02/15/2001
.
.
.
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
February 15, 2001
Present:
Brian J. Aungst
J. B. Johnson
Robert Clark
Ed Hart
F. David Hemerick
Mayor ICommissioner
Vice-M ayor ICom missioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Also present: William B. Horne II
Garry Brumback
Pamela K. Akin
Cynthia E. Goudeau
Brenda Moses
Interim City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
Board Reporter
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. at City Hall. The invocation
was offered by Reverend David Landers of Heritage United Methodist Church. The Mayor
led the Pledge of Allegiance.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily
discussed in that order.
ITEM #3 - Service Awards
One service award was presented to a City employee.
ITEM #4 - Introductions and Awards - None.
ITEM #5 - Presentations
a) Clearwater Beach Gazette 50th Anniversary recognition
A Certificate of Appreciation was presented to Chuck Pollick, Publisher.
ITEM #6 - Approval of Minutes
Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of
February 1, 2001, and the special meetings of January 17, 2001 and February 6, 2001, as
recorded and submitted in written summation by the City Clerk to each Commissioner. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #7 - Citizens to be heard re items not on the Aoenda - None.
mcc02b01
1
02/15/01
.
.
.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM #8 - Public HearinQ & First ReadinQ Ord. #6688-01 - Vacating west 5' of 10'
Drainage & Utility Easement lying along east side of Lot 40, Countryside Tract 6 Replat
(Ryan, V2001-01 )(PW)
This property is addressed as 3217 Pine Haven Drive. The applicant is proposing to
install an in-ground pool in the portion of the easement to be vacated. The City has no
existing utilities within the easement. Public Works Administration is recommending
approval of this vacation request. Florida Power, Time Warner, Verizon, and Verizon Media
Ventures have no objections to the vacation request.
Commissioner Clark moved to approve the applicant's request to vacate the West
5.0 feet of the 10.0 foot drainage and utility easement lying along the east side of Lot 40,
Countryside Tract 6 Replat. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6688-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass Ordinance #6688-01 on first reading. The
motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
Johnson, Clark, Hart, Hemerick, and Aungst.
"Nays":
None.
ITEM #9 - Public Hearino & First Readino Ord. #6641-01 - Relating to Downtown
Clearwater Periphery Plan; adopting an amended periphery plan (PLD)
The Downtown Clearwater Periphery Plan evolved out of a downtown planning
process that considered expanding the Downtown Redevelopment Plan boundaries. It
governs four areas located on the edges of downtown known as the Northwest,
Southwest, Northeast, and Southeast Expansion Areas. The Plan was approved in 1993.
The Plan addresses the function of each area, land assembly possibilities, zoning and
design issues, and priority land uses for the expansion areas.
In 1995, the City changed the Future Land Use designation of the four expansion
areas to Central Business District. The Downtown Clearwater periphery Plan 2000 Update
revises the original Plan. It includes extensive information on existing zoning, property
conditions, ownership patterns, relationship to Downtown Redevelopment Plan Area and
infrastructure impacts. It also identifies issues and opportunities within each area, as well
as includes a description of what the 1993 Plan indicated for each expansion area.
Following is a list of the other specific changes proposed in the Periphery Plan 2000
Update 1) Addition of generalized land use maps; 2) addition of policies to guide
development; 3) expansion of the Southwest and Southeast boundaries, which resulted in
mcc02b01
2
02/15/01
.
.
.
the minor adjustment of total land area; 4) eliminated possibility of industrial uses in the
Southwest and Northwest Expansion Areas; 5) revised density limitations in the Southwest
Expansion Area; 6) added commercial uses as permitted uses in the Southwest Expansion
Area; 7) added institutional uses as permitted uses in the Northwest Expansion Area; and
8) permitted new single family dwellings in a specified area in the Northwest Expansion
Area.
The Downtown Clearwater Periphery Plan 2000 update is consistent with objectives
and policies of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. There is a companion item to this
Periphery Plan that will rezone the Northwest and Southwest Expansion Areas to the
Downtown Zoning District. The specific request is contained in a separate agenda item
and ordinances. The Community Development Board reviewed the proposed Periphery Plan
2000 Update in its capacity as the Local Planning Agency (LPA) at its regularly scheduled
meeting on January 23, 2001, and recommended approval of the Plan.
Five persons spoke regarding the Downtown Periphery Plan expressing concern
regarding the need for a category that allows hi-tech industrial; loss of commercial use in
the Southwest area; the need to protect and preserve the bluff and neighborhoods; and
density being too great.
Concern was expressed regarding the long-term ramifications of the hub zone.
Planning Director Ralph Stone said the infill option allows light industrial uses that cannot
be distinguished from Office use. It was suggested that more light industrial that is
indistinguishable from residential be allowed. Mr. Stone said there would be a full range of
downtown district uses allowed. He said if an industrial use occupational license lapsed,
the area would allow Office and/or Residential uses unless the property owner applied
under the Infill process. It was remarked that the plan overall is good. Discussion ensued
regarding the Southwest area. It was felt the uses for that area should be expanded. In
response to a question, Mr. Stone indicated the density is not being increased over what
was approved in 1993. Staff was requested to come back with recommended changes,
based on tonight's discussion, at the next Commission meeting. Staff was commended for
a job well done.
Commissioner Hart moved to continue Items #9 and #10 to the March 1, 2001
Commission meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #10- Public Hearinq & First Readinq Ords. #6639-01 & #6640-01 - Downtown
Zoning for Northwest & Southwest Expansion Areas of Periphery Plan (PLD)
Continued to the March 1, 2001, meeting, see previous item.
Note: Due to advertising requirements for continued items, Items #9 and #10 will have to
be continued to the March 22, 20001 Commission meeting.
mcc02b01
3
02/15/01
.
.
.
