, as well as the reduction of some assignment pay. It further diminishes the need for additional physical expansion of the Property Section and removes the disposition of all the newly collected property and evidence from the responsibility of the City of Clearwater. The contact is renewable for two additional years at a rate not to exceed a 4.25% increase each year. A question was raised whether the evidence room would be completely eliminated. It was stated no new evidence would be brought in, but it would take two years to work through what is there. Also, fingerprinting would continue. Increases to the minimum and maximum SAMP Pay Plan ranges in variable amounts as recommended by the Human Resources Director and the City Manager (HR) The proposed variable adjustments to the SAMP Plan salary ranges for fiscal year 1992-93 are based on the following: 1) Economic adjustments made to the Regular Pay Plan job classes as a result of the collective bargaining process. All union bargaining unit classes which are regular full-time or permanent part-time were adjusted by three percent throughout their pay scale (minimum through maximum), effective October 1, 1992. 2) Compression problems existing between the Regular Pay Plan and the SAMP Pay Plan, particularly between job classes in the lower SAMP ranges and related job classes in the Regular Pay Plan but also impacting higher level classes. It is noted that the Regular Pay Plan was adjusted last fiscal year by four percent throughout the plan, while the SAMP Pay Plan was adjusted four percent at the maximum end only. With the three percent adjustment to the minimum of the Regular Pay Plan for FY 92-93, it is important that some reasonable adjustments be made to the SAMP minimums this year. A descending percentage adjustment is proposed for the minimum rates in the SAMP Pay Plan, ranging from twelve percent at SAMP A to zero percent at SAMP M through P. This will help to eliminate the more serious compression concerns at the lower SAMP ranges and preclude such concerns from occurring with higher SAMP ranges. A descending percentage adjustment is also proposed for SAMP maximum rates, ranging from eight percent for SAMP A to three percent for SAMP E through P. This will allow SAMP employees currently at their range maximum to receive an adjustment equivalent to the economic adjustment made for all other employees. In response to a question whether the compression issue would ever change, the Human Resources Director stated it will always be there to some degree. An increase in the minimum of a range only affects those below the new minimum. Last year the maximums were increased to accommodate some already at the maximum level. This occurred twice since 1987. A major analysis of the SAMP plan will done next year. Contract for maintenance of Gaylord Galaxy automated library system to Gaylord Systems, Syracuse, NY, at an annual cost of $28,082 to commence upon installation date (LIB) The City of Clearwater utilizes the Gaylord System to provide on-line circulation control and the card catalog reference to library patrons. The contract includes hardware and software maintenance. Gaylord extends to customers a 180-day money back guarantee. Gaylord standard maintenance contract goes into effect upon installation of hardware and software. Maintenance includes 24-hour, dial-in support seven days per week for both hardware and software diagnostics and next day support for on-site maintenance requirements. The Gaylord maintenance contract reflects a savings of $45,000 a year over the previous vendor. In response to a question as to why the maintenance contract is less expensive, the Library Director stated they have a new system; older systems are harder to maintain. Extension of contract for copier services with Pitney Bowes, Inc., Tampa, FL, for the period 11/1/92-10/31/93, at an est. $84,000 (PIO) Convenience copy machines are used by every department within the city. Under the terms of the contract, the vendor supplies all labor, parts, stands, repairs, maintenance and supplies, except paper. The cost-per-copy method of providing copier services requires little administrative time and no capital investment by the city. It also affords the city the option of changing or upgrading equipment as circumstances demand. In 1990, the city received eight responses to its bid for photocopier services. Of the responses received, Pitney Bowes of Tampa submitted the lowest bid that met all bid specifications. This cost of $.0175 includes all machines, parts, labor and supplies, and represents no increase in the cost-per-copy the city has paid for more than four years. This contract was for one year with the option to extend the original terms, including price-per-copy, for four additional one year periods. This is the third year of the contract period. In response to a question whether the cost of paper is included in the price, it was stated it is not. A request was made that the total cost including paper be submitted. Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #5291-92 - Vacating Westerly 3' of the landscape, drainage and utility easement lying along the E lot line of Lot 4, Braeside Place Sub., 3418 Braeside Place (Byron/Taylor V92-18) (PW) The applicant's house encroaches approximately 1.9 feet into the existing easement. The applicant is requesting the westerly 2.0 feet of the existing easement be vacated to eliminate the structural encroachment. This petition has been reviewed by various City Departments/Divisions concerned. The Building Official reports that the house was built in 1985, with the pool and screen enclosure being added in 1986." This house was constructed prior to the recently-instigated process whereby impending encroachments are more readily discovered and precluded. All other Departments concerned have no objection. The city has no existing utilities within this easement. Florida Power, General Telephone, and Vision Cable have no objection to this vacation request. A question was raised regarding what "landscape" easement means. The Public Works Director stated the developer may have had plans to put mangroves in at one time. A definition of landscape easement was requested. Variances to Sign Regulations for property (Oakbrook Village) located at 2225 Nursery Rd., Oakbrook Village Condo (Oakbrook Condominium Assoc. of Clwr., Inc.) (SV92-17) (PLD) The applicant is requesting four variances to permit four non-conforming subdivision signs for the Oakbrook Condominium Association to remain after October 13, 1992. The four non-conforming subdivision signs are located at three places in the residential development: two are positioned on either side of the entrance drive fronting on Belcher Road; one is located at the northwest portion of the property fronting on Nursery Road; and one is located at the northeast portion of the property fronting on Nursery Road. The subject subdivision signs are contributory to the architectural theme of the residential development and have been in place for approximately 20 years. The signs are constructed of masonry block and brick. The current code allows one 24 square foot, six foot tall subdivision sign for each platted subdivision or property entrance. The revised code allows a maximum of two subdivision signs per property entrance with a maximum height of six feet and a maximum surface area of 24 square feet. per sign. Under the new code, the two signs on Belcher Road are conforming, but the other two signs are not associated with specific entrances and are not conforming. In response to a question regarding what standards were used to justify approval, the Planning and Development Director stated the signs are not obtrusive, the property has an unusual shape and fronts two roads. Concern was expressed regarding how approval of variance requests will be determined based on the new sign code. Variances to Sign Regulations for property located at 27001 US 19N, Sec. 30-28-16, M&B 41.03 (J.C. Penney Co., Inc.) (SV92-19) (PLD) The applicant is requesting three variances to permit an existing directional wall sign and four existing nonconforming business identification signs to remain after the amortization period. The signs are attached signs located on the J.C. Penny store in Countryside Mall. The property is zoned Commercial Center (CC), and the store is allowed three business identification signs containing a maximum area of 128 square feet for the "main" sign and 112 square feet per each of the other two signs, for a total of 352 square feet. The store currently has four business identification signs, containing a total of 681 square feet. The store also has a 6.25 square foot directional sign indicating where package pickup can occur. The maximum area for directional signs under the 1985 regulations is 3 square feet. Under the revised (1992) sign regulations, the store would be permitted to have three of the four business identification signs at their current size after applying the sign bonus provision (the store is setback over 500 feet from any adjoining property boundaries). The new regulations would not allow the two signs that exist on the est side of the store, but one of these signs could remain. The directional sign could be classified as an attached sign and would also be permitted to remain under the revised regulations. Staff recommends approval of three "J.C. Penny" signs to remain on the north, east and south sides of the business. The directional sign would also be allowed to remain. The only modification to signage that the store would have to undertake to achieve compliance with the revised regulations would be the removal of one of the two large "J.C. Penny" sings on the east side of the property. Removal of this sign would still allow the store to be adequately identified by the remaining large attached sign. In response to questions regarding what signs are non-conforming, it was stated there are two signs on one wall facing the parking lot and only one is allowed. In addition the signs are larger than allowed. They need to reduce the size and remove a sign. Variances to Sign Regulations for property (Countryside Mall) located at 27001 US 19N (formerly 2601 US 19N), Sec. 30-28-16, M&B 41.01, 41.02, 42.02 & 42.03 (Bellwether Properties of Florida, Ltd (SV92-20) (PLD) The applicant is requesting the variance to permit a 60 foot high sign instead of 24 feet as permitted by code (at the time of submittal). The sign will be replacing the existing freestanding sign located at the southwest corner of the Countryside Mall property; this sign has been temporarily removed due to the road construction project. The application indicates that the variance stems from the fact that there is an overpass being constructed for US Highway 19 at Countryside Boulevard which is eliminating the existing sign and also because of the new overpass for US Highway 19 at S.R. 580. The application states that the "crown height of the two overpasses will be approximately 25 to 30 feet;" the applicant feels that the location and height of these two overpasses and the size of the mall necessitates the additional sign height. Also, the application makes reference to a similar variance approved for the Arigato Japanese Steak House located at 26508 US Highway 19 North; however, this approved variance (on 6-18-92) permits the freestanding sign for the subject restaurant to be only 10 feet higher than the 20 foot height permitted. Effective October 13, 1992, the new sign regulations permit a height bonus relative to this situation as follows: the allowable height (now 20 feet in the CC district) may be increased for freestanding signs on properties which front on overpasses or elevated roadways a maximum of ten feet above the crown height of the overpass or elevated roadway as measured from a point on the roadway that is perpendicular to the sign location. The City Public Works Department reports that the plans for US Highway 19 indicate the crown height of the point of the elevated roadway which will be near the sign location, the point of measurement as per the specifications in the new sign code, to be 14 feet (Note: the highest point of this overpass will be 35 feet above Countryside Boulevard). Therefore, the bonus provision of the new code would permit the sign to be 34 feet in height. The Traffic Engineer has reviewed the request and has no objection to the proposed sign height from a traffic standpoint; however, he feels that it wouldn't make much of a difference to a motorist if the sign were to be 34 feet or 60 feet at the proposed location because, unless Florida Department of Transportation were to erect a sign indicating specifically which exit to use for access to the Mall, which is not likely, a motorist will have to be aware of which exit(s) to use before the sign is visible or figure out which exit(s) to use after passing the sign and/or the mall. The Traffic Engineer does not feel the additional sign height is necessary or justified. In response to questions regarding the height and size of the sign, it was stated code allows the pole sign to be 36 square feet, 24 feet in height. The height is determined by location. Staff Presentation re: North Myrtle and North Fort Harrison Avenue neighborhood zoning study (PLD) During the presentations of the Downtown Development Plan in the North Fort Harrison neighborhood, staff was asked to research options for providing zoning incentives for the revitalization of the existing commercial corridor. A zoning study was proposed and authorized to be prepared for this area. Staff has completed its initial zoning study and is ready to begin the process of receiving public comment. Staff is proposing an expedited review of these issues in order to link any proposed Land Use Plan changes to the Pinellas Planning Council Consistency Program submittal to the Department of Community Affairs in November. If this schedule is not followed, it will be late 1993 before a new zoning pattern can be implemented in the North Fort Harrison/North Myrtle area. The purpose of the study is to develop a neighborhood plan that creates the potential for long-term redevelopment of this major Downtown entryway area while reducing land use incompatibilities that tend to contribute to neighborhood deterioration. Objectives established to achieve the purpose are 1) improve "street appeal" along North Fort Harrison and North Myrtle Avenues; 2) reduce or eliminate blighting influences such as inappropriate residential conversions and blighted commercial structures and areas through zoning incentives that encourage desired development and proactive code enforcement; 3) establish a long-range zoning pattern which recognizes existing uses and promotes future uses which support neighborhood cohesiveness and compatibility from a land use standpoint; 4) promote compatible densities within clearly specified residential areas; 5) stimulate new commercial development and promote continued existence of existing businesses through zoning district map amendments; 6) establish a new zoning district to facilitate a wider range of nonresidential uses within the nonresidential corridors while promoting compatibility with surrounding residential neighborhoods. To determine the effectiveness of the new plan and new zoning for the subject study area, the following success measures were established: 1) private development of 100 new multi-family residential