Loading...
06/04/2001CITY COMMISSION WORKSESSION CITY OF CLEARWATER June 4, 2001 Present: Brian J. Aungst Mayor/Commissioner Ed Hart Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Whitney Gray Commissioner Hoyt P. Hamilton Commissioner William C. Jonson Commissioner Also present: William B. Horne II Interim City Manager Garry Brumback Assistant City Manager Pamela K. Akin City Attorney Sue Diana Assistant City Clerk Brenda Moses Board Reporter The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. at City Hall. Employee of the Month Award - May 2001 The Employee of the Month award was presented to Michael Willis of the Marine & Aviation Department. The meeting recessed from 9:02 to 9:06 a.m. to meet as the Community Redevelopment Agency. PRESENTATIONS Jerry Lieberman - Performance Based Evaluation of Social Services Funding Requests Jerry Lieberman, USF (University of South Florida) said the Jim Walter Partnership Center is funded by the Eckerd Family Foundation and Fannie Mae. Decision-making is based on priorities, evaluation criteria and measurable outcomes for social services funding programs. He distributed 2 handouts that included information regarding the Center and suggested processes that Clearwater could review and consider. In response to a question, Mr. Lieberman said he has reviewed some of Clearwater’s programs and felt there is some duplication of services and evaluation of activity is needed. He said Clearwater’s process tends to fund the organizations in place, but that process could become a more thoughtful one. He suggested staff review his outline of the social services process. It was remarked that Clearwater has missed out on significant funding opportunities over the past 4 years due to its lack of a performance based evaluation process. Consensus was to establish a formal review process to determine funding for service providers. PUR PURCHASING Overstreet Paving Co., Inc., street resurfacing, to add 16 additional street projects to award approved on 9/21/00, est. $300,000 (PW) Tomas Ollestad, professional tennis instruction, 5/7/01-9/30/02, addition to $20,000 contract approved by City Manager on 5/7/01, for total $180,000 (PR) Alto U S Inc., one 2001 Americal Lincoln riding floor sweeper model 7760 with attachments, replacement, $34,269.92; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease-Purchase Agreement (GS) Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners, one color aerial photography - 2000 series, City's share of cost, $30,000 (PW) In response to a question regarding the professional tennis instruction contract to Tomas Ollestad, Purchasing Manager George McKibben said Mr. Ollestad is paid based on a percentage of the revenues he brings in. As an independent contract instructor, he may at times employ other tennis pros to assist him or provide lessons and is responsible to pay them from his own proceeds. In response to a question, Parks and Recreation Director Kevin Dunbar said the City receives 25% of revenues generated by Mr. Ollestad. In response to a question regarding color aerial photography from the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners, Mr. McKibben said the City is buying a copy of the entire county for a third of the cost that the City would incur if done in-house. Tom Mahoney, Engineering, said the photographs will be maintained on CD Roms for historical purposes and would be available to the public. FN FINANCE Authorize $100,000 payment to settle claim of Charles Gross for damages to his home & its contents resulting from a city sewer backup On February 26, 2001, grease in a City sewer line caused the line to back up and flood the residence of Claimant Charles Gross. The residence of Claimant is located in the City at 1722 Windfield Drive North. The raw sewage caused extensive damage to the residence structure and its contents. The City is legally responsible for maintaining City sewer lines. The City failed to properly maintain its sewer line. The City’s liability to Claimant is limited to $100,000 pursuant to Section 768.28, Florida Statutes. Claimant incurred approximately $54,000 in clean-up costs, and has an estimate of $42,361 for repairing the damage to the residence. Claimaint’s residence was uninhabitable while being cleaned and the City paid Claimant $3,341 for living expenses outside his home through May 19, 2001. Claimant has submitted a claim for contents damage in addition to his claim for damages to the structure. That claim, when coupled with the incurred costs for clean-up and repair, and additional living expenses, exceeds $100,000. The City’s Risk Management Division and the City’s Claims Committee recommend payment of the balance of the $100,000 to Claimant in full settlement of his liability claim caused by sewer backup damages to his property. It was remarked that grease trap legislation is forthcoming to address these types of problems. MR MARINE First Reading Ord. #6796-01 - allowing City Manager to sign off on standard, 3 year lease agreements for current marina building tenants, without taking to Commission In a memo from the City Clerk to the Harbormaster dated June 15, 1995, direction from the City Commission at its work session of June 12, 1995, was given on the Marina Lease policy. It stated the City Commission adopted a policy statement authorizing the City Manager to sign 3-year leases with current tenants in the Clearwater Marina building. The City Manager has been signing off on these specific types of leases since that time, without bringing them before the Commission. In the policy statement adopted June 12, 1995, the statement reads in part, “Adopt an ordinance that will allow the City Manager to approve and execute Marina building for profit lease agreements for a 3-year period. Current