04/15/2004
.
.
.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
April 15, 2004
Present: Brian J. Aungst
Frank Hibbard
Hoyt P. Hamilton
William C. Jonson
Carlen Petersen
Mayor
Vice-Mayor
Councilmember
Councilmember
Councilmember
Also present: William B. Horne II
Garry Brumback
Ralph Stone
Pamela K. Akin
Cynthia E. Goudeau
Brenda Moses
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
Board Reporter
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. The invocation was
offered by Reverend Doctor John R. Thompson of Countryside Christian Center. The Mayor led
the Pledge of Allegiance.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
4 -Introductions and Awards - None.
5 - Presentations:
5.1 - Proclamation - Municipal Clerks' Week - May 4 - 8, 2004.
5.2 - FOOT (Florida Department of Transportation) update re: Memorial Causeway Bridqe
FOOT District Director of Transportation Operations Jim Moulton reported the Memorial
Causeway Bridge project contractor, PCl Civil Constructors, had presented its preliminary
strengthening plan, addressing the shoring failure of Span 7R and excessive cracking of Piers
5L, 5R, 6L, and 6R. He said more analysis would determine the levels of stress placed on the
columns. As segments were added, a seesaw situation occurred, affecting the under designed
diaphragms on top of each pier. That recommended fix would widen the concrete at the
diaphragms, add reinforcing steel, and tie the diaphragms into the columns via a 7-step
process.
Mr. Moulton reported no concern regarding the geometry of the right bridge. However,
the left bridge is 8.5 inches out of alignment. A normal remedy would use counter-weights to
align the roadways. That method, however, would subject the piers to further stresses and
cracking, as the gap is so large. He reviewed the contractor's proposal to buttress the four most
severely cracked columns with additional steel and extra concrete around approximately 15 feet
of the bases. FOOT has requested information related to the original design by HDR and
changes made to that design. Preliminary information indicates some deficiencies in the new
design.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
1
. Concern was expressed every suggestion seems to raise additional concerns and it was
suggested it may be better to raze problematic portions of the bridge and have another
contractor help PCl complete the project. Mr. Moulton reported the State has hired three
experts to review the project and assured the City these experts will make certain that all
problems are addressed. Public Works Administrator Mahshid Arasteh said the three experts
are very knowledgeable. Mr. Moulton said FOOT is waiting for the contractor to provide all
necessary information before the analysis can proceed. FOOT will look out for the public
interest and will make certain the bridge is safe and sustainable. It was requested FOOT retain
open communication lines with the City regarding updates.
In response to a question, Mr. Moulton said the superstructure would require additional
strengthening or removal. If the superstructure must be removed, contractors are available with
the expertise to surgically disassemble the bridge safely, using hydro-demolition techniques.
Mr. Moulton said repairing a pier would require epoxy, additional concrete, and reinforcing steel.
Cracks below the waterline soon will be addressed.
In response to a question, Mr. Moulton said FOOT and HOR had reviewed PCl
proposed changes to the original design. While some proposed changes were detailed, others
were conceptual. FOOT is reviewing the entire design process. Mr. Moulton reported the
aesthetics of the bridge remain a concern, and the contractor's proposal to buttress cracked
columns would result in larger columns, but would retain the same design as other columns. A
schedule for completion cannot be detailed until all related information is analyzed.
.
In response to a question, Mr. Moulton said FOOT requires a bond on all projects. He
said PCl has continued to pay its contractors even though FOOT has begun to withhold
payments. After July, PCl will be subject to a $15,000 per day fine. When finalized, it was
requested FOOT provide an explanation of proposed repairs, in layman's terms. Ms. Arasteh
said staff has requested FOOT be out front with the public to ensure the safety of the bridge
once a remedy is chosen. He said as FOOT will own and maintain the bridge, the agency will
make certain construction is done correctly.
5.3 - Neiqhborhood of the Quarter
The Neighborhood of the Quarter Award was presented to the Grovewood Homeowners
Association. Also presented were Homes of the Quarter Awards to Richard & Barbara Hill,
Wendell & Harolbelle Sheets, Charles & Darlene Beysher, and Michael & Eugenia McQuigg.
6 - Approval of Minutes
6.1 - City Council Minutes - April 1, 2004
Councilmember Petersen moved to approve the minutes of the April 1 ,2004, meeting,
as recorded and submitted in written summation by the City Clerk to each Councilmember. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
2
.