units in the study area by 1997; 2) private development of 30,000 square feet of new nonresidential development in the study area by 1997; 3) a ten percent increase in nonresidential property values (above the countywide rate of increase in appraised value of nonresidential properties) in the study area between 1992 and 1997; 4) include the North Forth Harrison/North Myrtle Avenue area in a comprehensive economic development scheme for the promotion of mixed nonresidential and residential development in the general vicinity of Downtown Clearwater by 1994; 5) adopt a streetscape landscaping theme and provide a retroactive remedial landscaping along North Fort Harrison Avenue by 1993; 6) perform a "follow-up" housing code reinspection of residential sections in the study area by 1994; 7) develop 50 units of assisted multi-family housing in the study area by 1995; and 8) prepare a CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Development) study for the North Fort Harrison/North Myrtle area during 1993. The subject study area contains a wide variety of zoning districts (including single family residential, multi-family residential, resort commercial, and neighborhood commercial) and land uses. Additional issues for consideration are crime prevention, housing code enforcement, community development program, streetscape landscaping, and the downtown plan expansion. Implementation of the plan would include 1) receipt and referral by the City Commission on October 15, 1992; 2) public meetings with affected groups in October and November; 3) recommendation to the City Commission on November 3rd; 4) City Commission adoption of the plan on November 19, with first reading ordinances regarding zoning and land use, creating infill commercial zoning, and study area zoning changes in DCA land use changes submittal; 5) Commission approval of first quarter budget amendment to authorize streetscape project along North Fort Harrison Avenue in January, 1993; and 6) second reading ordinances regarding zoning and land use changes and creation of infill commercial district. Concerns were expressed regarding the time crunch of the implementation schedule citing the need to present the plan to and receive input from the public prior to presentation to the Planning and Zoning Board on November 3rd. The Planning and Development Director stated staff has met with affected groups several times and they have discussed problems with the Neighborhood Coalition. In response to a question, it was stated if the plan is delayed 30 days, it will actually be delayed six months. It was hoped to submit this with the Downtown Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive land use changes can only be submitted to the State twice a year. Direction re: Implementation of the Tropical Seascape Theme for Clearwater Beach (PLD) (WSO) The Clearwater Beach Blue Ribbon Task Force has recommended a number of tasks to address the development of an architectural/promotional theme for the Clearwater Beach commercial areas. Central to the development of this theme is clearly defining what is meant by "tropical seascape," from a quantifiable, architecturally meaningful standpoint. Staff recommends coordinating the development of a tropical seascape theme with several groups which represent various interests on Clearwater Beach, including the Clearwater Beach Association, Resort Motel Owners Association, and the West Area Council of the Chamber of Commerce. The Task Force proposed an incentive approach to implementing the tropical seascape design theme., Such an approach was implemented in the North Greenwood Commercial District, where a point system was devised that rewarded compliance with some aspects of the design guidelines with parking waivers. However, under the North Greenwood system, general compliance with the design guidelines is required prior to the issuance of any building or sign permit. Since the development of these guidelines for North Greenwood, no development has occurred; consequently, staff is unable to gauge the effectiveness of the incentive aspects of the program. Possible incentives for complying with the guidelines are: 1) Allowing the parking reduction "bonus" only for complying properties. This incentive would require code changes which would eliminate the 50% parking reduction on Clearwater Beach except for properties which meet the design guideline requirements. 2) Allowing complying properties to "count" existing public parking as part of their required parking in a manner similar to that used in the Downtown Urban Center zoning district. (NOTE: Staff feels this will exacerbate the parking problem on Clearwater Beach.) 