building tenants would have the option of a 3-year lease approved by the City Manager or a 5-year lease approved by the City Commission.” The City Legal Department suggests, “To have a clear delegation, it is best that you prepare an ordinance which incorporates the Commission’s directives from the June 12, 1995, workshop.” Director of Marine and Aviation Bill Morris said this is a housekeeping item. He said the reason 3-year leases are put in place is to allow tenants to change their mix of services. This ordinance applies to all tenants that are not Federal or State tenants. Some tenants prefer the 5-year lease, but the 3-year lease provides tenants more flexibility. He said current tenants have known of this ordinance for the past 7 years. He said the post office lease cannot be terminated for 9 years. They have been looking for another location for their shipping and receiving functions, but want to maintain a presence at the Marina because of its popularity with the community. Post Office employees have been moved further away from the Marina and into the permit parking lot. In response to a question, Ms. Akin said the City has no flexibility in terminating the post office lease. PW PUBLIC WORKS Presentation - Water Disinfection Public Utilities Director Andy Neff reviewed the proposed water disinfection process. He said the City must change the process from a chlorine to a chloramination system. He reviewed the process including: 1) terms; 2) what is changing; 3) why and when; 4) how and where; and 5) costs. Tampa Bay Water and Pinellas County are going to change to the chloramination system and that will require the City also to change its system. The City must comply with more stringent regulations from the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Mr. Neff said the chloramination system is safe and has been used by cities across the United States, including many in Florida, such as Tampa, who has been using the system since the early 1980s. He said the new system would eliminate the chlorine smell of water, however, initially, there may be some “dirty water” complaints until the new system flushes out the water mains. He said the health community and the general public would be informed of the new system. The health community and pet shops will be required to neutralize toxins and use carbon filters to neutralize chlorine and ammonia from water. These solutions are not costly to those organizations. In response to a question, Mr. Neff said taste/odor studies indicate that chloramination is preferred over chlorine systems. Staff has spoken to the City of Tampa regarding their conversion problems in the early 1980s to this new system. They have indicated minimal problems had occurred. He said as a result of an alteration of the chemical nature inside water pipes, increased flushing will be necessary. He said he was unsure of the amount of flushing necessary during the initial transition period. He said only if Pinellas County opts out of using the new system or if the City pumped its own water, would the City also be able to opt out. All indications appear that the County will implement this system. Public Works Administrator Mashid Arasteh said pilot testing and monitoring of water quality would be done as the process moves forward. In response to a question, Mr. Neff said the design is expected to be completed in July 2001; construction started in October 2001; and the project completed in March 2002. Capital project costs would be $1.4 million for reservoirs 2 and 3, and $8.2 million for reservoir #1, which is included in the water treatment plant, costs. All costs are included in the Public Utilities budget request. Most of the additional costs provided are for chemicals, not personnel. Mr. Neff said the new water quality standards under the Safe Water Drinking Act applies to all public providers in the nation. Surface water must be implemented sooner than ground water. (Cont. from 4/19, 5/3 & 5/17/01) Public Hearing & First Reading Ord. #6782-01 - Vacating 10' drainage & utility easement lying along a line 660' east of the west property line of M&B 41.05, Sec. 5-29-16, less S10' (School Board of Pinellas County, V2001-07) Paul B. Steven’s School is presently located on the subject property. The School Board of Pinellas County proposes to construct a new public school building on the property over the present easement location. The City has a 6-inch water line in the easement that is being relocated at the applicant’s expense. The applicant agrees to grant a new utility easement over the relocated water line. Florida Power, Time Warner, Verizon and Verizon Media Ventures have no objections to the vacation request. Public Works Administration is recommending approval of this vacation request. In response to a question, Assistant Planning Director Cyndi Tarapani said staff has not recently had discussions with the surrounding neighborhood. In previous meetings, residents expressed concern regarding the type of buffer along the south property line. Staff reviewed the School Board’s landscaping proposal and feels it is adequate. Some residents indicated they may prefer a fence in addition to the proposed landscaping. Staff has requested that the School Board provide them with a letter agreeing that any damage to the roadway due to this construction project would be repaired by the School Board. She said Mr. Miller has assured her that letter is forthcoming. Interim City Manager Bill Horne said a meeting would be held on Wednesday with the neighborhood to review the buffering proposed by the School Board. Jim Miller, Director of Real Property Management for Pinellas County School Board, said at the last neighborhood meeting residents expressed concerns regarding buffering. The School Board