.
.
7 - Citizens to be Heard re Items Not on the Agenda
Gary Johnson, Boy Scout Master, accompanied boy scouts to the meeting to earn merit
badges related to public service.
Dr. David Shank complained regarding patient parking problems at his medical clinic and
requested a meeting to discuss alternatives. It was noted Dr. Shank had walked out of a
previous meeting with staff.
Jim Ficken disagreed he was combative and uncooperative regarding code violations for
which he was cited and complained referring these violations to county court would result in a
criminal record. The City Attorney said these types of violations do not result in criminal
records.
Mike Meidel, Clearwater Regional Chamber of Commerce, hoped the City would support
his proposal to extend the PST A's (Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority) Suncoast Trolley
itinerary by combining Route 80 with the Suncoast Trolley. Consensus was to prepare a
resolution in support.
Public Hearings
Councilmember Jonson moved to hear Item 10.1 out of agenda order, before Item 8.1.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
8 - Administrative public hearings
8.1 - Approve the applicant's request to vacate a portion of First Street East. a drainaqe and
utility easement Iyinq within a vacated portion of First Street East and a utility easement Iyinq in
a vacated portion of Chautauqua Boulevard, located in Chautauqua Unit 1, Section A and pass
Ordinance #7288-04 on first readinq, (VAC 2004-03 Dimmitt).
The applicant is seeking the vacation in order to plat 46 single-family lots in a new
subdivision to be known as Lake Chautauqua. The two easements to be vacated are located in
vacated portions of Chautauqua Unit 1, Section A subdivision. Bright House Networks,
Knology, Progress Energy, and Verizon have no objections to the vacation of the street portion
and easements requested. No City utilities are located in the areas proposed to be vacated and
easements will be required as needed for the proposed plat. Public Works Administration has
no objections to the vacation request.
Councilmember Jonson moved to approve the applicant's request to vacate a portion of
First Street East, a drainage and utility easement lying within a vacated portion of First Street
East and a utility easement lying in a vacated portion of Chautauqua Boulevard, located in
Chautauqua Unit 1, Section A. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Ordinance #7288-04 was presented for first reading and read by title only.
Councilmember Petersen moved to pass Ordinance #7288-04 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Hamilton, Jonson, Hibbard, Petersen, and Aungst.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
3
.
.
.
"Nays": None.
9 - Quasi-judicial public hearings - None.
10 - Second Readings - Public Hearing
10.1 - Adopt Ordinance #7252-04 on second readinq approvinq the Petition for Annexation for a
portion of the First Street East Road riqht-of-way (the southerly most 163 feet of the First Street
East Road riqht-of-way in Sec 32-28-16.
Ordinance #7252-04 was presented for second reading and read by title only.
Councilmember Hibbard moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #7252-04 on second and final
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Jonson, Hamilton, Hibbard, Petersen, and Aungst.
"Nays": None.
10.2 - Adopt Ordinance #7281-04 on second readinq approvinq the Initial City Future Land Use
Plan desiqnation of Residential Suburban (RS) for a portion of the First Street East Road riqht-
of-way (the southerly most 163 feet of the First Street East Road riqht-of-way in Sec 32-28-16).
Ordinance #7281-04 was presented for second reading and read by title only.
Councilmember Hibbard moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #7281-04 on second and final
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Jonson, Hamilton, Hibbard, Petersen, and Aungst.
"Nays": None.
10.3 - Adopt Ordinance #7282-04 on second readinq approvinq the Initial City Zoninq Atlas
desiqnation of LOR. Low Density Residential. for a portion of the First Street East Road riqht-of-
way (the southerly most 163 feet of the First Street East Road riqht-of-way in Sec 32-28-16).
Ordinance #7282-04 was presented for second reading and read by title only.
Councilmember Hamilton moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #7282-04 on second and final
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Jonson, Hamilton, Hibbard, Petersen, and Aungst.
"Nays": None.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
4
.
.
.
10.4 - Adopt Ordinance #7287-04 on second readinq, approvinq the applicant's request to
vacate the 1 O-foot drainaqe and utility easement Iyinq adiacent to and alonq the south side of
the 100-foot Florida Power Corporation easement located on Lot 26, Elysium, Phase I (A.K.A.