3) Providing increased floor area ratios for complying properties. Floor area ratios could be increased from the current 1.05 to 1.5, for example, in the Beach Commercial district if the design guidelines were met. This will require local approval of an "Activity Center" designation for Clearwater Beach that will have to be ultimately adopted by the Pinellas Planning Council and the Countywide Planning Authority (the County Commission) in order to allow development intensity in excess of that provided for in the Countywide Plan. 4) Allowing increased height for complying properties. For example, properties that comply with the design guidelines might be permitted a 10 to 20 foot height "bonus." Staff finds the parking reduction "bonus" incentive to be the only one likely to effectively promote compliance with the design guidelines. Floor area ratios and height restrictions are, for the most part, sufficiently generous to not impede development that does not meet the required design. Density bonuses are probably not feasible due to State requirements for maintaining existing density in coastal high hazard areas. Another way to address the issue is through a regulatory approach. This approach establishes quantifiable design guidelines as specific development requirements; these guidelines would be mandatory, just as parking and setback requirements are mandatory. Since design guidelines are somewhat subjective, it would be necessary to establish a design review board to review and approve each development proposal. Staff feels that market forces on Clearwater Beach would allow the application of a regulatory approach. Without a significant cutback in existing development rights, such as deletion of the parking "bonus" or a stringent reduction in allowable floor area ratios, an incentive approach stands little chance of successful implementation. The regulatory concept will need to evolve from the definition of the tropical seascape theme. Once a clear definition of "tropical seascape" has been developed by the designated groups and approved by the City Commission, staff will initiate requests for proposals from various firms to: a) develop specific design guidelines to implement the architectural elements of the tropical seascape theme; and b) insure that local guidance is provided in the development of these architectural requirements. In response to questions, it was stated building renovations would have to be equal to at least 50% of the property's value for eligibility of incentives. It was also suggested compliance with the guidelines would be voluntary when renovating, but mandatory for new construction. Discussion ensued regarding what incentives would be the most attractive to the property/business owners. Suggestions were made to consider low interest loans and/or grants and signs as incentives. Consensus was to come up with a general theme and get input from Beach organizations regarding what they would like as incentives for complying with a theme. ITEM - Sign Variance Fees Refund The City Commission requested that staff review the potential impact of refunding sign variance fees for properties who have requested variance approvals for modifications to existing signage or to allow existing signage to remain. The time period for refunds was to be analyzed from the point at which the substantially higher variance fees went into effect to the present (August 2, 1990-September, 1992). Preliminary review indicates that 51 sign variance requests have occurred during this period, with 32 of these requests involving existing signage. Refunding the variance fees associated with these sign variance requests in excess of the current $50 fee would result in an approximate loss of $14,400 in revenue. In response to a question, it was stated application fees paid previously for variances ranged from $450-475 plus $50 for each additional variance required. A concern was expressed that the door would open to other requests for refunds. Concern was also expressed that those who cooperated with the City by applying for a variance prior to the end of the amortization period paid a higher fee than those who are waiting until the last moment. Consensus was to refund only those variances processed for existing signs. OTHER CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS Report of claims review committee re: Brannon v. City This claim arises from a one car accident on Bay Esplanade. The accident happened on November 29, 1991, at 2:38 a.m. James Brannon was a passenger in a car driven by Christopher Diegtel. Diegtel was going east on Bay Esplanade and failed to follow Bay Esplanade as it makes a 90 turn northward, and drove off the public boat ramp and into Clearwater Bay. Diegtel died at the scene. Brannon was pulled from the car and lived approximately ten months before he died. Brannon's estate claim is for medical expenses, economic damages, loss of earnings, loss of net accumulations, survivor's pain and suffering, etc. Assistant City Attorney Richard Hull stated a settlement proposal of $25,000 was received; the City's maximum risk in pursuing the case is $200,000. The driver of the vehicle had a blood alcohol level of .225 and the passenger was .125, with the legal limit being .1. Attorney Hull stated there were no signs in place at the time of the first accident. A companion case occurred six months later after signs were in place. The driver of that vehicle also had an elevated blood alcohol level. Even with the signs, the risk is still there. In response to a question, the Assistant City Attorney stated there has been no discovery yet. A