has agreed to install curbing and would provide samples of fence heights for the neighborhood to review. Cedar trees, fencing, landscaping, and a wind screen are all possibilities. Mr. Miller said not all residents agree on a common fence height as their properties are affected differently. He said the concerns voiced by the east property owners have been addressed. In response to a question, Mr. Miller said he was unsure that the project has caused water quality issues in the area, but the School Board has placed hay bales in the areas of concern as a preventative measure. He said the roadways are cleaned regularly and gravel placed in appropriate areas to prevent mud on tires. The School Board also has agreed to put in a baffle box drain in the vicinity of the new cafeteria to address runoff. The runoff would operate as a grease trap. Ms. Arasteh said staff is in the process of reviewing the baffle boxes. Mr. Miller said on the south side of the project, an 8-foot long, 6-inch high curb on the south side would alleviate drainage problems on the inverted roadway. The School Board is placing vegetation on a 15-foot section of land that could experience runoff. Mr. Horne said depending on how well the neighborhood meeting goes on Wednesday and if staff receives the School Board’s letter regarding roadway repairs, staff will be recommending approval on first reading of this item at the Thursday Commission meeting. He said not to expect complete agreement from all the neighbors regarding staff’s recommendation. Public Hearing - Declare surplus 10' wide parcel for purpose of conveying fee simple title therein by Quit-Claim Deed to Hidden Oaks Apartments, Inc., in exchange for City receiving 15' wide Sanitary Easement On July 31, 1939, John and Mary Taylor deeded the City a 10-foot wide strip of land that cuts through the property of Hidden Oaks Apartments on the southeast corner of Druid Road and South Greenwood Avenue to provide right-of-way for a 15-inch sanitary sewer. A boundary survey prepared by Polaris Associates, Inc., dated April 27, 2001, Job Number 001-2789, locates the majority of the sanitary line outside the deeded parcel, a situation that could trigger a reverter clause in the Taylor deed that would revoke city access to the line. Hidden Oaks Apartments, Inc. (“Hidden Oaks”) owner of the apartment complex, is in the process of refinancing its mortgage and proposes to clear what amounts to a cloud on the title. In exchange for the City reconveying the 10-foot wide Taylor parcel to Hidden Oaks, Hidden Oaks will grant the City a 15-foot wide easement for maintenance and future replacement, when necessary, of the sanitary line. The replacement easement will fully embrace the actual path of the sanitary line, and the additional 5-foot width will provide for easier and more efficient access for maintenance and replacement purposes. Section 2.01(d)(5)(iv) of the City Charter provides that surplus real property may be exchanged for other real property having a comparable appraised value. Recognizing that the potential loss of access to the sanitary line, and in consideration of the costs to otherwise relocate the facilities, it is deemed that the proposed exchange or the 10-foot wide fee simple parcel for the 15-foot wide easement parcel meets and complies with the requirements established in Section 2.01(d)(iv) of the Charter. In response to a question, Ms. Akin said it was and is not unusual to deed over a part of property where a utility easement lies. Contract for Clearwater Airpark Landscape Improvements to Florida's Finest Landscape Services, Inc., for $59,928.83 (Consent) The proposed project is located at the City owned Clearwater Airpark, 1000 North Hercules Avenue. The work includes the installation of a landscape buffer along Hercules Avenue, a landscaped noise abatement berm along Airport Drive and landscaping the entrance to the Airpark. The work also includes the installation of an irrigation system. This landscape plan for Clearwater Airpark is a requirement and a condition of the City’s Building Permit for the new airplane T-hangars which are currently under construction. The completion of the landscape installation also is a requirement of the Certificate of Occupancy for the new T-hangars. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $140,000. It includes this contract for $59,928.83 plus City material and labor costs to construct the noise abatement berm. This project is a Joint Project (JPA #40298619401) with the FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation). The FDOT will fund 50% of the total cost of the project or approximately $70,000. This project intends to enhance the existing Airpark facility and buffer objectionable view and noise from the adjacent neighborhoods and roadways. Work will commence upon award and execution of the contract and will be completed in 90 days. This is in accordance with the City-approved Master Plan. In response to a question, Ms. Arasteh said the landscaping is mostly drought resistant hedges, palmettos, etc., but could not be considered entirely xeriscaping. It was suggested staff consider xeriscaping prior to installing the landscaping. In response to a question, Mr. Morris said this project includes realigning the paving and access and relocating shade hangars in order to move them. He said the hedge along Hercules at the southeast corner of the Airpark would be inside the fence and would not create a visibility problem. Presentation - Memorial Causeway Bridge - History & Status; Pierce Street Extension Ms. Arasteh gave an overview and brief history of why the new Memorial Causeway Bridge project was brought forward, and its progress to date including 1) existing conditions; 2) traffic; 3) jurisdictional transfers; 3) bridge