2944 Chancery Lane). (VAC 2004-01 Freedman)
Ordinance #7287-04 was presented for second reading and read by title only.
Councilmember Jonson moved to pass and adopt Ordinance #7287-04 on second and final
reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Jonson, Hamilton, Hibbard, Petersen, and Aungst.
"Nays": None.
City Manager Reports
11 - Consent Agenda - Approved as submitted.
11.1 - Authorize the City to initiate foreclosure proceedinqs at this time, and/or in the future if
warranted, on the property located at 1116 Howard Street. Clearwater for non-payment and
non-responsiveness of a City Housinq Loan.
11.2 - Extend an existinq lease aqreement with Xerox Corporation, Tampa, FL from December
30, 2007 to May 31.2008 and increase the award from $640.000 to $890,000 for the lease of
11 additional diqital copiers in accordance with Section 2.564 (1 )(d) Code of Ordinance -
Putnam County contract numbers 071398105 and 071736300.
11.3 - Approve a three-year operations aqreement. with a three-year renewal option. with Raven
of Tampa. Inc. d/b/a Joffrey's Coffee Company. for a cafe in the new Main Library and authorize
the appropriate officials to execute same.
11.4 - Approve the Work Order to PARSONS for desiqn enqineerinq services for the first two
diqesters in the Diqester Refurbishment phase of the Biosolids Treatment Implementation
proiect at the Northeast and Marshall Street AWTP facilities in the amount of $254,351, and that
the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
11.5 - Approve the final plat for "Downtown Lofts." located at 1 00 North Martin Luther Kino
Junior Avenue.
11.6 - Approve the final plat for "Laura Street Townhomes," located between Laura and Grove
streets, about 400 feet east of Myrtle Avenue.
11.7 - Approve a contract with Mount Carmel Community Development Corporation of
Clearwater, Inc. to sell the South 'Y2 of Lot 6 and all of Lot 7, GREENWOOD MANOR. for the
total sum of $18,000, and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
11.8 - Authorize settlement of leqal action brouqht aqainst Metal Culverts. Inc., to recover
money on account owed for qas consumption.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
5
.
.
.
11.9 - Request for Authority to institute a civil action aQainst David FoderinQham to recover
$2,163 for damaQe to City property.
11.10 - Appoint Councilmembers as representatives on the ReQional and Miscellaneous
Boards: Tampa Bay ReQional PlanninQ Council (TBRPC) - Petersen; Suncoast LeaQue of
Municipalities Board of Directors - Jonson; PerforminQ Arts Center & Theater Board of Directors
- AunQst (On hold); Mayor's Council of Pinellas County - AunQst; Chi Chi Rodriquez Youth
Foundation Board of Directors - Hamilton (On hold); Jolley Trolley Transportation of Clearwater,
Inc. Board of Directors - Hamilton (On hold); CHIP (Clearwater Homeless Intervention Proiect)
Board of Directors - (On hold); Clearwater Marina Aquarium Board - Hibbard (On hold): Barrier
Island Governmental Council - Hamilton; Tampa Bay Partnership Board of Governors - AunQst;
Tampa Bay Partnership Policy Board - AunQst; Tampa Bay Estuary Policy Board - Jonson;
Sister Cities Committee - Petersen; EmerQency Medical Services Advisory Council (EMS) -
AunQst - 2-year term expired 5/2003 (On hold); Pinellas WorkNet Board - Hamilton - 2-year
term expired 9/30/2003 (On hold); St. PetersburQ/ Clearwater Area Economic Development
Council - Jonson - 1-year term expires 10/2005; Pinellas PlanninQ Council (PPC) - Hamilton -
2-year term expires 12/31/2004; Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PST A) - Jonson - 3-year
term expires 9/30/2006; Metropolitan PlanninQ OrQanization (MPO) - Hibbard - 4-year term
expires 9/2005; Pension Advisory Committee (PAC) Petersen - 2-year term expires 4/4/2005,
Hamilton - 2-year term expires 4/4/2006, Hibbard - 2-year term expires 4/4/2006; and Main
Street Joint Venture - Jonson.
PurchasinQ
11.11 - Gas Material - Meters and ReQulators durinQ the contract period: May 1, 2004 throuQh
April 30, 2005.
11.12 - Gas Materials - Meters and ReQulators durinq the contract period: May 1. 2004 throuqh
April 30, 2005.
