Loading...
11/14/2001 - Island Estates Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District MeetingISLAND ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT MEETING St. Brendan’s Church – 245 Dory Passage November 14, 2001 Item 1 – Welcome Study Committee The meeting was opened by Study Committee Member Curtis Waldon at 7:05 p.m. at St. Brendan’s Church, 245 Dory Passage, Clearwater. Other members of the Island Estates Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Study Committee who were present were Curt Waldon, Phyllis Boksen, Chuck Stebbins, Jack Heckert, Rusty Hoaglin, Sandy Cole, Tom Caleca, Dan Molino, Fran Briskman and Lars Warn. No members of the City Commission were present. City staff included Assistant Planning Director Lisa Fierce, Long Range Planning Manager Gina Clayton, Neighborhood Services Manager Fredd Hinson, Senior Planner Richard Kephart, Planner Lochen Wood and Neighborhood Services Coordinator Melody Benbow. Item 2 – Overview of Last Public Meeting – Melody Benbow, Neighborhood Services Coordinator Mr. Waldon said rather than split into separate groups, the plan is to review each of the items identified in previous public meetings. Mr. Waldon said Neighborhood Services Coordinator Melody Benbow is leaving the City for a position in Jacksonville, Florida. Ms. Benbow said this is the fourth Island Estates NCOD (Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District) meeting at St. Brendan’s. She recapped the progress over the past 4 meetings, including brainstorming sessions to determine neighborhood strengths and weaknesses, developing goals and objectives, consideration of what makes Island Estates unique or different than other communities, and what improvements are needed. Item 3 – Review of Goals and Objectives – Gina Clayton, Long Range Planning Manager Long Range Planning Manager Gina Clayton said the goals and objectives that were compiled from small discussion groups at previous meetings have been consolidated and will be reviewed tonight in order to further refine them. She prepared a PowerPoint presentation. In response to a question, she said the focus of tonight’s meeting is to refine the goals and objectives of the neighborhood plan, then items such as development standards that are associated with an overlay district will be addressed at a future meeting. She said additional meetings might be necessary. As Ms. Clayton began the presentation, a member of the NCOD Study Committee expressed concern that staff’s list of objectives does not reflect the objectives of the Study Committee. He expressed concern that staff continues to solicit input from the public to obtain additional suggestions and that it would slow down the process. He said the Study Committee considered only those items suggested by residents that relate to an overlay district. It was remarked that the Study Committee worked diligently to compile a list from all the public NCOD meetings, consolidate the issues, and eliminate the items that the neighborhood could not control. Ms. Clayton said the neighborhood as a whole has not had the opportunity to hear input from the individual group sessions. She felt it important to gain a consensus of the entire group in attendance. She said this is a typical planning process used when developing any plan. She said there would be a line item vote after which the City Commission would review the results and make a final decision regarding the NCOD plan. In response to a question, she said if only 2 items on the NCOD list pass approval of the neighborhood and the City Commission, then only those 2 items would be applied to the neighborhood through the NCOD. Ms. Clayton said staff would supply residents with current City Code versus deed restrictions. Study Committee members distributed copies of objectives that could potentially be included in the NCOD. The Study Committee Chair requested the residents vote on whether they wish to review the City staff’s PowerPoint presentation or proceed with the Study Committee’s recommendations. Upon the vote being taken, a majority of residents chose to review the Study Committee’s recommendations. It was remarked that there should have been a coordination of effort between the City staff’s and the Study Committee’s process. The Study Committee Chair said an impasse was reached regarding results of their findings and City staff’s. The Study Committee Chair proceeded with review of the Study Committee’s list of neighborhood objectives including subcategories of re-development, housing and property, waterfront, and traffic and parking. It was remarked that regardless if the City changes the current Code in the future, these NCOD requirements would be maintained. The Chair requested residents to rank each item in order of priority from 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest priority. In response to a question, Ms. Clayton explained how the FEMA requirements affect the neighborhood plan. It was suggested that language regarding NCOD height requirements for properties in flood plains consider FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) regulations. It was suggested that the requirement be the same as the current City Code which is 30 feet above the 100-year flood plain. In response to a question, Assistant Planning Director Lisa Fierce said current Code states that the majority of a resident’s yard must be living plant material. Driveways can be pavers, asphalt, concrete, or other material. She noted there are many existing nonconformities on Island Estates. It was suggested that the waterfront objective regarding fencing allow only see-through fences along the water side. It was suggested that an item should be added to the dock restrictions that prohibits construction within 12 feet from side setbacks. It was noted that the item regarding ‘structurally damaged sea wall/docks should be repaired in a reasonable” should read “ … reasonable amount of time – 60 days”. Concern was expressed about the clarity of regulations regarding limitations of RV and boat parking on the street and in driveways. It was suggested adding an item that black trash containers are only to be put at the curb on the day of collection. A request was made to add an item under the Waterfront category regarding prohibition of unshielded lights on docks and at the rear of homes. It was remarked that these are general topics and the details regarding specific side and rear setbacks, etc. will be specified after residents accept the general categories being proposed. In response to a question, Ms. Clayton said the neighborhood will be responsible for initiating the first actions related to NCOD violations. She anticipates a neighborhood representative would contact the alleged violator(s) via written notice including a compliance date. If the violation still exists after that time, a violation notice will be sent. After that, if compliance is not gained, the city will be notified to pursue code enforcement. It was remarked that some violations would be addressed automatically through the City permitting process before they would involve the NCOD. It was suggested that residents witnessing construction without permits, etc. notify the alleged violator that they must obtain permits to avoid violations. Everyone is entitled to due process. Anyone can ask for a variance through flexible standards in the Code. The NCOD plan would provide residents with a higher level of protection than currently exists. The City Commission specifically added an amendment to the Code in June 1999 that stated the neighborhood must be the first line of defense regarding enforcement of deed restrictions. Ms. Clayton said residents must be active partners in special enforcement of NCOD provisions. The NCOD will allow the City to step in and enforce the NCOD regulations after the neighborhood addresses the issues and cannot resolve them. In response to a question, the Study Committee Chair said each condominium unit would vote and their votes would be compiled by the association. Each association’s vote would be counted. Residents’ votes regarding the Study Committee’s list of objectives were given to Dan Molino, member of the Study Committee. The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m.