Loading...
09/02/2003COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING CITY OF CLEARWATER September 2, 2003 Present: Brian J. Aungst Chair/CRA Trustee Hoyt P. Hamilton CRA Trustee William C. Jonson CRA Trustee Frank Hibbard CRA Trustee Absent: Whitney Gray CRA Trustee Also present: William B. Horne II City Manager Garry Brumback Assistant City Manager Ralph Stone CRA Executive Director/Asst. City Manager Pamela K. Akin City Attorney Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 9:01 p.m. at City Hall. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. 2 - Approval of Minutes - None. 3- Recommend approval of Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan The purpose of the proposed Downtown Plan is two-fold: 1) to serve as a Special Area Plan in accordance with the Countywide Rules of the PPC (Pinellas Planning Council) and Florida Growth Management Rules and 2) to serve as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Plan in accordance with Florida’s Community Redevelopment Act. The CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) has the authority and responsibility to make a recommendation on the CRA Plan to the City Commission. The City Commission has the authority for the final decision on the Plan. Numerous public meetings have been held on the Downtown Plan. The City Commission directed the Planning Department to incorporate recommendations from various boards at the August 5th Special Meeting. The City Commission provided direction to the Planning Department on numerous issues and revisions have been made. It should be noted, however, that one DDB (Downtown Development Board) recommendation regarding the need for design flexibility to preserve significant trees is not included. Further research has determined that this flexibility already is available through provisions in the Community Development Code. If the City Commission desires to specifically include this issue, the most appropriate place to emphasize it would be in the Design Guidelines. Requested revisions and suggestions have been obtained from PPC (Pinellas Planning Council) staff and the Pinellas County Planning Department, both of which officially will review the Plan once it is adopted. Revisions and additions have been prepared to address their concerns. These changes were not discussed on August 5, 2003. Pinellas County has requested the City provide TIF (Tax Increment Financing) projections for the County’s portion at the 50% level for the expanded CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). The Downtown Plan supports the County allocating 100% of the tax increment in this area as currently provided for in the original CRA. Planning Director Cyndi Tarapani reviewed the proposed changes to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. She said staff plans to return with a code amendment to address transition zones. Discussion ensued regarding allowable public uses within the footprint of the existing Harborview Center. Ms. Tarapani said only restaurant, retail, convention center, hotel and entertainment uses, which covered movie theaters, would be allowed. Assistant City Manager Ralph Stone said residential uses of the Harborview Center are excluded. Regarding the Vision Statement for the Downtown Plan, consensus was to change the Vision Statement to, “Downtown Clearwater is a major center of activity, business, and government.” Consensus was to add “Downtown will be an integrated community with a mix of retail, residential, offices, and recreational opportunities. The development of a variety of residential projects to attract new residents to Downtown is critical to the success of a revitalized Downtown.” Consensus was to amend the Vision Statement to read, “Downtown’s unique waterfront location should be a focal point for revitalization efforts and an orientation for all of Downtown. Views of and access to the water must be preserved.” In response to a recommendation, Mr. Stone said inclusion of the City Hall reference in a Vision Statement makes the point that use of the site is critical for Downtown redevelopment. It was recommended a statement related to property maintenance be added to the Vision Statement and the prohibition of automobile oriented uses be removed. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said if a non-conforming use is vacant for six months, that use cannot be reinstated. Discussion ensued regarding language addressing automobile oriented uses with concern expressed the document not be softened. In response to a suggestion, Ms. Tarapani said a goal could be added to enhance pedestrian orientation. Consensus was to add Vision Statements: 1) The Pinellas Trail is a unique resource for recreation and economic development within Downtown and 2) The location of the Pinellas County seat within Downtown Clearwater is a point of civic pride and economic development opportunity. Consensus was to add a number one Vision Statement: “The Clearwater Strategic Vision for two decades included 11 overall goals, one of which is: “’A Vibrant Downtown that is mindful of its heritage.’ ” In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said the City would not automatically approve increased intensity to support a light rail station location chosen by outside agencies. The City would want stations placed in the most intense locations. The City wants light rail decision makers to consider the Downtown Plan when determining the route and station location. It was suggested the Plan can be revised when necessary. The majority agreed to make no change to permitted intensities near light rail stations. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said staff’s position is that no transition will exist between zones in East Gateway. The Plan will reflect required transitions. In response to a question regarding a bus shelter design, Ms. Tarapani said according to the settlement agreement, Eller Media or subsequent owner is permitted advertisements on 50 bus shelters in the City’s planning area. PSTA (Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority) provides the shelters. Costs associated with bus shelter construction are not included in the Plan. Economic Development & Housing Director Reg Owens said PSTA has agreed to allow the City to use its own design to construct bus shelters but the City would be responsible for expenses. PSTA may provide its costs for a shelter to that project. While PSTA would maintain City-built shelters, the City would be requested to make repairs, because PSTA could not maintain a supply of necessary parts. In response to a recommendation that the Plan state the City will address the LOS (Level of Service) on Downtown streets rated F during busy times, Mr. Stone said it is typical to have Downtowns that have a LOS F at peak times. He said the City does not have the ability to fully address that problem. He supported recommended language. Ms. Tarapani said a Plan strategy addresses that issue. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said building heights need to be consistent with character districts, even if TDRs (Transfers of Development Rights) and density pool units are used. Concern was expressed the Plan allows no flexibility related to building height. Mr. Stone said the limits provide a comfort level regarding what is prescribed. The City Manager noted the difficulty in developing the Plan. He said reacting solely to the market could result in no height limits. Staff determined where and what height limitations should be after assessing the issue. In response to a recommendation to allow flexibility in height limits, Ms. Tarapani said the community wants a concrete knowledge of what can be expected regarding building heights. Discussion ensued regarding height limitations with comments that owners will ask higher prices for properties if heights are increased, developers will continue requesting additional height, some flexibility in height is necessary, heights would still be limited if a percentage increase was permitted, amenities should be tied to height bonuses, and the percentage of increase must be identified. Staff will submit language regarding permitting a percentage increase in building height if a major amenity is provided. Ex-Officio Glen Warren expressed concern limiting building heights will discourage development. He opposed the plan to decrease zoning east of Myrtle Avenue. He said flexibility is necessary. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said urban design elements will be incorporated after the City Commission has approved the Plan and it has been forwarded to the County for approval. Disappointment was expressed the Plan does not include urban design elements. The City Manager explained unanticipated difficulties had occurred with the consultant related to the urban design element and staff did not want to delay the Plan. He stated staff is committed to developing these elements. Support was expressed for staff taking the time needed to develop these elements. Commissioner Jonson moved to forward the Downtown Plan to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The City Attorney requested the CRA recommend to the City Commission approval of the Downtown Plan. Commissioner Hibbard moved to rescind the motion to forward the Downtown Plan to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Commissioner Hibbard moved to recommend to the City Commission approval of the Downtown Plan as amended and as attached as Exhibit A hereto. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4 - Executive Director (Assistant City Manager) Verbal Reports - None. 5 - Other Business - None. 6 - Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:35 a.m.