Council member Jonson moved to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted and that
the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
12 - Other items on City Manager Reports
12.1 - Pass Ordinance #7280-04 on first readinq, which will amend the City of Clearwater
Ordinance relatinq to fees for services provided by the Police Department.
This amendment to Appendix A will include and revise fees for administrative services
provided to persons seeking to solicit, seeking letters of good conduct, seeking to obtain
fingerprint services or police reports, applying for an occupational license, or seeking to drive
taxicabs or public conveyances within the City. The amendment of Ordinance #7280-04 will
reimburse the Clearwater Police Department for costs to provide those administrative services.
Councilmember Jonson moved to amend the City of Clearwater Ordinance relating to
fees for services provided by the Police Department. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
6
.
.
.
Ordinance #7280-04 was presented for first reading and read by title only.
Councilmember Hamilton moved to pass Ordinance #7280-04 on first reading. The motion was
duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Hamilton, Jonson, Hibbard, and Petersen.
"Nays": None.
Absent: Aungst.
12.2 - Approve the Pinellas County Interlocal Mutual Aid Aqreement concerninq Traffic Accident
Investiqations and Traffic Enforcement and adopt Resolution #04-08 authorizinq the appropriate
officials be authorized to execute same.
Mutual aid agreements among law enforcement agencies are authorized by Chapter 23,
Florida Statutes, for rendering voluntary assistance of a routine law enforcement nature to one
another across jurisdictional lines. Aggressive drivers, speeders, and other traffic violators do
not respect jurisdictional boundaries; yet municipal law enforcement officers in Pinellas County
are powerless to enforce traffic laws or conduct traffic-accident investigations on a street
contiguous to the jurisdictional boundaries of the officer's employing municipality but in the
jurisdiction of the other cooperating agency.
The proposed Mutual Aid Agreement will allow a uniformed, on-duty, municipal law
enforcement officer in Pinellas County to conduct traffic accident investigations on a street
contiguous to the jurisdictional boundaries of the officer's employing municipality but in the
jurisdiction of the other cooperating agency when the agency in whose jurisdiction the accident
occurred is unable to dispatch an officer to the scene. The proposed Mutual Aid Agreement will
also allow a uniformed, on-duty, municipal law enforcement officer in Pinellas County to take
appropriate action when he/she observes a traffic infraction occurring on a street contiguous to
the jurisdictional boundaries of the officer's employing municipality but in the jurisdiction of the
other cooperating agency.
The Mutual Aid Agreement will terminate on January 1, 2005. The City Attorney and
Police Chief recommend approval.
Council member Petersen moved to approve the Pinellas County Interlocal Mutual Aid
Agreement concerning Traffic Accident Investigations and Traffic Enforcement and that the
appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
Resolution #04-08 was presented and read by title only. Councilmember Hibbard
moved to pass and adopt Resolution #04-08 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute
same. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was:
"Ayes": Hamilton, Jonson, Hibbard, Petersen, and Aungst.
"Nays": None.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
7
.
.
.
12.3 - Approve the New Construction chapter of the Downtown Desiqn Guidelines.
Planning Director Cyndi Tarapani reviewed proposed guidelines. As presented on
December 18, 2003, the development of the Downtown Design Guidelines has been organized
into four parts: 1) Design Principles; 2) New Construction; '3) Treatment of Designated Historic
Structures; and 4) Signs and Miscellaneous.
The Design Guidelines review schedule, revised in February 2004, has been organized
around these four major topics of discussion with each topic to be presented to the City Council
for review and approval. The first one, Design Principles, was approved on December 18,
2003. The second one addresses New Construction and is the subject of this agenda item.
Planning staff and the Steering Committee have met six times during the last four
months to create this section. The Council received a draft last week, excluding the color and
material subsection. The New Construction chapter focuses on the basic and specific principles
for the numerous aspects of site and building design that will guide new development within the
Downtown. It is divided into three subsections: 1) site design; 2) building placement; and 3)
building design. Subsections are organized by topic with an accompanying principle and
subsequent "appropriate"/"inappropriate" supporting statements, photographs, drawings and
other images to guide design.
The Steering Committee reviewed the color and materials subsection on April 6, 2004,
and forwarded recommendations. The Planning Department recommends approval of the New
Construction provisions as presented by the Committee with one exception. The Department
recommends language be added to page 39 of the color section that would prohibit the use of
the deepest tones of colors on the main body of buildings. The Committee reviewed the
proposed language but voted to remove it from the Guidelines by a vote of 7:3.