ITEM #11 - Public HearinQ & First ReadinQ Ords. #6681-01, #6682-01 & #6683-01 -
Annexation (& redefining boundary lines of City to include said addition), Land Use Plan
Amendment to Preservation & Preservation Zoning, Sec. 24-29-15, M&B 11.01, proposed
2100 lakeview Road (City)(PlD)
This property is located at 2100 Lakeview Road, on the north side of Lakeview
Road, approximately 660 feet west of South Belcher Road. The subject property is
currently zoned (R-3), Residential, Single Family from Pinellas County with a land use plan
designation of Preservation. The property is planned to remain as a natural preservation
area as part of the new environmental park to the west. The purpose of the annexation is
to enable to City to bring this property into its jurisdiction and consistency with both the
Countywide Plan and the City zoning district. The subject property contains a peat bog
which is part of the ecosystem of Allen's Creek providing a wildlife habitat and storm water
mitigation. The site is approximately 5.1 acres in size.
The property can be served by the City's water and sanitary sewer service.
However, the site does not require the provision of public facilities due to its use as a
preservation area.
The Planning Department determined that the proposed annexation is consistent
with the following standards specified in the Community Development Code: 1) The
proposed annexation will not have an adverse impact on public facilities and their level of
service; 2) the proposed annexation is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the
Countywide Plan and the Community Development Code; and 3) the proposed annexation
is contiguous to existing municipal boundaries, represents a logical extension of the
boundaries and does not create an enclave.
The annexation will require a review the Pinellas Planning Council (PPC). Following
the approval of the Pinellas charter amendment in a referendum election on November 7,
2000, the PPC is now authorized by Ordinance #00-63, Section 7( 1-3) to review all
voluntary annexations including those previously executed through valid agreement.
The Planning Department determined that the proposed land use plan amendment
and rezoning applications are consistent with the following standards specified in the
Community Development Code: 1) The proposed land use plan amendment and rezoning
application are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; 2) the potential range of uses and
the specific proposed use are compatible with the surrounding area; 3) sufficient public
facilities are available to serve the property; and 4) the applications will not have an
adverse impact on the natural environment.
Pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement with Pinellas County, review by the PPC will
not be required for the plan amendment.
mcc02b01
4
02/15/01
.
.
.
Commissioner Hart moved to approve the petition for annexation, land use plan and
zoning atlas amendments for 2001 Lakeview Road (Metes & Bounds 11-01 in Section 24,
Township 29 South, Range 15 East), a Land Use Plan Amendment from County
Preservation to City Preservation and Zoning Atlas Amendment from County Zoning
Residential, Single Family (R-3) District to City Preservation (P) Zoning District. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6681-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Johnson moved to pass Ordinance #6681-01 on first reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
"Nays":
Johnson, Clark, Hart, Hemerick, and Aungst.
None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6682-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Hart moved to pass Ordinance #6682-01 on first reading. The
motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
"Nays":
Johnson, Clark, Hart, Hemerick, and Aungst.
None.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6683-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass Ordinance #6683-01 on first reading. The
motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
"Nays":
Johnson, Clark, Hart, Hemerick, and Aungst.
None.
ITEM #12 - Public Hearinq & First Readinq Ords. #6684-01, #6685-01 & #6686-01 -
Annexation (& redefining boundary lines of City to include said addition), Land Use Plan
Amendment to Recreation/Open Space & OS/R Zoning, Sec. 24-29-15, M&B 12.02,
proposed 1281 S. Hercules Avenue (City)(PLD)
This item was withdrawn.
ITEM #13 - Public Hearinq & First Readina Ords. #6645-01, #6646-01 & #6647-01 -
Annexation (& redefining boundary lines of City to include said addition) for Town of
Bayview Sub., Lots 2 & 3 and vacated portion of CR31; Land Use Plan Amendment to
Residential/Office Limited for subject property AND change of Land Use Designation for
Myron A. Smiths Bayview Sub., Tract A to same; & Office Zoning for subject property
AND rezoning Myron A. Smiths Bayview Sub., Tract A to same (Laura Nail Connolly
Trust)(PLD)
This site is located at 3035 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard on the south side of Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard approximately 350 feet west of McMullen Booth Road. The site is
approximately 4.5 acres in size and is vacant. The purpose of the land use plan
mcc02b01
5
02/15/01
.
amendment and rezoning is to allow the construction of an approximately 78,000 square
foot "Class A" office. The property will be served by the City's water and sanitary sewer
service.
The Planning Department determined that the proposed land use plan amendment
and rezoning applications are consistent with the following standards specified in the
Community Development Code: 1) The proposed land use plan amendment and rezoning
application are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; 2) the potential range of uses and
the specific proposed use are compatible with the surrounding area; 3) sufficient public
facilities are available to serve the property; and 4) 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/or intensity of the plan amendment site, review and
approval by Florida Department of Community Affairs is not required.
The COB originally reviewed these applications at their public hearing of August 17,
1999, and recommended approval of the annexation application and denial of the land use
plan amendment to Residential Office/General and rezoning application to Office. There
was substantial public testimony regarding the application primarily in opposition to the
requests.
.
After the August 1999 COB meeting, the applicant revised the application to
request a less intensive office Future Land Use Plan classification than originally requested.
The original request was for the Residential/Office General Plan classification which allows
an F.A.R. of .50; the revised request is for Residential Office/Limited with a F.A.R. of 40.
In addition, the applicant initiated two studies to respond to concerns at the 1999 public
hearing. The first study is a transportation analysis prepared by Lincks and Associates,
Inc. dated March 2000. The second study is an archaeological and historical study
prepared by Archaeological Consultants, Inc. dated July 12, 2000.
On December 12, 2000, the Commission heard the applications as revised. The
Commission determined that further review and discussion by the COB was warranted due
to the revised request and the new traffic and archaeological information.
The COB held a public hearing on January 23, 2001, to review the revised requests.