aesthetics and amenities; 4) costs; and 5) presented a short video. In response to a question, Ms. Arasteh said the FDOT has determined that no more vascular bridges are to be built due to the repairs associated with the mechanical parts of those types of bridges. She said in 1993, the FDOT had a project for $3 - $4 million to start rehabbing the existing bridge due to mechanical repairs needed. That project would have required closure of lanes and presented an adverse affect on citizens as it is a major evacuation route. Discussions began regarding FDOT’s intention not to build a new bridge for another 20 years. Other communities would be applying for the same funds. It was clear that the new bridge may have been postponed another 10 years until funds to finance it were available. In response to a question, Ms. Arasteh said when the bridge design was started, staff did not know what type of public transportation would be available. She said staff has not discussed with the FDOT clearance requirements to eliminate either the sidewalk or the shoulder to accommodate light rail. She said preliminary indications are the bridge can handle the load if a shoulder is removed. She said there is a possibility that a 20-foot section in the middle lane of the bridge could handle the load for light rail. Ms. Arasteh said staff is analyzing traffic patterns and levels of service. She said some intersection improvements may be needed in the future. She said the lift station at City Hall would be downsized over the next 2 years. She said the Pierce Street connection is 30 feet above ground level with 2 walls, one on the north and one on the south side of the bridge. She said landscaping is minimal and is mostly sod. Staff is applying to the FDOT to put in more palm trees, shrubs, and flowering plants. She said at one time, the bridge plan included a 3-tier landscaping plan at a cost of $300,000. She said the major feature of the bridge is its design. It includes curves and flows more gracefully than other bridges to provide an aesthetically pleasing result. In response to a question, she said the designs for lighting has changed. Underside lighting has been added. A spiral round for pedestrian access also was added to allow access to the Pinellas Trail. Ms. Arasteh said the estimated costs of construction include a 10% contingency. FDOT and the City’s consultant indicate a confidence that the bridge would come in lower than $50.1 million. She said by June 30, 2001, the City must deposit total construction costs in a project fund for the bridge. Anything unused for construction would come back to the City. She said upscale amenities previously discussed are not part of this project now. Doug Butler, HDR Project Manager, said the FDOT does not like alternative bids. He said certain amenities were included such as decorative railings. He said HDR attempted to determine those items that could be added at a later date at lower costs, and identified and included those items that would be too costly to add in the future. It was remarked that those types of decisions be discussed with the Commission rather than after the fact. Ms. Arasteh said although no public meeting was held regarding the latest changes to the bridge design, staff communicated with one another regarding these changes. It was suggested staff pursue the possibility of the City being reimbursed sooner than 2020. Ms. Arasteh said staff would need to keep in close contact with the FDOT regarding that issue. In response to a concern about the accuracy of the artist’s rendering of the bridge, Ms. Arasteh said that rendering is not accurate. The first piling is on the ground and the rest would be in the water. She said the Pierce Street connection is not part of this plan. It would cost approximately $400,000 and require Commission approval. It was suggested obtaining public feedback regarding the Pierce Street connection. Finance Director Margie Simmons said as there is no funding for that design aspect, the Pierce Street connection would require reallocation for that project. It was remarked that the private sector could be very helpful in sponsoring amenities for the new bridge. Ms. Arasteh said the City must use the funds the same year it submits an application for a grant. She said after the bridge is completed, the FDOT is responsible for its maintenance. In response to a question, she said the City is keeping the footprint of the bastille bridge on the east side simply for downtown construction. In response to a question, Mr. Horne said engaging the downtown community over the next couple weeks would not affect this project. He suggested the Commission consider the information provided them today and provide staff feedback on Thursday night. Second Amendment to Agreement with FDOT for Memorial Causeway Bridge replacement, to reflect receipt of additional $8,770,662 in federal funding for total federal commitment of $20,770,662 (Consent) On June 27, 1997, the Commission approved the JPA between the FDOT and the City for design, right-of-way acquisition and construction of the Memorial Causeway Bridge replacement. This JPA was amended in December 2000 to recognize $12 million in federal funding. The City now has been notified of the receipt of an additional $8,770,662 in federal funding, for a total federal commitment of $20,770,662. This JPA amendment is required to reflect the receipt of the additional federal funding. Project status: 1) bridge structural plans 100% submitted; 2) roadway construction plans – Phase IV submitted; 3) final R/W survey and mapping submitted; 4) R/W acquisition completed; 5) contract letting date is September 2001; and 6) construction is expected to begin in late 2001, with a completion date of 2003. In response to a question, Ms. Arasteh