The Planning Department and Committee are developing the next element of the
Guidelines, "Treatment of Designated Historic Buildings," which is scheduled for Council review
on May 20, 2004.
Ms. Tarapani reported as the City Council approves each section, staff will apply the
new guidelines as applications are presented.
Discussion ensued in regard to transition areas. It was recommended structure heights
increase gradually, rather than from 30 feet to 100 feet. Ms. Tarapani said developers will
determine building heights in transition areas based on a sliding scale and separation. It was
recommended improved designs be rewarded, with staff retaining flexibility to ensure enhanced
projects. Ms. Tarapani said criteria related to setbacks were added to the guidelines to improve
design. The City Manager encouraged the City Council to identify prescriptive guidelines to
help staff manage developer requests. Assistant City Manager Ralph Stone said design
guidelines provide tools to help staff implement the redevelopment plan.
Ben Harrell, part owner of the private marina in Old Clearwater Bay, reviewed plans to
redevelop the property, indicating the development is being pushed away from the residential
area. He recommended that guidelines limit the density adjacent to residential structures, not
residential areas.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
8
.
Vicki Morgan, Steering Committee Vice Chair, Old Bay Neighborhood Homeowners
Association President and resident said she wanted to take Mr. Harrell's proposal back to the
Steering Committee for review. She said her goal is to protect current neighborhood properties
from being looked down upon by residents in neighboring development. In response to a
question, Ms. Morgan said the Steering Committee had recommended a 45-foot separation
between the residential neighborhood and the development. This was based on other cities that
had transition areas in place.
Discussion continued in regard to transition areas and concern was expressed at putting
something in the Code based on one specific property. Ms. Tarapani said the transition only
applies to two places, one of which is Mr. Harrell's property. Staff has applied the proposal to
the other sites to see if it works.
Ms. Tarapani said there is some validity to Mr. Harrell's request to base the setback on
the structure, instead of plan boundaries. She suggested staff could take the issue back to the
Steering Committee. Concern was expressed tonight's decision not handcuff development of
the marina. Ms. Tarapani indicated the developer is still working on plans.
Discussion ensued in regard to Cleveland Street retaining a specific character or
identity. It was recommended the guidelines for new construction include photographs and
references to preferred architectural periods. Concern was expressed that Downtown does not
have enough critical mass to establish a historic district and that "Old Florida" style needs to be
defined. It was agreed that Cleveland Street, which should be the City's main street, now
exhibits a mishmash of styles.
. Assistant City Manager Ralph Stone said staff had done a good job with the
development of Station Square Park. He believed the streetscape program would define the
character of Downtown. He recommended against making the guidelines too prescriptive. It
was recommended a sentence be added to the guidelines requiring period architectural style for
new development for a section of Cleveland Street. Concern was expressed future
redevelopment not be tied down by designating Downtown buildings for historic preservation.
Discussion ensued regarding architectural styles and recommendations were made for
styles such as Mediterranean Revival and a style that reflects Clearwater's roots, such as the
time period before 1950 as exemplified by the Coachman Building and the Starbucks location.
Mr. Stone said staff could develop guidelines based on photographs of preferred architectural
styles and recommendations on incorporating that style in higher rises.
Direction was given to move forward with the Design Guidelines as recommended by
staff, with the exception of transition zones, which will be returned to the Steering Committee,
and for staff to look at structures typical for Clearwater prior to the 1950s for the Cleveland
corridor.
.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
9
.
.
.
12.4 - IAFF Union neqotiations update:
Human Resources Director Joe Roseto reported the IAFF (International Association of
Fire Fighters) and City have reached a tentative agreement for a three-year contract. If ratified
next week by union members, staff will bring the contract forward for City Council approval.
13 - City Attorney Reports - None.
14 - City Manager Verbal Reports
14.1 Pinellas Assembly Annexation Policy/Guidelines Task Force Recommendations.
In her April 5, 2004 memorandum, Ms. Tarapani reviewed Pinellas Assembly Annexation
Policy/Guidelines Task Force Recommendations regarding the following topics: 1) voluntary
annexation; 2) referendum annexation; 3) enclaves; and 4) other issues associated with
annexation.