There was substantial public testimony and experts were presented by both the applicant
and the opposition. The areas of concern by the opposition included tree protection, traffic
and site access issues, site plan considerations such as building height and parking layout,
the desire for this site to be used as a park and compatibility of the proposed use with the
surrounding neighborhood and other uses. After a lengthy public hearing, the COB
recommended approval of the annexation, revised land use plan amendment and rezoning
requests.
Tim Johnson, representing the applicant, said his client is in agreement with the
staff report. He said there will be no access to Bayview Avenue. He said a study has
shown that the archaeology on the site is not significant. He said the FOOT (Florida
.
mcc02b01
6
02/15/01
.
.
.
Department of Transportation) has stated accidents would have to increase by 5 times the
current number to be a problem. Mr. Johnson said the suggestion that this site be
purchased for a City park would cost the City approximately $50,000 a year to maintain.
Jim Graham, architect, referred to the site plan. He said the plan would maintain
buffers from residents, protect the tree canopy, build an SO-foot high building with a
parking garage, and provide a single point of access on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. He referred
to aerial views and said there would be a limited view into and from the neighborhood.
Norman Easy, arborist, said this property previously had been developed as a mobile
home park. He said the tree roots are deeper than they would have been in a natural,
undeveloped area and have adapted to their environment. He said he would ensure that all
trees saved would survive.
Breck Parker, representing the opposition, referred to a FDOT study that gave a
Level of Service F to Gulf to Bay Boulevard. He also referred to studies that called for the
preservation of the Bayview Neighborhood. He stated the applicants must show a
compelling need for this change. He referred to sections of the Community Development
Code and indicated how the opposition believes the request does not meet requirements.
He stated if this commercial use is allowed, others will follow.
Loren Westenberger, arborist, stated this stand of oaks should be preserved. He
said if this development is allowed, many of the trees will slowly decline and die.
Early Sorenson, registered engineer, expressed concern regarding the safety of the
driveway.
Connie Mudano read from a history of the area.
In response to a question, Mr. Johnson said the MPO analysis, being used by the
applicant, is based upon updated, more recent information and the FDOT analysis, referred
to by the opposition, is based on their general calculations. In response to a question,
Public Works Administrator Mashid Arasteh said in 1999, the FDOT performed a general
analysis of the condition of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. In 2000, the MPO performed a localized
intersection analysis which shows the level of service as a D rating.
The meeting recessed from S:04 to S:21 p.m.
Twenty-two (22) persons spoke in opposition to the request. One spoke in favor.
Mr. Johnson said fact must be separated from emotion. He said it has been
confirmed by City staff and the MPO that with or without this development, the level of
service on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is acceptable. He said the FDOT has indicated, after
considering all requirements for site distance, safety, etc., that they would grant a
driveway for the site. He said the applicant's arborist has stated approximately 75% of the
trees would be saved on the site. He said many trees thrive in parking lots, etc. alongside
development. He said the City has never expressed an interest in purchasing this property.
mcc02b01
7
02/15/01
.
.
.
He said that residential development is inappropriate at this site as it is at one of the
busiest intersections in the County. He said the COB (Community Development Board)
determined that residential development on the site would destroy more trees than the
proposed development.
Discussion ensued and it was remarked that some people do not wish any
development to occur on this site. It was remarked that the City cannot continue to
operate open space. Concern was expressed if this is a reasonable use for this property
considering all the trees and natural habitat, although a property owner has certain
inalienable rights. In response to a question, City Attorney Pam Akin said the Snyder
decision is a Supreme Court decision that dealt with definitiveness of quasi-judicial matters.
It is not legislative, but quasi-judicial, therefore is based on competent substantial evidence
rather than compelling needs. She said in order to succeed in an action against the City,
the applicant would have to show the use that is being submitted is not a reasonable one.
The issue of enhancing the public safety and welfare is not a Snyder issue but is addressed
in the Code. Ms. Akin said the Commission must weigh the evidence against the criteria in
the Code. If this request is denied, on appeal, the applicants would have to prove that the
existing zoning is not reasonable.
Commissioner Clark moved to approve the annexation for the portion of lots 2 and
3, Block 5, Town of Bay View Subdivision and partially vacated right-of-way of County
Road 31 located to the south of 3035 Gulf-to-Bay ; approve a land Use Plan Amendment
from Residential low Medium (RlM) and Residential Urban (RU) to Residential/Office
Limited (R/Ol); and approve a Zoning Atlas Amendment from Mobile Home Park (MHP) to
Office (0) at 3035 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (Tract A, Myron A. Smith's Bay View
Subdivision); and approve a Zoning Atlas Amendment from the County R-4 Zoning District
to Office (0) at 603 Meadowlark lane, 3012 County Road 31 (portion of lots 2 and 3,
Block 5, Town of Bay View Subdivision) and the vacated portion of County Road 31. The
motion was duly seconded.
It was requested that a condition be placed on the approval that requires the owner
to maintain the pond next to the Bayside bridge.
Mr. Johnson said he has received permission from the FOOT and his client has
agreed to maintain that pond.
Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Johnson, Clark, and Hemerick voted
"aye": Commissioner Hart and Mayor Aungst voted "nay". Motion carried.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6645-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Johnson moved to pass Ordinance #6645-01 on first reading.
The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
"Nays":
Motion carried.
Johnson, Clark, and Hemerick.
Hart and Aungst.
mcc02b01
8
02/15/01
.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6646-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass Ordinance #6646-01 on first reading. The
motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
"Nays":
Motion carried.
Johnson, Clark, and Hemerick.
Hart and Aungst.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6647-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass Ordinance #6647-01 on first reading. The
motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
"Nays":
Motion carried.
Johnson, Clark, and Hemerick.
Hart and Aungst.
The meeting recessed from 9:51 to 10:00 p.m.
ITEM #14 - Public HearinQ - Development Agreement with Clearwater Seashell Resort
L.L.C. (Kimpton) (PLD)
The subject site is 1.63 acres in area and is located on either side of Third Street
between South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive. It is located within an area
identified for a catalytic project by Beach by Design and is a priority candidate for
. redevelopment on Clearwater beach.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 250-room resort hotel 150 feet in height.