concern was expressed if the City were to settle, it could set a precedent encouraging others to sue presuming the City is in error. Consensus was to not settle and to pursue the case. CITY MANAGER VERBAL REPORTS Legislative Program Elizabeth Deptula, Assistant City Manager, reviewed some key issues. She is working with other municipalities regarding annexation of enclaves. The solid waste flow control and billboard issues are being monitored. The Florida League of Cities is not in agreement regarding flow control. Ms. Deptula stated Clearwater was initially one of the few entities concerned; some don't understand the issue. She stated legislation regarding Trip and Fall issue may be brought forward. A question was raised regarding a requirement that curbs be painted to distinguish them from sidewalks. The highest priority to be addressed by the Legislature is the issue of voter control taxes. It was stated each county needs to find ways to bring in tax revenues. Concerns were expressed regarding tax exemptions for historic properties and ad valorem taxes on government property leaseholds. Commission Involvement in Land Negotiations The City Manager stated there are two negotiations in process, the Brown property and an easement on Stevenson's Creek. He requested two Commission volunteers to assist in the negotiating process, with the expectation it would give more clout to the City. At the same time, it would give the Commissioners an idea of how lengthy the process is and that team effort from several different city departments is involved. A concern was expressed this would violate the Sunshine Law. Consensus was that Commissioners not be involved in the negotiations. Concern was expressed regarding the need for discussion of lawsuits to be open to the public, citing a loss of rights of confidentiality regarding lawsuits. Consensus was to include in the Legislative Program a request for amendments to the Sunshine Law regarding land purchase and lawsuit discussions. The Assistant City Manager recommended a Legislative reception be held in honor of the newly elected representatives. Consensus was to coordinate with the other districts. COMMISSION DISCUSSION ITEMS Security Alarm Ordinance (WSO) The following concerns were raised regarding the false alarm ordinance: 1) the length of time an alarm sounds and the reset feature, which may not be available on older systems 2) the need for annual permit renewals since there is no cost for the permit, 3) weather conditions which cause alarm are out of control of owner, 4) power surges out of control of user, 5) accessibility to buildings by Police Officers in order to confirm the secure condition of the building, and 6) time lapse between the time of alarm and arrival of the police officer, which could allow for a change in the surrounding conditions. Chief Klein stated since the alarm ordinance was enacted in October, 1990, the number of alarms to which the Police Department had to respond decreased eight percent, while the number of calls for service increased by 10 percent. Each response to an alarm call takes an average of 15 minutes and requires two officers. The number of warnings issued has increased, while citations have decreased. Regarding the length of an alarm and the reset feature, Captain Kaminskas explained the process, stating warnings usually end up with the alarm company upgrading the systems. Chief Klein stated the annual renewal as provided for in the code has been put on hold. There are over 4,000 alarms and the permit renewal process would be very costly. A proposed amendment to the code to remove the renewal requirement is being submitted. Regarding conditions beyond the control of the user, Chief Klein stated each case is handled individually. In two years, of 168 citations challenged, ten went before the City Manager. Eight of those ten were upheld as false alarms and two were overturned. Alarms should not go off due to a power surge or weather conditions. If this occurs, the alarm company is forced to upgrade the equipment. Assistant City Attorney Rob Surette stated an amendment is being proposed that if it is determined an alarm is caused by a power surge, a letter from the alarm company, after an inspection which causes the wires and/or control panels to be replaced, will be accepted in lieu of a fine. A certified letter stating the system has been updated will also be accepted. Regarding concern #5, Chief Klein stated the owner is contacted and requested to respond; if there is no response, this limits access to the building for further investigation. The Police Officer can only report what he has seen. A suggestion was made the wording of the form be changed regarding the inability to confirm the security of the building. With regard to response time, Chief Klein stated the Police Officer responds according to priority of a call. Again, it was suggested the wording on the alarm report be changed to better reflect the circumstances. Opening Dunedin Pass (WSO) Commissioner Deegan stated the County's draft report on dredging the pass, compiled over three years ago, seems to indicate a lot of good could be done to