said it takes time to incorporate recommendations and obtain approval from the FDOT for alternatives to the bridge. It was remarked that the City wants to ensure it does not wait until 2020 to start the reimbursement process. Contract for 2000 Reclaimed Utility Improvements Project to A&L Underground, Inc., for $3,705,253 This construction contract includes work items from 2 separate projects. The projects are being bid and constructed together in order to minimize construction costs. The original project included replacement of the reclaimed water and potable water transmission mains under Clearwater Harbor. This replacement is necessary because the existing lines have reached the end of their useful life. Construction of the new Memorial Causeway Bridge will necessitate the relocation of a subaqueous sanitary sewer force main, and will impact a gas main crossing Clearwater Harbor. Replacement of these 2 utility lines is included in this contract. The subaqueous intracoastal borings under Clearwater Harbor will be performed using horizontal directional drilling technology. The costs for the individual components are as follows: 1) Sanitary force main = $1,440,563; 2) reclaimed water main = $1,039,519; 3) potable water main = $818,960; and 4) gas main = $406,211. The sanitary force main and the reclaimed and potable water mains were included in the recently approved utility rate increase. Resolution #01-07 was passed on March 1, 2001, establishing the City’s intent to reimburse certain project costs incurred with future tax-exempt financing. The Clearwater Harbor Force Main and Clearwater Harbor Transmission Mains (Water and Reclaimed Water) were identified as projects to be reimbursed by the issuance of Water & Sewer Revenue Bonds in FY 2002. The reclaimed water portion of the project is 50% funded by SWFWMD (Southwest Florida Water Management District) as part of a Cooperative Funding Agreement. The costs of the sanitary force main and the gas main are associated with the Memorial Causeway Bridge project. Penny will reimburse the costs for the new gas main for Pinellas funds to a maximum of $313,000. The amount in excess of $313,000 will be funded by the Gas Utility Fund. Work will commence upon award and execution of the contract and will be completed in 6 months. In response to a question, Ms. Arasteh said this item does deals with construction only in the area of Clearwater Harbor. She said the bluff will be part of the bridge construction. She said the agenda item does appear to infer that we are dealing with “reclaimed” water. Mr. Neff said the original project was to replace a reclaimed line under the Harbor and the rest of these projects just piggybacked onto that project title. Ms. Arasteh said this is part of the normal process. Authorize Parking System to recharge new pre-paid parking cards to a value of $22 for the price of $20 The new electronic parking meters are equipped with a pre-paid parking card payment option. Initially, the cards will be sold in $20 increments. This allows the customer $20 in time at any parking meter in the City. The City’s cost to purchase the cards is approximately $2 each. The cards can be recharged and reused. The Parking System has proposed to provide $2 in bonus time to each customer that recharges his or her card. By recharging the cards, the City is reducing its expenditures. However, by providing the $2 in bonus time, there is a potential of $2 in lost revenue each time a card is recharged. The Parking System views this as a wash to the City, but an incentive to the customer. There are several reasons why the City wants to promote the use of the pre-paid cards: convenience for its customers, reduce staff time collecting and counting coins, receive parking revenue up-front, less chance of meter vaults filling up and jamming the meters over holiday weekends, and reduced liability of lost revenue if meters are vandalized or broken into, etc. In response to a question, Ms. Arasteh said she did not know why the City is charged $2 to purchase the card but would research the matter before the Thursday Commission meeting. The meeting recessed from 11:07 to 11:19 a.m. PLD PLANNING Public Hearing & First Reading Ords. #6612-00 & #6613-00 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential/Office General & Office and LDR Zoning, 1106 Druid Rd. S., Bluff View, part of Lot 30 and Harbor Oaks, part of Lot M (Steven B. Chapman) (LUZ 00-08-10) This site is located generally on the northwest corner of Druid Road South and Jeffords Street and is approximately 1.63 acres in size. It is bordered on the west by the intercoastal waterway. The purpose of the land use plan amendment and rezoning is to allow a single-family residence to be built along the waterfront. The current use of the property includes an office building, 2 vacant structures, and a 31,000 square foot parking lot. The proposed residential development requires the site plan be reviewed by the CDB (Community development Board) as a flexible development approval. The CDB is anticipated to approve the site plan at their May 15, 2001, meeting, contingent upon Commission approval of this plan amendment and rezoning. The Planning Department determined the proposed land use plan amendment and rezoning are consistent with the following standards specified in the Community Development Code: 1) The proposal is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Plan; 2) there will be no adverse impacts on public facilities and their level of service; 3) the proposed land use plan amendment and rezoning represent a logical extension of the boundaries and will not result in “spot zoning”; 4) the potential range of uses and the specific proposed use are compatible with the surrounding area; and 5) the applications