The proposal also includes 35,000 - 50,000 square feet of retail/restaurant space and an
over 833 space garage. The proposal requires use of 184 hotel rooms from the density
pool created in Beach by Design and the vacation of Third Street and South Gulfview. The
applicant is proposing to begin construction as soon as practical upon approval of the
development agreement and commits to the following 1) Construction of improvements
and participation in the financing of South Gulfview Boulevard to create Beach Walk
generally between First Street an the South Beach Pavilion; 2) dedication of 10 feet for use
as public right-of-way abutting Coronado Drive; and 3) availability of 400 parking spaces in
the private garage will be made available for public use.
The proposal is in compliance with the standards for development agreements and is
consistent with Beach by Design.
Ms. Akin said a motion has been filed objecting to tonight's public hearing being
prior to the Community Development Board hearing on this application. She said the public
hearing before the CDB is scheduled for February 20, 2001. Action by the Commission is
scheduled for March 1, 2001. She said as this is an extra public hearing, she did not feel it
is prohibited.
.
mcc02b01
9
02/1 5/01
.
.
.
Mr. Stone reviewed the highlights of the business points of the development
agreement.
Charlie Siemon, Siemon and Larsen, said funds for improvements would be
generated from increased revenue from this development only, not from any other
properties.
Nathan Hightower, representing the Markopolous Development team, objected to
the public hearing. He said as the development agreement is not complete, the public is
not being properly informed. He objected to this Commission making a decision regarding
this proposal and felt it ties the hands of the new Commission. He cited 1 5 specific
objections.
Seven (7) persons spoke expressing concern regarding the timing of the
development, holding this public hearing prior to the Community Development Board
hearing, the impact of the proposed pedestrian overpass, and the need for a plan for this
entire area of the beach.
It was remarked that the Commission is not voting on this proposal as this is merely
a public hearing to provide an opportunity for public input.
In response to a question, Mr. Siemon said he anticipates a final document would be
provided to the Commission within a couple of days. He said the current draft proposal
provides for 750 parking spaces with a minimum of 400 for public use. The site plans
shows 838. He said if the density pool does not materialize, the developer has requested
the City work with them to identify viable economic uses that would benefit the City as
well as meet their use. No commitments have been made. He said he is comfortable with
the timeframes as stated in the proposal. He said the exhibit numbering is not alphabetical
but will be corrected. Where an impact fee is required, the City would attempt to expend
the money for those improvements which support this project. The developer would
provide the City the option to purchase parking spaces. Prior to the City exercising its
option, the developer shall submit a list of qualified appraisers to determine the fair market
value of the parking spaces. Two appraisers shall be retained and paid for by the City.
The developer agreement also provides that the City agree to defer the construction of any
additional public parking within a radius of a quarter mile until the Marriott Seashell Resort
has achieved a stabilized annual net operating income that is equal to 1 25 % of the annual
debt service. If the City decides to construct additional parking spaces prior to the end of
the deferral period, the City would be required to lease, on an annual basis, the minimum
number of parking spaces required to meet the Marriott's debt service coverage standard
(125 % of the annual debt service at an annual rate of $1,875 per space). The $1,875 was
arrived at through a series of assumptions regarding occupancy rates of average rental
space in the area and estimated the costs if parking spaces were purchased. It was
requested that Mr. Siemon clarify in the document that the debt service refers to debt
service on the parking garage.
mcc02b01
10
02/15/01
.
.
.
Mr. Siemon said he felt the elevated public access would be an enhancement.
Handicapped access elevators would be included on the beach side. An operating
management agreement for maintenance and operation of concessions is included in the
development agreement. With regard to performance filings, in some cases performance
bonds would be required. Mr. Siemon said the document includes a schedule of events but
no specific time limits to break ground on the resort structure. Mr. Siemon said he felt the
size of the development proposed is adequate for this 1 .36-acre site. He said the project is
desirable and a beneficial plan as well as a practical response to the existing conditions.
He said without this public/private agreement, the City could not afford to buy land west of
Coronado and spur redevelopment at this site. He felt this is the only opportunity the City
has to achieve placing beach parking on the site the first year. He felt that opportunity
alone is a significant benefit.
Mr. Siemon said the City would provide through the relocation of Gulfview and the
density pool, the only 2 incentives it has available. Those 2 incentives are relatively
modest to cause the type of development the City wants and needs. He felt this
agreement strikes a good balance for the City and developer. He said a 400-car garage
would cost the City millions that it does not have to spend. He said the value of the
contiguous improvements is that the developer bears all risks up front. He said the value
and convenience of the walkway from the parking garage to the beach is one of the best
benefits of the project. In response to a question, Mr. Siemon said the City cannot put a
value on a pool of units and make them available at a specific price for sale. The benefits
this project provides are: front ending funds for the parking garage and other amenities, a
new resort, public parking with no City responsibility for funding, bidding, etc., and
improvement of South Gulfview. The units can only be allocated in consideration of
achieving a desired public benefit. Mr. Siemon said existing properties would be the
primary beneficiaries of this project as this development would increase the activity and
rates at the beach.
In response to a question, Mr. Stone said access for the development would be at
ground level on the north side of the project. He said the earliest date for the proposal to
be reviewed by the PPC would be in March or April. He anticipates a response by Mayor
June. Staff has spoken to the DCA which has indicated they have no problems with the
proposal conceptually. Staff will amend the comprehensive Plan to reflect some of the
direction as provided by Beach by Design. Mr. Stone said no special taxing district would
be created. He said the only reason the density pool exists is because normal market
conditions at the beach have not generated the product. He felt no developer would
purchase property in this area with a smaller density project and provide the needed
parking.
In response to a question, Mr. Stone said item #4 on Page 5 of the draft
development agreement refers to overnight stays being prohibited in excess of 30 days per
stay.
