Loading...
10/25/2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD SPECIAL MEETING CITY OF CLEARWATER October 25, 2001 Present: Carlen A. Petersen Vice Chair David Gildersleeve Board Member Edward Mazur, Jr. Board Member Shirley Moran Board Member Ed Hooper Board Member Alex Plisko Board Member Frank Hibbard Alternate Board Member (Non-voting) Absent: Gerald Figurski Chair Also Present: Cyndi Tarapani Planning Director Lisa L. Fierce Assistant Planning Director Gina Clayton Planning Manager Richard Kephart Senior Planner Mark Parry Planner Brenda Moses Board Reporter The Vice-Chair called the meeting to order at 12:41 p.m. at the Municipal Services Building. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. Planning Director Cyndi Tarapani introduced Senior Planner Rich Kephart, who will assist the Planning Department with zoning code updates. She said Chair Figurski would not be present at this meeting due to a death in his family. She distributed information regarding donations to be sent to UPARC in his mother’s name. Ms. Tarapani said the purpose of today’s meeting is to brainstorm regarding any concerns, issues, trends, etc. the CDB felt would be appropriate to discuss. She said staff expects to move quickly through the code amendment process. The process has been reviewed with the Greater Clearwater Chamber of Commerce and the Government Affairs Committee, and a meeting is scheduled with the Coalition of Homeowners. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said concern has been expressed regarding the height of signs in the Countryside area, as they were permitted to be taller due to construction plans for an overpass at Drew Street. Staff is working with local area businesses in that area to search for a solution. Concern also was expressed regarding the size of signs. She said the smaller stand-alone signs are starting to make a difference in the clutter. An open discussion session was held with the Mainstreet Committee regarding the downtown plan and having separate districts downtown with regard to signage height in different sectors of downtown. Staff is considering how to address signs required at regional malls and movie theatre signs that are constantly changing. In response to a question, Planner Mark Parry said to date, 77 flexible standard cases and 32 flexible cases? Have been reviewed at a staff level. It was suggested that mcd10b01 1 10/25/01 there are still some cases that staff could review rather than bringing them before the CDB. It was felt that the CDB only needs to review cases with regarding to height, density, and use, not landscaping, sidewalks, pathways, etc. It was remarked that surface level encroachments should not be a CDB matter. One CDB member remarked that he has heard concern at public meetings about the height and bulk of the Marriott Seashell Resort project and that staff has stretched the entire process to accommodate the project. He said there is concern that the Code now allows a great deal of flexibility and will create a product that when aggregated throughout the entire area, may not be what the City wants in terms of bulk and height. He said the zero setback and the massiveness of the project creates a canyon effect. Ms. Tarapani said staff will review other cities’ Code regarding volume measure and setbacks. She said projects also must comply with FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Authority) requirements. It was remarked that a minority of residents has expressed concerns regarding beach development and the need for more open/green space in the tourist/beach areas. Planning Manager Gina Clayton said residents’ major concern at last night’s Island Estates NCOD (Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District) meeting was the bulk of development and the proximity of houses to rear and side lot lines as they relate to obstruction of views and the affect on the character of the neighborhood. There also were questions regarding parking and variances and the Dolphin Point issue. It was remarked there is nothing in the Code that provides an incentive for view or access corridors. It was remarked there is a psychological effect on a person who cannot see beyond a 15-story building due to its mass versus a 2-story building. In response to a question, Assistant Planning Director Lisa Fierce said the newspaper agencies in the process of changing out their newspaper boxes to the ones newly approved. Ms. Tarapani said the St. Petersburg Times should be complimented for their efforts in working with other entities to consolidate and improve the containers. Discussion ensued regarding variable message signs. Ms. Tarapani said the signs can change every 6 hours unless otherwise approved by the City Manager. The objective is to avoid signs changing so frequently that they could create a distraction to passersby. It was remarked that the City uses trailer-mounted signs that distract passersby and government and the City Manager should not allow themselves deviations from the general public. It was remarked that the government has a right to and should make every effort to reach out to every citizen. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said the 6-hour change is intended to allow for changes between the morning and evening rush hour traffic. She said it would be difficult to enforce a smaller timeframe. In response to a question, Ms. Clayton said building signs would not permitted if freestanding signs are allowed. In response to a question, Ms. Fierce said staff has had discussions regarding the character of signs in specific corridors in the City. It was remarked that the County is addressing requiring common address signs on US19 to make them easier to read. It was felt that some addresses on US19 are placed on poles. There is no consistency as to where to locate them. Ms. Fierce said staff has ongoing conversations with Code Enforcement regarding signage. mcd10b01 2 10/25/01 Discussion ensued regarding multi-frontal parcels, fences in street rights-of-way, and tall fences in front yards. The Code states no tall fences are permitted in front yards and there is no built in flexibility. It was remarked there are fences in front yards that are not in the setback but that still create a visual impact. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said staff would provide information to the CDB regarding telecommunications towers. Staff is making a presentation to the Commission at Monday’s Work Session. She said it is important to ensure the technology is available and that all providers have access to that technology. Staff reviewed 15 other cities’ policies regarding telecommunications towers. Staff is meeting with 5 – 6 providers in the area tomorrow to get their input regarding technology. It was suggested there should be an automatic requirement in the telecommunications tower ordinance that requires the Commission periodically review it in order to keep up with changing technological requirements. Ms. Tarapani said the Planning Department reviews the zoning code annually. In response to a question, Ms. Clayton said multi-use docks over 500 square feet would come before the CDB. In response to a question, Ms. Fierce said she met with a representative from the Ice House. The CDB approved the Ice House’s site plan in March 2001, and the owner is still unsure what he will do with the site. He is only required to comply with code issues. He does not have to follow through with the requested and approved items. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said staff is comfortable with the landscaping at the mini storage facility in downtown behind Walgreens. She said the building also is acceptable, but staff is unhappy with the signage. Discussion ensued regarding the quality of materials prepared and distributed to the CDB by staff. It was felt the deeds and application forms were unnecessary and the maps could be streamlined. In response to a question, Ms. Clayton said staff is working with the Utilities Department regarding potential residents that are not paying sewer bills. The ordinance only permits back charges for one year’s fees. Ms. Clayton said staff continues to attempt to resolve the ditch issue (where?) and whether the City or County should take responsibility of the ditch. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said the CDB agenda mailed to members differs from the final agenda distributed at meetings because it is mailed 10 days prior to the meeting and consent agenda items are not always finalized at that time. Staff was complimented for the quality of their staff reports. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said the citizen who disputed 2 annexation cases unrelated to her case was not technically allowed to have them pulled from the Consent Agenda. She had expressed objections throughout the entire annexation process, but had forgotten she had originally signed the Agreement to Annex. Although she was present at the public meeting, she objected to the 2 cases to be presented because she claimed she had not received notice of the hearing. Staff continues to look at commercial industrial sites and ATAs (Agreements to Annex), as mcd10b01 3 10/25/01 well as incentive programs or improving existing programs to find other approaches to annexations. Ms. Tarapani said she feels the City will experience long term benefits from the annexations. Staff reviewed the site plan application process, providing specific examples of previous cases. Mr. Parry said staff encourages applicants and their representatives to contact local area homeowner associations when submitting applications. In response to a question, Ms. Fierce said staff cannot deny a certain number of hotels in an area if it is a permitted use. Staff can determine if a project is in harmony with the surround neighborhood. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said she does not anticipate any issues arising from the new Publix store being constructed on the former Dimmitt property. Ms. Fierce said the Engineering Department has requested the Planning Department share a proposal with the CDB regarding the guideway from the beach to the downtown. Consensus was to review the proposal at a future meeting. Holiday Luncheon Discussion ensued regarding the holiday luncheon and meeting on December 11, 2001. Consensus was to schedule lunch at 12:00 p.m. at the Harborview Center and hold the meeting at 2:00 p.m. at City Hall. Everyone will pay for his or her own lunch. Last year, the CDB donated gifts and canned goods to the Officer Friendly Program. It was remarked the Food Pantry and other local charitable organizations also need help. The Salvation Army accepts both food and gift donations and is one of the partnering agencies with CHIP and the United Way. It was felt the CDB donations should be donated to a local Clearwater agency. Discussion ensued regarding Everybody’s Tabernacle. Consensus was to bring both canned goods and a gift for donation to Everybody’s Tabernacle. Member Moran will contact Barbara Green of Everybody’s Tabernacle to ensure the gifts are to be donated unwrapped. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 2:31 p.m. mcd10b01 4 10/25/01