will not have an adverse impact on the natural environment. In accordance with the Countywide Plan Rules, the land use plan amendment is subject to the approval of the PPC (Pinellas Planning Council) and the Board of County Commissioners acting as the Countywide Planning Authority. Due to the size and intensity of the plan amendment site, review and approval by Florida Department of Community Affairs is not required. The CDB reviewed this application at the public hearing of May 15, 2001, and recommended approval of the application. In response to a question, Assistant Planning Director Cyndi Tarapani said Harbor Oaks residents and the neighborhood association were notified. Staff has not received any written or verbal comments. Public Hearing & First Reading Ords. #6806-01, #6807-01 & #6808-01 - Annexation (& redefining boundary lines of City to include said addition), Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban & MDR Zoning, 2492 Belleair Rd., Sec. 19-29-16, M&B 43.09 & 43.10 (Belleair Townhouse Partnership, Ltd.) (ANX 01-03-07) This site is located at 2492 Belleair Road and is approximately 1.77 acres in size. The purpose of the annexation is to bring the property into the City’s jurisdiction to serve the property with City sewer service. The current use of the property is vacant and the proposed use is multi-family dwellings. The property will be served by Pinellas County water and the City of Largo sewer service. This annexation has a land use amendment and zoning atlas amendment associated with it. The Planning Department determined the proposed annexation, land use amendment, and zoning district are consistent with the following standards specified in the Community Development Code: 1) The proposal is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Plan; 2) there will be no adverse impacts on public facilities and their level of service; 3) the proposed annexation is contiguous to existing municipal boundaries, represents a logical extension of the boundaries and does not create an enclave; 4) the potential range of uses and the specific proposed use are compatible with the surrounding area; and 5) the applications will not have an adverse impact on the natural environment. Following approval of the Pinellas County Charter amendment in a referendum election on November 7, 2000, the PPC is not authorized by Ordinance #00-63, Section 7 (1-3) to review all voluntary annexations including those previously executed through valid agreement. The PPC staff has reviewed this annexation and no objections have been received from that office. In accordance with the Countywide Plan Rules, the land use plan amendment is subject to the approval of the PPC and the Board of County Commissioners acting as the Countywide Planning Authority. Due to the size and intensity of the plan amendment site, review and approval by Florida Department of Community Affairs is not required. The Community Development Board reviewed this application at the public hearing of May 15, 2001, and recommends approval of the application. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said there are still a number of properties in this area that are still in the county. The Engineering Department will perform a long-term study in unincorporated areas and come up with a long-range plan to extend City services to all areas. She said a forced main using County property is the only alternative which would make it difficult to add other users. As Largo’s mains are across the street, staff felt it the best alternative. Alternatives for Parking Garage(s) on the Beach and Design of S. Gulfview and Beachwalk A report was prepared providing a brief history on recent beach parking garage alternatives. The report defines the need to pursue an alternative to the approved Marriott Resort development parking garage due to the need to locate, design and initiate construction of the new facility by the end of calendar year 2001 in order to have the parking garage and South Gulfview/Beachwalk projects concluded in conjunction with the construction of the new bridge. The report defines 6 alternatives for replacement of the south beach surface parking and recommends that the Kimpton-Prime Interest site (Marriott site) be pursued as the preferred location for the parking garage. This alternative anticipates a “turn key” parking garage of approximately 500 to 700 spaces with approximately 20,000 to 30,000 square feet of retail space. This option also may include a resort or condominium alternative. Alternative preliminary designs for the South Gulfview/Beachwalk project also are included in the report to demonstrate how the alignment, traffic movement and access, pedestrian linkages, etc. might work. Administration recommends pursuing the Kimpton-Prime Interest site as an alternative to the Marriott project parking solution, subject to detailed financial feasibility analysis and negotiation of an agreement with the Kimpton-Prime Interest group. In response to a question, Planning Director Ralph Stone said Mr. Markopoulos has modified his previous proposal including moving the garage north as much as possible and achieving more one-way movement further north. It was remarked that the pending litigation must be dropped in order for the project to move forward. Mr. Stone said Option #2 includes some access for Pier 60 vendors but felt it would cause more problems for the Roundabout. He agreed a condominium project on Gulfview would not be a catalytic project. It was remarked that condominiums would be better than a fast food restaurant. Mr. Stone said land costs are a major factor in where the parking garage could be constructed. It was remarked that an 800-space parking garage is not the best use of the Kimpton property. It was requested that