Concern was expressed regarding the timelines outlined in the developer agreement.
Mr. Siemon said he would continue to address maintenance of traffic.
mcc02b01
11
02/15/01
.
.
.
Public Hearing - Second Reading Ordinances
ITEM #15 - Ord. #6689-01 - approving Beach by Design
Mr. Stone reviewed 2 additional amendments being recommended to the Beach by
Design document: 1) elimination of reference to a special taxing district, and 2)
explanations of the design guidelines. Other minor amendments to the language in the
document also have been made. Specific project applications would require Commission
approval.
Concern was expressed that the paragraph relating to the 150-foot height provision
for buildings in the area between the Hilton and the Clearwater Beach Hotel and in the
Yacht Basin properties needs to be changed and clarified. Mr. Stone said the 150-foot
allowance was provided in the East Shore area only with the condition that the property is
consolidated and there is a provision for the boardwalk option. Absent those 2 conditions,
the height allowance would be limited to mid-rise developments. Mr. Siemon cautioned
that stating only a 5-story product under every condition could result in an unattractive
project. As the size of a parcel increases, the need for height must be considered as it
creates a more desirable outcome. Consensus was to make no change.
Concern was expressed that the need for parking would not be addressed before the
new Memorial Causeway bridge is built. It was suggested that solutions must be found to
address beach parking. Mr. Stone said the document identifies areas for parking garages.
He felt the City has a better chance of adding needed parking with the Kimpton/Marriott
Seashell proposal. Once that proposal has been finalized, the City would look at revenue
and for other locations for parking garages. It was requested that staff clarify the vacation
of Hamden and making Coronado into 4 lanes.
Five persons spoke regarding the Beach by Design document expressing concern
regarding the unit pool not being available to existing properties, allowing zero setbacks
incentives to the developer, and the inability to expand existing hotels.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6689-01 as amended for second reading
and read it by title only. Commissioner Johnson moved to pass and adopt Ordinance
#6689-01 as amended on second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and
upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
"Nays":
Johnson, Clark, Hart, and Aungst.
None.
ITEM #16 - Ord. #6690-01 - Vacating west 1.5' of 7.5' utility easement lying along east
side of Lot 43, College Hill Estates (Schooler)
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6690-01 for second reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #6690-01 on second
and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
mcc02b01
12
02/15/01
.
.
.
"Ayes":
Johnson, Clark, Hart, and Aungst.
"Nays":
None.
Absent:
Hemerick
ITEM #17 - Ord. #6691-01 - Vacating east 5' of 10' utility easement lying along west side
of Lot 52, College Park Unit Two (Weinzetl)
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6691-01 for second reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Johnson moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #6691-01 on
second and final reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
Johnson, Clark, Hart, and Aungst.
"Nays":
None.
Absent:
Hemerick
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
CONSENT AGENDA (Items #18-24) - Approved as submitted less Items 20, 22, and 23.
The following items require no formal public hearing and are subject to being approved in a
single motion. However, any City Commissioner or the City Manager may remove an item
from the Consent Agenda to allow discussion and voting on the item individually.
ITEM #18 - Approval of Purchases per PurchasinCl Memorandum:
1) Standard Insurance Company, long term disability insurance for employees not covered
by City's Pension Plan, 111 /01-12/31 /01, est. $30,000 (HR)
2) Bill Heard Chevrolet, Inc., one 2001 Chevrolet Silverado ~ ton pickup truck,
replacement, $16,968; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease-Purchase
Agreement (GS)
3) Cobble-Stone Electric, Inc., design, supply & install ballfield lighting at Belmont Ballfield,
$29,245 (PR)
4) DAVID Corporation, risk management software, $40,000 (FN)
5) Century Rain Aid, misc. irrigation system parts, est. $74,000 (PR)
mcc02b01
13
02/15/01
.
.
.
6) Sheehan Pontiac-GMC, Inc., two 2001 GMC Savanna 2500 vans, replacements,
$40,358; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease-Purchase Agreement (GS)
7) Maroone Chevrolet, three 2001 Silverado 3500 pickup trucks with options,
replacements, $80,371; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease-Purchase
Agreement (GS)
8) Maroone Chevrolet, two Chevrolet Silverado 2500 pickup trucks, 1 replacement / 1
approved addition, $42,850; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease-Purchase
Agreement (GS)
9) Kaiser Pontiac, three 2001 GMC Sierra 3500 cab & chassis with options, replacements,
$80,694; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease-Purchase Agreement (GS)
10) Bill Heard Chevrolet, Inc., four 2001 Chevrolet Blazer 4x4 utility vehicles with options,
replacements, $92,826; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease-Purchase
Agreement (GS)
11) Maroone Chevrolet, one 2001 Chevrolet 3500 HD cab & Chassis with options,
replacement, $31,230; financing to be provided under City's Master Lease-Purchase
Agreement (GS)
ITEM #19 - Guaranty Contracts for Firm Transportation Service 1 & 2 (FTS-1 & FTS-2);
Contracts with Florida Gas Transmission (FGT) Company; approve transfer of capacity
letter which aggregates the City's FTS-1 & FTS-2 contracts into Florida Gas Utility (FGU)
firm contracts (SBS)
ITEM #20 - See page 1 5
ITEM #21 - License AClreement with Clearwater-Garden Tower Ooeratino Associates (Bank
of America Building) for use of 50 parking spaces in Garden Avenue Parking Garage,
effective 3/1/01 (PW)
ITEM #22 - See pages 15 & 16
ITEM #23 - See pages 17 & 18
ITEM #24 - Agreement settling 3 cases v. Nelson Construction involving damage to
Clearwater Gas System gas lines (CA)
Commissioner Hemerick moved to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted, less
Items #20, #22, and #23, and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
mcc02b01
14
02/15/01
.
