Loading...
09/18/1996 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER September 18, 1996 Present: Jill Melkonian Anne Garris Mike Foley Allan Stowell Alan Smith David Rhame Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member   Leslie Dougall-Sides Tom Miller, Assistant Director Gwen Legters Assistant City Attorney Engineering/Environmental Board Reporter  Absent: Whitney Gray Vice Chair   To provide continuity, the items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. in City Hall. Mr. David Rhame was welcomed as a new member. City Correspondence Mr. Miller distributed and highlighted the following: 1) a correction to Page 2 of the EAB procedure manual; 2) documentation of Mr. Rhame’s appointment to the EAB; 3) a fax from EAB Chair Melkonian to Mr. Miller relating items the board wishes to see on the September agenda; and 4) a letter from City Manager Deptula requesting advisory board members to refrain from wearing or displaying political campaign materials during meetings of boards on which the members serve. Minutes Approval - August 21, 1996 Member Foley thanked Mrs. Legters for an excellent summary of his jet ski impact report. No amendments or corrections to the minutes were indicated. Follow-up discussion of topics reported in the July 17 minutes appears below, under Discussion Items. Member Stowell moved to approve the minutes as submitted in writing to each member by the Board Reporter. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Confirm Agenda - Establish Consent and Regular Agenda Items Regular Agenda 1. Old Business a. City Comprehensive Plan Mr. Miller reported Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford has incorporated the board’s comments into the document and submitted it, with the board’s changes. The City submitted the Evaluation and Appraisal Report to the Department of Community Affairs on July 22 and should receive their comments within 45 days. Two public hearings on the matter are scheduled for March, 1997. One member expressed strong concern with the changes made to language in Section 22.2.9 regarding protection of the Bayfront from undesirable land uses. She expressed concern that construction below the bluff, once prohibited by Charter, is now to be allowed through policy guidelines. She protested changing the Comprehensive Plan to make it conform with the Downtown Redevelopment Plan, when it had once been reported the two plans were not in conflict. Member Garris moved to request urgently, that the City Commission return to the original Comprehensive Plan language for Section 22.2.9 which was: “Protect, through amendments to the Land Development Code, the Clearwater bayfront area from undesirable land uses and/or further construction, encroachment and destruction of the bluff and the bayfront shoreline, in accordance with the City Charter.” Discussion ensued regarding the motion. Some members expressed agreement, citing concerns with: 1) allowing staff to decide what is desirable or undesirable; 2) vague wording in the revised draft; and 3) violation of the City Charter requiring referendum approval of construction on specific locations on the bluff. Mr. Miller stated the Comprehensive Plan is a document meant to provide guidance to staff. The attempt has been to draft language that will provide the flexibility to advance the Downtown Redevelopment Plan in the way the City Commission decides in the future. Citizen approval of a referendum question would still be needed before any development occurs. One member pointed out the language “In accordance with the City Charter…” had been added as a compromise, in response to the latter concern. One member stated the time has come to stop compromising and protect two of Clearwater’s most valuable environments; the bayfront and the bluff. Member Garris restated her motion for the record. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. A question was raised and discussion ensued regarding removal of Section 22.5.1, regarding maintaining the integrity and natural function of wetlands. It was indicated board members had expressed concern the language was nebulous and open to interpretation. Consensus had been to drop policy 22.5.1 and let the more definitive policy 22.5.5 serve as the mechanism. (When 22.5.1 was eliminated, the remaining policies were renumbered and the new policy 22.5.5 became 22.5.4.) Member Garris moved to recommend approval of the amended Conservation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, with the amendment to policy 22.2.9, as approved by the board in the previous motion. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. b. Stormwater Video -- Tom Miller Member Stowell moved to continue this item to the next meeting, due to time constraints. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. c. Memorial Causeway Parking Lot Project -- Engineering Director Rich Baier Mr. Baier displayed an aerial photograph of the proposed location for a 48-space parking lot on the southwestern end of the Memorial Causeway. The project was initiated because of a request by marina tenants for additional parking. A parking feasibility study demonstrated increased Clearwater beach parking needs resulted from recent beach redevelopment and increased event programming. The City Commission directed staff to develop the proposal and solicit input from marina tenants and several advisory boards. He explained construction elements, configuration, ingress and egress considerations, effect on the surrounding area, retention requirements, and costs. The parking lot would not be accessible to westbound traffic due to the difficulties involved in obtaining a DOT permit for a median cut. The lot was designed specifically for overflow parking associated with the Marina building and activities. In response to questions, Mr. Baier discussed impervious versus permeable surfacing in terms of cost, aesthetics, and maintenance. He stated the Parks and Recreation Board and Beautification Committee did not favor of the proposal, citing concerns regarding loss of green space, effect on the environment, and aesthetics of a parking lot at the entrance to the beach. Marina tenants and the Marine Advisory Board felt the additional parking is sorely needed to help alleviate the parking deficit and enable expanded charter boat passenger capacities. In response to a question, Mr. Baier said metering was recommended so the lot could bear its share of the cost of beach maintenance. It was not known how current maintenance costs for the subject property would compare with the cost of maintaining and enforcing meters at the parking lot. A safety concern was expressed with exiting the parking lot on a blind right-hand curve into fast-moving eastbound traffic coming off the bridge. Mr. Baier stated he shared this concern, and an acceleration lane will be provided. One member, who did not support the parking lot, referred to recent discussion of constructing a parking garage in the Pelican Walk area of Mandalay Avenue. She requested a comparison of the walking distance to the Marina from the Pelican Walk area, versus from the proposed parking lot. She stated the Jolley Trolley could not serve patrons of the proposed parking lot, but could serve the Pelican Walk area. She displayed an enlarged photograph of the south side of the causeway as it exists currently, expressing concern with aesthetics and the impact of losing green space. Mr. Baier briefly related details of a public/private partnership that had been considered for a parking garage at Pelican Walk, stating it was not felt to be feasible. Additional discussion ensued regarding consideration of permeable block paving and heavy landscaping to soften the visual impact of the parking lot. Mr. Baier said landscaping costs are factored into the plan, but pervious block pavers would cost $8 to $12 thousand more than asphalt. One member requested a continuance of this item to allow time for board members to walk the area and evaluate the impact of the proposal. One member expressed concerns the proposal would set a dangerous precedent for unwanted development of Memorial Causeway. He felt people would not want to park their cars in the salty air of this location every day. He indicated he has never had a problem parking at the marina, but frequently experiences a beach parking shortage. It was indicated the proposal would not help alleviate the beach parking problem. He pointed out the proposal is in conflict with Comprehensive Plan Policy 22.4.1 to ensure Memorial Causeway’s major contribution as an aesthetic gateway and landmark to City beaches. One member stressed the need for public transportation to bring people to the beach and avoid additional paving. Because of the mangroves, she stated the proposed location is one of the few remaining open vistas. She reiterated her concern with the negative visual impact of a parking lot spoiling the view. Mr. Baier responded these points have been examined as part of the parking feasibility study. He stated staff is looking at reconfiguration and restriping, better signage, and better traffic direction to existing parking spaces. He pointed out Clearwater beach has more than 800 parking spaces, a large amount compared to other similarly sized beaches. Consensus was the board needed more time to review the proposal and prepare its recommendation. Staff was requested to provide for the next meeting a cost comparison of maintaining the existing land versus maintaining and policing the parking meters on the proposed parking lot. Member Foley moved to continue this item to the October meeting. Members Melkonian, Foley, Stowell, Smith, and Rhame voted "Aye"; Member Garris voted "Nay." Motion carried. d. Memorial Causeway Bridge Update -- Rich Baier Mr. Baier reported the next Local Interest Group meeting is October 15, 5:00 p.m. at 428 Cleveland Street in the Calvary Baptist Church storefront. The preliminary design phase is about one-third completed. He displayed conceptual drawings of the four bridge alignments under discussion. The goal is to accommodate trip oriented passerby traffic that currently takes up roadway capacity and does not provide economic benefit for downtown. He explained eliminating heavy beach traffic