staff provide a breakdown of land costs, cost per space, etc. for each proposal. It was felt that some alternatives have not been considered. Mr. Stone said staff could provide a range of costs per site, but no specifics. It was felt that $18.50 a space is on the high end for any location in the City. It was felt that the City’s first priority is to be fiscally responsible and be consistent with design standards for the beach. It was requested that staff address the exemption in Beach by Design that provides for a parking structure that is not required to comply with the design standards for the beach. It was requested that staff provide information regarding provisions for bus and RV parking in each proposal. In response to a question, Mr. Stone said the City cannot legally create a single use piece of property, but can create a zoning district that would address uses such as fast food restaurants. Ms. Akin said the property must be useable within the parameters of the Code. Mr. Stone said a fast food restaurant would be in the same zoning category as a hotel. He said staff has to balance “spot zoning”. It was remarked that the Rockaway location would be a profitable location for a parking facility. It was suggested that south beach redevelopment and the parking garage are 2 separate issues. It was felt that the parking problem only exists 20% of the year. It was felt that the City must act now if a parking facility is going to be built by the time the new bridge is built. Mr. Horne said it is not feasible to fulfill the south beach parking commitment by building a facility on the north beach. Staff needs a clear sense of what the Commission wants on south beach and if the prior Commission’s commitment is still valid today. He said the north beach parking discussion is another matter. It was remarked that the catalytic project is not available to accomplish what the Commission wants. It was felt that the City should consider if it is better to wait for the best alternative rather than consider the first proposal. It was felt that a long and narrow parking garage at the Marina defeats the purpose of a parking garage and the aesthetic goals of Beach by Design. It was remarked that timing is everything. No one wants the City torn up for the next 20 years. It is important to spend time finding an acceptable alternative to tearing up South Gulfview then creating additional construction and traffic problems. Discussion - Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District During the discussion of initiating the Island Estates Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District, the Commission directed the Planing Department to develop a code amendment regarding the final review of the overlay district provisions. Specifically, the code provision would require every property owner in a proposed overlay district to vote individually on each new local zoning regulation. To begin the development of this code provision, Planning staff met with the City Clerk and City Attorney. There are several issues regarding this proposal that warrant further discussion and direction from the Commission. Major issues include: 1) Binding Vote vs. Straw Vote – Generally, zoning issues are not decided by referendum but rather are a power reserved to the local government. If the vote by the property owners is considered a binding vote, it has the effect of delegating zoning powers to a group other than the Commission. It may be more advantageous to consider the results of the vote as the recommendation from the neighborhood to be considered by the Commission when deciding on the overlay district; 2) Method and Cost of Election – There are concerns about the method and cost of holding this election due to the fairly large number of voting property owners who will vote on multiple ballot issues. Based on the previous Commission direction, we expect that each new zoning regulation unique to Island Estates would be a separate ballot issue. As a point of comparison, the proposed Coachman Ridge Overlay District has 10 individual regulations. Due to the variety in the Island Estates neighborhood, it is expected that this neighborhood would have at least as many zoning regulations as Coachman Ridge and possibly more provisions; 3) Eligibility for voting – Unlike political elections where every adult in a household is eligible to vote, Planning staff proposes that voting would be limited to only one vote per household. This recommendation is based on the fact that the zoning regulations would impact properties rather than individuals. Further, Planning proposes that a condominium would be limited to one vote per condominium association. This provision is intended to reflect the impact of multiple condominium voters in their relative proportion to the total property owners throughout the neighborhood; and 4) Determination of Results – In a local election, the winner is determined by a plurality of the total votes cast (i.e., 50% plus one vote). The current direction from the Commission suggests the decision will be based on a specific percentage of the total property owners on any issue. The Planning Department is waiting to start organizational meetings with the Island Estates neighborhood until these issues are resolved. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said the overlay district does not exclude condominiums. Each neighborhood can individually make recommendations. She said there are approximately 600 condominiums in Island Estates that are within the overlay boundaries. She said Island Estates is recommending including condominiums. They helped staff determine the boundaries. She said it is up to the Commission as to whether or not election costs should be absorbed by the associations. It was remarked that zoning districts should be combined, but with separate overlays. Ms. Tarapani said the main reason all commercial was pulled out of Island Estates was to address out of town ownership. She suggested the Commission permit staff to conduct the first organizational meeting with the Study Committee to discuss all neighborhood and Commission concerns. In response to a question, Ms. Akin said every overlay issue/item would not be brought before the Commission. Ms. Tarapani said only the plan including goals and policies, and new zoning regulations new to Island Estates would be brought to the Commission. She said the CDB would continue to review those cases that they normally review. She said staff would prepare an ordinance regarding the straw vote, election costs, etc. It was remarked that opinion polls could replace elections, as they are less costly. CLK CITY CLERK Set meeting dates: Rules & Policies Worksession; Advisory Board Worksession; City Manager Selection - short listing candidates (tentatively set for 9 am on 6/12/01 at Harborview Center); DDB (Downtown Development Board) Discussion ensued regarding the above meetings. The meeting short-listing the candidates for City Manager selection was confirmed for June 12, 2001, at 9:00 a.m. It was clarified the Investment Training on June 14, 2001, starts at 10:00 a.m. and would not conflict with the 9:00 a.m. PAC (Pension Advisory Committee) meeting. Due to the number of upcoming meetings and Commission vacations in July, consensus was to schedule other meetings at a later date. CA LEGAL DEPARTMENT Second Reading Ordinances Ord. #6784-01 - Annexation (& redefining boundary lines of City to include said addition), 1601 Druid Rd., Sec. 14-29-15, M&B 43.12 & 43.16 (Charles Hammrick, Dorothy E. Hammrick, Richard L. Kamensky and Elizabeth Plecker) Ord. #6785-01 - Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban, 1601 Druid Rd., Sec. 14-29-15, M&B 43.12 & 43.16 (Charles Hammrick, Dorothy E. Hammrick, Richard L. Kamensky and Elizabeth Plecker) Ord. #6786-01 - LMDR Zoning, 1601 Druid Rd., Sec. 14-29-15, M&B 43.12 & 43.16 (Charles Hammrick, Dorothy E. Hammrick, Richard L. Kamensky and Elizabeth Plecker) Ms. Akin said the City does not have the title information on the above-referenced properties and there is a possibility they will be pulled from Thursday night’s Commission meeting agenda. Agreements, Deeds and Easements Settlement Agreement re Car Spa Clearwater's appeal of Order in MCEB Case #37-00 re billboard located at 2516 Gulf to Bay Blvd. The City has cited the owner of the property located at 2516 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, Car Spa Clearwater, LLC, and the sign company, National Advertising Company, for having an illegal billboard in violation of the City’s sign code. On October 26, 2000, the MCEB (Municipal Code Enforcement Board) found the owner and the sign company in violation but directed that no fines accrue until the conclusion of litigation in National Advertising v. City of Clearwater, Case No. 00-3844-CI-11. That case, filed by the sign company, challenges the City’s sign ordinance on various grounds and is expected to proceed for some time. The code enforcement case also is under appeal. Car Spa Clearwater, LLC claims that it sought through due diligence to determine the property’s status prior to purchase of the property but was not able to get information about the billboard being in violation of City code. The owner represents that it is in the process of selling the property and there is a closing date set. In the interest of avoiding further litigation and obtaining removal of the billboard, City legal staff has negotiated a Settlement Agreement with Car Spa, Inc. The agreement contains the following provisions: 1) Car Spa agrees to remove the billboard on or before October 31, 2003, 60 days after the expiration of its current lease with the billboard company; 2) if Car Spa fails to do so, the City may take any legal course of action to remove the billboard; 3) Car Spa releases the City from any claims based upon failure to provide information as to the status of the billboard; 4) the City will cancel the MCEB Order; and 5) the agreement is binding upon Car Spa’s successors in interest. In response to a question, Ms. Akin said National Advertising owns the billboard. She said this settlement would not resolve the other pending cases the City has with National Advertising. She said this agreement is only for this particular sign. Car Spa agrees not to renew the lease with National Advertising and the party that purchases this property is legally obligated to abide by this agreement, as it runs with the property. Other City Attorney Items Ms. Akin requested a 30 minute meeting for an attorney client session regarding City vs. Kahlmeyer. She said approval is needed by the July meeting. Consensus was to schedule the meeting at 5:00 p.m. on June 21, 2001. Commission Discussion Items Designate commission member to attend 6/11/01 meeting re Gulf Blvd. improvements at Indian Rocks Beach City Hall Commissioner Hart was designated to attend the meeting that is scheduled for 7:00 p.m. Other Commission Action Commissioner Jonson said at the Suncoast League of Municipalities, Dunedin’s Mayor requested input regarding a proposed national fire protection code and distributed a copy of his letter. Commissioner Jonson proposed the Commission send a similar letter. The League is trying to create standards that would provide for coverage of increased fire protection costs to cities. Mr. Brumback requested that Ms. Diana add this item to the City Manager Verbal Reports section of Thursday night’s Commission meeting agenda. Direction was for staff to draft a letter. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 1:16 p.m.