ITEM #20 - Approve expenditure of additional $93,600 from Recreation Facility Impact
Fees for proposed landscape improvements on new medians & adjacent ROW areas on Gulf
Blvd. on Sand Key (PR)
The City, County, and Sand Key Civic Association have been working on ways to
improve landscaping on Sand Key. On April 6,2000, the Commission approved $15,000
as preliminary funding for proposed landscape improvements on Sand Key. As part of the
recent road-widening project, Pinellas County installed several medians that are to be
landscaped by the City. The City provided the $15,000 in funds so that the contractor
could install the irrigation and electrical sleeves while the road was being constructed. The
project is closed out with an outstanding balance of approximately $7,900. An additional
$93,600 is needed in this project to provide the necessary landscape materials and
installation for these medians as well as the adjacent rights of way. The design will consist
of a mixture of Date Palms, Oleanders, Junipers, and annuals. Costs for the proposed
landscape improvements are budgeted at $101,500. The City will maintain the medians
and the Sand Key Civic Association will maintain the beautification in the rights of way
adjacent to the medians. Estimated costs to the City for annual maintenance is $10,000.
These funds will be requested as an enhancement in the FY 2001/02 operating budget.
The City and Sand Key Civic Association will enter into an Adopt-A-Park Agreement so
they can maintain the rights of way. Installation of landscaping on the rights of way will
not occur until negotiations with the Association are finalized and an agreement is in place.
.
A mid-year budget amendment will allocate $93,600 of Recreation Facility Impact
Fees to CIP Code 181-99964. The Commission must approve use of Recreation Impact
Fees. These fees were collected from projects on Sand Key.
Concern was expressed that the City taxpayers should not fund this expense. It
previously had been requested the Sand Key Civic Association meet with the County to
fund this expense. Ms. Arasteh said staff has coordinated with the County on the
landscaping plan. The County has little funds for this project.
Commissioner Clark moved to approve the expenditure of an additional $93,600
from Recreation Facility Impact Fees for proposed landscape improvements on new
medians and adjacent right-of-way areas on Gulf Boulevard on Sand Key. The motion was
duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Clark, Hart, and Hemerick
and Mayor Aungst voted "Aye"; Commissioner Johnson voted "Nay". Motion carried.
ITEM #22 - Aqreement with SWFWMD for funding of project costs up to $20,000, for
purchase & installation of rain sensor devices; approve match of City funds in the amount
$20,000 (PW)
As part of the City's effort to reduce the demand for potable water, cofunding from
SWFWMD (Southwest Florida Water Management District) was sought to provide financial
incentives for City water customers to purchase and install automatic rain sensors for their
potable irrigation systems. The electronic sensors shut off or disable the irrigation system
when enough moisture is detected.
.
mcc02b01
15
02/15/01
.
.
.
Key objectives of this program include educating the public on water conservation,
reducing outdoor potable water use by 15%, and encouraging the use of water-conserving
devices. This is the first year of an estimated three-year effort by the City.
This program provides a one-time rebate of 50% of costs to retail water customers
(up to $40) for the purchase and installation of automatic rain-sensing devices 0 their
irrigation systems. To be eligible, a participant must be a City water customer utilizing
potable water for irrigation purposes. Purchase and installation of the rain sensor device
can be completed through a licensed plumber or irrigation consultant (available in the
yellow pages), or by the customer.
Landscape irrigation accounts for as much as 35% of total household water use.
This program offers nearly 600 sensors to City water customers, which is estimated to
save approximately 9,050 gallons of potable water for each day on which irrigation is
permitted. The program will be monitored by an outside contractor to evaluate the actual
water savings achieved. The amount of the contract will be within staff approval
authority, so a follow-up contract item will not be necessary. The program will be
evaluated statistically comparing water use for participants before and after the installation
of rain sensors.
Funding will be provided by a mid-year budget amendment transferring $20,000 of
available water revenue from the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project #315-96740
Water Supply & Treatment to a new project to be established, #315-96747 Flow Restrictor
& Rain Sensor Rebates. Sufficient funds were budgeted for this initiative in the Water
Supply & Treatment code, therefore, the code will not be impacted. The new project code
is being created to better track this initiative. Funding for the remaining 3 years of the
program has been included in the current rate study update.
Concern was expressed that this is an expense the City can do without. In
response to a question, Public Utilities Director Andy Neff said if the Commission has
strong reservations regarding fees in the program, the City should not move forward with
accepting dollars for the project from Southwest Florida Water Management District
(SWFWMD).
Commissioner Clark moved to approve the Cooperative Agreement with the
Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD), which provides funding of
project costs of up to $20,000 for the purchase and installation of rain sensor devices
(Project K-505), and approve a match of City funds in the amount of $20,000 and that the
appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and
upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Clark, Hart, and Hemerick and Mayor Aungst
voted" Aye"; Commissioner Johnson voted "Nay". Motion carried.
mcc02b01
16
02/15/01
.
.
.
ITEM #23 - AQreement with SWFWMD for funding of project costs up to $125,000, for
replacement of toilets with water-conserving equivalents; approve match of City funds in
the amount $125,000 (PW)
As part of the City's effort to reduce the demand for potable water, co-funding from
SWFWMD was sought to provide financial incentives for City water customers to replace
existing toilets with water-conserving equivalents. This program mirrors similar efforts in
Pinellas County and the regional community with key objectives of educating the public on
water conservation, reducing indoor water use by 15 - 20% and encouraging the use of
water-conserving devices. This is the first year of an anticipated 4-year effort by the City
in cooperation with SWFWMD.
City Code requires low-flow toilets for new construction. This program provides a
one-time rebate to retail water customers (up to $100 per toilet) for replacing an existing
toilet with a 1.6-gallon Ultra-Low Flow Volume (ULV) model. Older model toilets use from
3.5 to 5 gallons of water per flush. The funding for this program (a total of 4250,000 with
both SWFWMD and City funds) provides for an estimated 1,700 toilet rebates, which
would save approximately 57,000 gallons of potable water each day.