Voluntary Annexation Recommendations
The Planning Department generally supports Task Force recommendations regarding
voluntary annexation. The planning area boundaries have not had any negative effects on the
City's annexation program. The Planning Department has some concerns about allowing the
County to contract planning area boundaries.
The Task Force recommends treating the three following actions as a package. All three
should be approved or none should be approved: 1) Planninq/Annexation Areas - More than a
year ago, the County contracted the planning boundaries for several municipalities in an attempt
to prevent the annexation of the Lealman neighborhood (unincorporated County) and Lealman
Fire District. When the planning boundaries originally were determined, the municipalities never
contemplated the County had the authority to contract a municipality's planning boundary;
therefore, the Task Force viewed the County's action as a breach of trust. The Task Force
recommended restoring the planning boundaries for voluntary annexation to their original
location established by the County referendum. By returning the boundaries to their original
locations, the Task Force believed trust could be reestablished. The Task Force recommended
that the PPC (Pinellas Planning Council) and CPA (Countywide Planning Authority) reestablish
the boundaries, however, not allow them to be changed until after January 1, 2008, or a date
that coincides with changes recommended for the referendum process. This date was selected
because it is the expiration date of the Farkas Bill, which provides financial protection for the
Lealman Fire District when property is annexed out of the district. It should be noted that the
Task Force supported planning area boundaries for municipalities while also maintaining areas
outside of those boundaries as unincorporated areas. This belief drove the recommendations
on voluntary annexation and more importantly, the recommendations regarding referendum
annexation; 2) Criteria for Planninq/Annexation Area Boundary Amendment - The Task Force
supported amendments to Pinellas County Ordinance #00-63 to better define the process for
amending planning boundaries. The Task Force wanted clearer objectives that address
public/community interests and fiscal impacts; and 3) Process for Planninq/Annexation Area
Boundary Amendment - Under current County Ordinance #00-63, the Board of County
Commissioners, sitting as the CPA, has the authority to approve or deny boundary changes.
The Task Force recognized the need to treat boundary changes as other CPA cases and
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
10
.
.
.
require a supermajority of the CPA to override a PPC recommendation. The Task Force also
recommended the ordinance provide for an administrative hearing process for aggrieved
parties. Currently affected parties must file a petition in Circuit Court. The current litigation
between several cities and the county may have been prevented if such an appeal process
existed. The Planning Department supports this proposal.
This recommendation also supports clarifying the ordinance to allow municipalities or the
County to change planning boundaries. The revision, as contemplated by the Task Force,
would enable the County to contract planning boundaries. The Planning Department has
concerns about Proposal 3 regarding planning boundary amendments. The planning
boundaries established in Pinellas County Ordinance #00-63 were based on a city's ability to
provide urban services to the areas within its boundaries. It is unclear why the County should
have the ability to contract these boundaries.
Referendum Annexation
The Planning Department does not support proposed changes to the referendum
annexation proposal because it would take away rights from the City currently allowed by
Florida Statutes. Based on Clearwater's non-aggressive approach to annexation, referendum
annexation has not been explored and therefore, the potential benefits are unknown at this time.
Governinq Leqislation - Because Florida Statute provisions for referendum (involuntary)
annexation seem to be more appropriate for rural areas than urbanized areas, and appear to
contain some inequities in the voting process, the Task Force believed it is important to seek
legislative support to establish a referendum process exclusive to Pinellas County. In this
evolving discussion, the Task Force ultimately recommended that referendum annexation be
limited to use within the voluntary planning boundaries. This measure would prevent the
involuntary annexation of unincorporated areas outside of the planning boundaries and would
only allow planning boundary expansions through the process established for voluntary
annexation.
Enclaves
The Planning Department generally supports the two enclave proposals; however, it is
very concerned about the fiscal impact this could have on the City. The Department does not
object provided each city has a reasonable time to make service available and that enclaves be
required to hook up to city sewer service when available.
1) Internal Enclaves Required to be Annexed - The Task Force supported the "forced"
annexation of all internal enclaves by January 1, 2008 (those unincorporated areas surrounded
by a municipality on all sides). It also recommended that costs directly incident to annexation of
enclaves be borne by the municipalities.