from downtown streets will enable a more pedestrian friendly environment for downtown people. He discussed the problems and advantages with each of the proposed alignments, related to channel impacts, permitting, vista aspects, property acquisition, and infrastructure requirements. He responded to questions regarding non-work and work related State DOT project funding, and replacement schedule requirements. While there is no urgent need to replace the Memorial Causeway bridge, he noted the bridge is functionally obsolete and is the site of many traffic accidents. He indicated it is important to be prepared with funding and a plan for bridge replacement, before an immediate need arises. Mr. Baier discussed view and vista aspects, displaying illustrations of potential view corridors from various sites. He discussed engineering considerations related to bridge construction, traffic flow, parking considerations and green benefit. A question was raised regarding the potential for a public transportation system on Clearwater beach. Mr. Baier said a beach mass transport system cannot be marketed effectively to our automobile dependent population unless public parking is eliminated on all Pinellas beaches. In response to a question, he said specific direction regarding bridge design and location should be available by the end of next summer. The board thanked Mr. Baier for his presentations and asked him to bring any new information to the October meeting. e. Downtown Lake Staff recommended postponement of this item until November. A status update was supplied at the board’s request. It was indicated the City Commission is studying the information provided to them during a recent special meeting. Doing the lake in a market driven fashion, and determining feasibility by preparing an economic and mathematical model, are topics to be discussed at tomorrow night’s City Commission meeting. One member felt the public and City Commissioners are not adequately aware of the lake’s potential environmental benefits. She noted the lake has the potential of turning an area that has been a handicap into an asset, enhancing Clearwater’s image as a leader in protecting and improving the environment. Member Garris moved to recommend that the City Commission continue gathering information about environmental benefits and funding possibilities of the lake project, before they decide whether or not to proceed with the project. The motion was duly seconded. Discussion of the issue continued. One member was excited about the potential of the lake to improve downtown drainage issues, and encouraged the City Commission to allow more time to study the issue. It was felt, as nearly $200 thousand has been spent already, it would be appropriate for the new Economic Development Director to have the opportunity to look at the issue. Another member was reluctant to support the downtown lake concept, indicating it is unlikely the lake would ever have habitat value because of pollution from stormwater runoff and ground contamination. He suggested a mechanical means of treating stormwater runoff might be more cost effective than a $50 million lake. The Chair called the question. Upon the vote being taken, it carried unanimously. f. Adopt a Pond Project -- Consensus was to continue this item to the next meeting, or until November, if the Downtown lake presentation is ready for EAB review in October. Discussion Items Follow-up ensued regarding discussion at the July meeting. Staff was requested to forward Member Foley’s jet ski impact report and the fact the board had requested water quality testing at popular launch sites, to the TBNEP (Tampa Bay National Estuary Program) and the ABM (Agency for Bay Management.) The board requested information once staff obtains the results of the water quality tests. A question was raised regarding the status of the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) proposed by the TBNEP Intergovernmental Agreement. Mr. Miller reported the plan received approval and a consultant is in the process of putting together a framework for the interlocal agreement. He and Assistant City Attorney. Dougall-Sides are involved as technical advisor, and legal negotiator, respectively. Mr. Miller stated the City can be proud of the framework, and questioned whether the board wished to review it in more detail, or wait for a presentation of the draft agreement by Dick Eckenrod. Consensus was to wait for presentation once the agreement is drafted. Due to concerns about the proliferation of mangroves on the Memorial Causeway, staff was requested to invite a County representative to address the board regarding the County’s delegated mangrove trimming authority. Mr. Miller concurred, stating he will provide a copy of the City’s environmental policy regarding mangrove trimming on public property. Establish Agenda for October 16, 1996 1. Recommendation on the Memorial Causeway parking lot issue 2. Downtown Lake (if feasible) 3. Adopt-A-Pond (if feasible) 4. Mangrove Trimming Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Chair Environmental Advisory Board  Attest:    Board Reporter