An accompanying Agenda Item provides for funding of program administration not
to exceed $76,000, as part of the $250,000 total. The program will be monitored to
evaluate the actual water savings achieved. A phone line to receive customer calls for
participation in the City's ULV Toilet Rebate program will be established. The process itself
shall consist of a promotional campaign, developing a list of participants, verification of
existing toilets, having City water customers remove their existing high-volume toilet,
verification that this was accomplished, and at what cost, issuing the rebate check, and
preparing necessary reports.
Funding will be provided by a first quarter budget amendment transferring $125,000
of available water revenue from the Capital Improvement Program Project #315-96740
Water Supply & Treatment to a new project to be established, #315-96747 Flow Restrictor
& Rain Sensor Rebates. Sufficient funds were budgeted for this initiative in the Water
Supply & Treatment code, therefore, the code will not be impacted. The new project code
is being created to better track this initiative. Funding for the remaining 3 years of the
program has been included in the current rate study update.
Concern was expressed that this is a waste of taxpayer's money.
Commissioner Hart moved to approve the Cooperative Agreement with the
Southwest Florida Management District (SWFWMD), which provides funding of project
costs of up to $125,000 for the replacement of toilets with water-conserving equivalents
(Project K-512), and approve the match of City funds in the amount of $125,000.
The motion died due to the lack of a second.
mcc02b01
17
02/15/01
.
.
.
Commissioner Johnson moved to deny the Cooperative Agreement with Southwest
Florida Management District (SWFWMD) and matching City funds in the amount of
$125,000. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Commissioners
Johnson, Clark, and Hemerick voted "Aye"; Commissioner Hart and Mayor Aungst voted
"Nay". Motion carried.
OTHER ITEMS ON CITY MANAGER REPORT
ITEM #25 - Contract to VoltVIEWTech. Inc., implement, monitor & execute Ultra Low-
Volume Toilet Rebate Program, not to exceed $76,000 (PW)
This item was pulled.
ITEM #26 - First ReadinQ Ord. #6692-01 - Amending Sec. 32.374(1), providing for
metering of non-irrigation reclaimed water service users; creating Sec. 32.373(3), requiring
backup potable water systems for certain reclaimed water customers; amending Art.
XXV(3)(f) of Appendix A, as amended by Ord. #6587-00, providing fees for non-irrigation
reclaimed water use (providing for metering of reclaimed water service for air conditioning
reuse, changing rate structure) (PW)
This ordinance is necessary as a result of new reclaimed commercial customers in
the south Clearwater beach area requesting connection to the reclaimed water system for
make-up water for their air conditioning units. There is no provision in the current
ordinance for this reclaimed water use, which could be significant. If no change were
made, reclaimed use for many of these potentially significant commercial customers would
be billed at the rate of $1 5/month, if they were less than 2 acres. The ordinance change
will provide for metering of multi-family, commercial, and industrial units for air
conditioning cooling towers. A metered use rate of $.30/1,000 gallons will be applied to
these customers who have reclaimed water already available.
The proposed consumption rate is $.30/1,000 gallons for multi-family dwelling units
and commercial/industrial customers, matching the current metered rate according to the
ordinance. If a commercial/industrial customer is using reclaimed water for both irrigation
and non-irrigation air conditioning reuses, and the pervious area is less than 2 acres, the
charge will be $9 per month (availability) and $6 (irrigation) and $.30/1 ,000 gallons for all
non-irrigation (air conditioning make-up) reuse water. If the pervious area is greater than 2
acres, then a single meter will be set at a $9 availability fee plus $.30/1,000 gallons.
Upon approval, new customer accounts will be established for commercial/industrial
and multi-family dwelling units when service is requested. All customers connecting to the
reclaimed water system for air conditioning reuse shall be required to have a potable water
backup system in place, including proper backflow protection. Reclaimed water use
restriction will not apply to air conditioning make-up water usage. The dollar amount
($1 ,000) covers the anticipated costs to install new meters for existing customers as a
result of this ordinance. There are sufficient funds available in the System Expansion
account #96744 to set any additional meters.
mcc02b01
18
02/15/01
.
.
.
Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the provision for metering of reclaimed
water service for air conditioning reuse and changing the rate structure. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6692-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Clark moved to pass Ordinance #6692-01 on first reading. The
motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes":
Johnson, Clark, Hart, Hemerick, and Aungst.
"Nays":
None.
ITEM #27 - First ReadinQ Ord. #6695-01 - increasing domestic, lawn water & wastewater
collection utility rates by 7% each year over the next 5 years beginning 7/1/01 with
subsequent increases to be effective 4/1/02, 1/1/03, 10/1/03 & 10/1/04 (PW)
The utility rate increases are needed to provide funding to maintain compliance with
debt service coverage requirements supporting the continuation of capital improvement
projects needed to sustain the City's utility infrastructure. Infrastructure improvements are
needed to maintain compliance with federal regulations concerning water supply and
treatment, wastewater collection, maintain reliability of the water pollution control
facilities, and expansion of the reclaimed water system due to age of the infrastructure.
The last rate increase effective July 1, 2000, provided only temporary relief for
utility infrastructure needs. There are projects ready to award yet are not funded due to
the inability to adequately finance infrastructure improvements. At this point, projects are
on hold until a rate increase is passed.
Burton & Associates have completed a water and wastewater collection utility rate
study to cover 5 years of operations. Previously, the Burton Rate Study recommended a
6.6% rate increase over 5 years in order to have sufficient funds to cover debt service,
operations and capital improvement projects. The current study recommends 5 increases
of 7% each. The new water plant under consideration will provide estimated annual net
savings of $1.4 million in water cost at the current rate to purchase water from Pinellas
County of $1 .79 per 1 ,000 gallons. This savings created a reduction in the rate increase
requested from 8.14% to 7% per year. Also factored into the rate study are continued
wholesale water purchases from Pinellas County at their suggested increased rates. These
rates increase from the present $1.79/1,000 gallons to $2.29/1,000 gallons over the
timeframe of the proposed 5-year rate increase. A rate restructuring study also is currently
underway by Burton & Associates for more equitable distribution among customers.