According to information provided by Pinellas County, the City contains 1,114 acres of
enclaves, with 2,688 residential dwelling units. Clearwater has more acres of enclaves and
more residential dwellings than any other municipality in the County. Largo has 547 acres of
enclaves; Pinellas Park has 485 acres of enclaves; Dunedin has 373 acres of enclaves; and
Tarpon Springs has 269 acres. St. Petersburg only has 3.45 acres of enclaves. The Task
Force never clarified if cities would have to pay for the extension of sewer service if service is
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
11
.
.
.
not readily available; or if service is already available, would cities have to pay the sewer/water
assessment and impact fees; or would this apply to vacant land or only developed land, etc.
This Task Force recommendation must be fully explored and understood before agreed upon. If
the City has to pay all of these costs and fees by 2008, this recommendation will be cost
prohibitive. This recommendation will create inequities between those already in the City (and
those that annexed in order to receive City services) who paid for the development of the sewer
system and those newly annexed enclave properties that do not contribute to the cost of
receiving this service. Furthermore, there are currently City residents who do not have sewer
service and it is unfair that incorporated residents be allowed to get this service for free while
City residents must pay for it.
2) Other Unincorporated Areas with Municipal PlanninQ Boundaries - The Task Force
recommends "proactive measures" to achieve annexation of the "other" types of unincorporated
areas (those not totally surrounded by the City) in a systematic basis. The point of this
recommendation is to encourage the annexation of "enclaves" first and then look at other
unincorporated areas within the planning boundary and annex them in a prioritized, systematic
basis. Instead of annexing these areas, the Task Force also recommended interlocal
agreements may be a viable alternative to providing service to these areas instead of annexing
them.
Since the City is the designated service provider within a planning boundary, staff feels
the City should be allowed to determine the most appropriate way to fill in these boundaries,
e.g. voluntary annexation, non-contiguous annexation, forced annexation, or referendum
annexation. It is not clear from a policy perspective why these "other" unincorporated enclaves
located within a City's planning boundary should be treated in a way different from those
unincorporated enclaves totally surrounded by the City. Due to the nature of voluntary
annexation, filling in the boundaries will never be logical; therefore, the effective way to fill in
these areas on a systematic basis will be through forced annexation.
Other Issues
The Planning Department is generally supportive of four of the five following
recommendations. The Department does not support exempting properties of countywide
significance from local regulations: 1) Properties of Countywide SiQnificance - In an attempt to
prevent large County properties from becoming a stumbling block to annexation (by preventing
other properties from being contiguous to city boundaries), the Task Force recommended that
properties of "countywide significance" be exempted from local regulations and fees. The
obvious benefit from giving up local regulation of these properties is that other properties will
become eligible for annexation. The Task Force recommended that the details of any such
annexation be governed by an interlocal agreement to be executed between the County and
affected city. The Task Force also recommended that the County and each city agree to a list
of such properties.
The Planning Department is not supportive of exempting significant properties from local
regulations. Numerous County facilities already are located throughout the various
municipalities and were required to comply with local requirements. In the City, private
properties, as well as City and County properties must comply with City regulations. It is not
clear why newly annexed County facilities should not meet the same standards. The County
may have legitimate concerns about how certain fees could impact their operations, however,
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
12
.
.
.
the Planning Department believes County properties located within the City should comply the
standards that all other property owners must meet. It should be noted that the County is
moving forward with an ordinance exempting properties of metropolitan importance on April 13,
2004. This ordinance would apply to existing facilities already within municipal boundaries, as
well as those to be annexed or constructed in the future.
2) Incentives - The Task Force recommended to allow incentives to be used for
annexation, provided they have a clear public purpose. The Task Force did not recommend
what incentives would meet this test but that they be developed and included in the county
provisions regulating annexation by January 1, 2008. The Task Force even discussed the need
for the Legislature to define what constitutes "public purpose" and 3) Public Participation and
Information - This Task Force recommendation centered upon providing the public with policy
neutral information regarding annexation. The Task Force supported the need to educate the
public, as well as obtain public input on annexation.
The Planning Department supports this recommendation and believes that the City and
County must work together to provide information about the forced annexation of enclaves and
the use of referendum annexation for "other" unincorporated areas within municipal planning
boundaries. The County must be proactive in educating County residents located in planning
areas regarding the purposes of the boundaries, as well as the fact that they cannot expect to
remain unincorporated residents. Public education must focus on the goals and benefits of
annexation.