Clearwater Bay including improving the water quality. He believes the possibility of getting support from the Corps of Engineers is greater than thought. He spoke with Mr. Walther of Coastal Tech, who is in the business of inlet management planning, and thought it might be worthwhile for City staff to speak with him. He feels there is at least a 75% chance of getting the dredging permit. He requested Mr. Walther be given an opportunity to further investigate, stating there is still a lot of support for the dredging, including the Harbormaster and Marine Advisory Board. Discussion ensued regarding the County's involvement, with a concern expressed that City taxpayers should not have to pay the cost of dredging and maintenance of the pass. It was stated a report from 1989 referred to the depth and width not being sufficient to help the water quality and prism in the whole of Clearwater Bay. It was felt a new submittal would have a better chance of being approved. Additional concerns were expressed regarding the need to again obtain County assistance for such an expense. Commissioner Deegan expressed he would just like to get a second opinion to that of Camp Dresser and McKee. Inlet management is new, and a plan to protect beaches from erosion is required by DNR. North Greenwood Request for Holiday Lights (WSO) The Greenwood Merchants Association asked that the City Commission consider putting holiday lights along Greenwood similar to those downtown and on the Causeway. The current vendor would charge $110 per decoration per pole. There are 19 poles from Palmetto to Marshal Street for a cost of $2,090 for the season. This cost includes leasing the decorations and put-up and take-down charges. It does not include any additional electrical work that might be needed. The vendor has advised that the longer we wait to make a decision, the less fixtures he will have. A similar request was considered when the Beautification Committee requested decorations along Countryside Boulevard in the area of Countryside Mall. The policy at that time was to limit the decorations to the downtown core and the Causeway. Commission consensus was that the potential for additional expansion was to great. Consensus was to not change policy. Assistant City Attorneys - salaries & evaluations (WSO) The City Attorney stated the process of restructuring the system to remove the assistant city attorneys from the pay schedules began two years when the City Manager indicated he prefers not to have to sign off on the salary increases for these positions. They are currently in range L of the samp plan. Rob Surette, Assistant City Attorney, handed out statistics of cities of comparable size, stating most have more assistant city attorney positions. He felt the assistant city attorney positions should be removed from the samp plan guidelines. The City Attorney stated they should all get a pay raise, and they are more valuable every year. He is able to keep most work in-house due to having a capable staff, and he would like to keep them from looking elsewhere for a better salary. Discussion ensued regarding the establishment of a pay range scale for the assistant city attorneys, and that it should be adjusted every three years. It was suggested a comparison be made with similar positions of other municipalities to have something to work with to establish starting and cap salaries. In response, it was stated experience influences the quality of the job. In addition, the longer a person is in the job, the more they are asked to do. There weren't any pay ranges until the samp plan was developed. Discussion ensued and consensus was, since the Commission approves the City Attorney's budget, to let him determine what raises to give. It was stated there is an administrative policy to not exceed 18% for any one employee. It was requested an agenda item be prepared for Thursday's meeting removing the assistant city attorneys from the pay ranges, and establish a policy for the City Attorney not to exceed an 18% pay raise for any one employee and that increases stay within the budgeted salaries. OTHER COMMISSION ACTION Mayor Garvey questioned whether members for the trial period of the Environmental Advisory Committee need to be city residents, recommending teachers that run school environmental committees as good candidates as members. A question was raised regarding whether Commission appointees to the Budget Advisory Committee need to be removed when the Commissioner has vacated his/her seat. Also, whether those members are required to be City residents. Consensus was to keep the requirement of Clearwater residency to serve on the committees. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Authority is setting up a task force for responding to needs of hurricane victims. Commissioner Deegan asked the City Attorney to report whether the Downtown Plan meets the requirements of the State Statutes regarding the need for a thorough plan. He questioned when the new traffic plan on the Beach will be in effect. He requested a status report be given at each work session regarding the new City Hall. The meeting adjourned at 6:17 p.m.