In response to a question, Assistant City Manager Garry Brumback said matters
have only changed slightly since Monday regarding Tampa Bay Water. The City will build
the reverse osmosis water treatment plant on its own timeline. The City is committed to
optimizing the existing wellfield which will cost $500,000 to $600,000. Staff informed
Tampa Bay Water that the City could build the plant cheaper than they could. Their cost
was significantly higher than their original estimates. They also indicated the time-sensitive
mcc02b01
19
02/15/01
.
nature of their project no longer exists. Staff estimates the cost of the plant at $8 million.
Ms. Arasteh said the City's consultant updated the earlier analysis and indicated the $8.2
million value plugged into the rate study is sufficient to increase water pumpage by 2
million gallons per day.
Commissioner Johnson moved to approve increasing domestic, lawn water, and
wastewater collection utility rates by 7% each year over the next 5 years beginning July 1,
2001, with the subsequent increases to be effective April 1, 2002, January 1, 2003,
October 1, 2003, and October 1, 2004, respectively. The motion was duly seconded and
upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Johnson, Hart, and Hemerick and Mayor Aungst
voted "Aye"; Commissioner Clark voted "Nay". Motion carried.
The City Attorney presented Ordinance #6695-01 for first reading and read it by
title only. Commissioner Johnson moved to pass Ordinance #6695-01 on first reading.
The motion was duly seconded.
.
It was requested prior to the final vote, more clarity be provided. Mr. Brumback
said staff is comfortable that the City can build a plant for less than Tampa Bay Water's
original proposal. He said their increased price was due to the need to expedite its
construction. He said the change that has occurred is that now the City can produce
additional water from its existing well structures by optimizing its current wellfield and
placing the construction of the new water plant on a slower track. In response to a
question, Ms. Arasteh said staff has held public meetings and are continuing to address the
public's concerns. It was reported Tampa Bay Water's estimated costs for the $8.2 million
plant rose to $9.8 million. Tampa Bay Water also said the urgency of producing the water
was no longer required. As a result of these developments, staff feels the City could build
a plant sufficient to meet its needs at a lesser cost. Staff is addressing the sinkhole
concerns raised by residents. In response to a question, Ms. Arasteh said staff has found
that a lot of draw down in Lake Hobert is due to shallow wells for irrigation. The City
already has the necessary permit to increase pumping.
Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Johnson, Hart, and Hemerick and Mayor
Aungst voted "Aye"; Commissioner Clark voted "Nay". Motion carried.
ITEM #28 - 2001 Federal Leqislative Packaqe (elK)
City Clerk Cyndie Goudeau reviewed the final version of Clearwater's legislative
priorities for the new federal budget year. The City's priorities include: 1) $10 million for
Clearwater Beach Redevelopment; 2) $10 million for Wastewater and Reclaimed Water
Infrastructure; 3) Fire Department Assistance; 4) $ 3million for Stevenson Creek Estuary
Restoration Program; and 5) $3 million for Brownfields Clean-up. Ms. Goudeau said staff is
looking for ways to add funds for downtown redevelopment.
Commissioner Clark moved to approve the final version of Clearwater's legislative
priorities for the new federal budget year. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
.
mcc02b01
20
02/15/01
.
.
.
ITEM #29 - Other Pendinq Matters - None.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
ITEM #30 - Other City Attornev Items
a) Agreement with Pinellas Planning Council re Transfer of Development Rights for
Mandalay Beach Club project (JMC Communities of Clearwater III, Inc. / Cheezum)
Shortly after the new Land Development Code was adopted, the City processed the
site plan and transfer of development rights application for the JMC development on the
beach. After the applications were approved, the PPC (Pinellas Planning Council) contacted
the City regarding the use of 9 transfer of development rights units that were applied to the
site. The City had previously received correspondence from the PPC indicating that the
new Code was "consistent" with the Countywide rules. Subsequent to the application on
the JMC site, the PPC indicated that they did not understand how the new Code handled
the transfer of development rights, and they felt that their rules were not consistent with
the City's new Code.
In order to resolve the situation, both the City and the PPC agreed to amend their
respective rules, which has been accomplished. Currently, in order to take advantage of
the TDR process, a local government must adopt a Special Area Plan pursuant to the
Countywide rules. The Beach by Design plan that will be adopted in February 2001 meets
this requirement.
The agreement provides that the City will not issue building permits for the North
Tower until adoption of the Beach by Design plan. It further provides that units transferred
to the City shall be used only in compliance with the Countywide Rules.
Commissioner Hart said that the PPC is not guaranteeing they will act but has
indicated it appears to be satisfactory.
Commissioner Hart moved to approve the agreement with the Pinellas Planning
Council regarding the transfer of development rights for the Mandalay Beach Club project
and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
An Attorney/Client Session was scheduled for February 26, 2001 at 8:30 a.m.
regarding Short v. City.
ITEM #31 - City Manaqer Verbal Reoorts
A Canvassing Board meeting was scheduled for March 14, 2001 at 12:00 p.m.
mcc02b01
21
02/15/01
.
.
.
ITEM #32 - Other Commission Action
Mayor Aungst said Clearwater Youth is having a banquet on Friday.
Commissioner Clark requested the status of the Balk agreement. He questioned
why Court Street is being considered as the conduit to Myrtle Avenue when Alt19
realigned.
Commissioner Hemerick requested the City Attorney research if planned bus parking
on Memorial Causeway is allowed by Charter.
ITEM #33 - Adiournment
The meeting adjourned at 12:27 a.m.
ATTEST: ~,E- I:L..Q,"__
City Clerk
I?-~
MayorlCYmi sioner
mcc02b01
22
02/15/01