4) Service Deliverv Generallv - This Task Force recommendation supports the cities and
County working together to provide residents with the most efficient service and 5) Transfer of
Jurisdictional Responsibilities Upon Annexation - The Task Force recognized the need for the
City, County and any special district to work together to determine which jurisdiction is
responsible for maintaining and operating certain infrastructure after annexation occurs. In
many instances, annexed properties become part of "no man's land" with regard to certain
services such as street maintenance and in particular drainage/ditch maintenance. For
example, it may not be not practical for a City (or the County) to maintain one portion of a street
if the majority is in the County (or City) or a drainage ditch, etc.; therefore an interlocal
agreement setting forth these responsibilities will greatly assist residents in getting the proper
level of service and ensure no disruption of service. This would also enable cities and the
County to plan for the transfer of service in terms of costs and personnel.
Ms. Tarapani reported the Board of County Commissioners would discuss the report on
April 20, 2004. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said in the future the City might wish to
annex areas to the north. It was recommended the City continue to deal with internal enclaves
and stay inside the current planning area. Ms. Tarapani expressed concern the City may not
want to lose forever all future opportunities to annex additional property.
The majority supported staff's position regarding the Task Force Recommendations.
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
13
.
.
.
15 - Council Discussion Items
15.1 - Prohibited uses on Clearwater Beach
Councilmember Hibbard questioned if anything could be done regarding the
preponderance of t-shirt shops on the beach. He expressed concern their presence had
discouraged high-end development of resorts and retail uses. The City Attorney said t-shirt
shops are not problematic uses and would be difficult to legislate. Councilmember Jonson
appreciated shop owners removing from view t-shirts with explicit messages.
16 - Other Council Action
Councilmember Hibbard complimented the Junior League for supporting a fun bus for
area students to attend cultural events. He reported the Relay for Life had raised more than
$90,000 for the American Cancer Society.
Councilmembers Hibbard, Petersen, Jonson, and Hamilton, and Mayor Aunqst enjoyed
their trip to Tallahassee and thanked City Clerk Cyndie Goudeau for her wonderful job at
building relationships in the capital, where she is well respected and has accomplished much.
Legislators were thanked for their time and efforts.
Councilmembers Hibbard and Hamilton encouraged residents to attend Thresher games
at Bright House Networks Stadium for inexpensive family entertainment.
Councilmembers Hibbard and Peterson said they had attended the First Night in the
Stacks.
Councilmembers Hibbard, Petersen, and Jonson, and Mayor Aunqst said they had
enjoyed Neighborhoods Day and thanked residents for their participation.
Councilmember Petersen said she had attended the F. Harrison Smith Art Gallery
opening and encouraged others to visit.
Councilmember Petersen and Mayor Aunqst attended the 100th birthday party of a City
resident, whose family complimented the City on its cleanliness.
Councilmember Jonson provided an update regarding a meeting on neighborhood
concerns regarding proposed development on Edgewater Drive. He expressed interest in
reviewing density limitations. He reported legislation, that could have been damaging, has been
mitigated. He encouraged all to keep the City clean.
Councilmember Hamilton was sorry he missed Neighborhood's Day. He encouraged all
to attend Beachfest this weekend. He noted the annual Fun 'n Sun is upcoming and
encouraged citizens to look for fliers.
Mayor Aunqst expressed concerns parking difficulties occur when simultaneous
activities are booked at the Harborview Center and Coachman Park. He requested staff be
proactive with participants for upcoming events and determine alternative parking
arrangements. He recommended staff review plans for the Cinco de Mayo celebration, as it
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
14
.
.
.
may attract many more people to Coachman Park than anticipated. He said staff needs to be
aware of feedback and criticisms of the Harborview Center. He congratulated City Clerk Cyndie
Goudeau for being a finalist for the FLC City Clerk of the Year award. He looked forward to his
trip to Washington D.C. to visit Florida's senators, congressmen, and staff. When completed,
he will provide details on Congressman Bill Young's report on the Memorial Causeway bridge.
He reported on April 12, 2004, he had welcomed a group of Oak Grove Middle School and
Clearwater High School students, who collaborated their talents for a wonderful concert. He
announced the Florida Orchestra is holding a major fundraising event at Ruth Eckerd Hall on
April 18, 2004.
17 - Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m.
rr
~c.tL Z. !li1~
Cit lerk
Council Meeting 2004-04-15
15